Henry Charles Lea's 
 Historical Writings 
 
 A Critical Inquiry Into Their 
 Method and Merit 
 
 By 
 
 Paul Maria Baumgarten 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 JOSEPH F. WAGNER 
 
 1909
 
 COPYRIGHT. 1908 
 
 JOSEPH F. WAGNER 
 NKW YORK
 
 TRANSLATOR'S NOTE. 
 
 Upon reading Monsignore BAUMGARTEN'S review 
 in the German original the translator believed that it 
 would prove of particular interest to American read- 
 ers, and arrangements were made with the author 
 the outcome of which is this version in English. 
 
 While faithfulness to the original is throughout 
 observed, some detail in the chapter on translations 
 of Mr. LEA'S volumes and in the concluding chapter 
 was found dispensable in an American edition, and 
 it has been omitted with the author's courteous ap- 
 proval.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 I. INTRODUCTION 5 
 
 II. AURICULAR CONFESSION 15 
 
 III. INDULGENCES 35 
 
 IV. THE INQUISITION OF THE MIDDLE AGES 41 
 
 V. FRENCH AND GERMAN EDITIONS OF LEA'S HISTORY. 79 
 
 VI. THE SPANISH INQUISITION 88 
 
 VII. THE SACRED PENITENTIARY no 
 
 CONCLUSION 135 
 
 DOCUMENTS 144
 
 I. INTRODUCTION 
 
 How HENRY CHARLES LEA, the Philadelphia pub- 
 lisher and historian, was directly influenced to 
 select for his researches the particular sphere of 
 history with which he occupies himself in his books, 
 I have not become aware. Whatever the induce- 
 ments, we are confronted with the fact that he at- 
 tempts to deal, in his own way, with questions 
 which to this extent are not ordinarily made the 
 object of research by the lay historian. As a result 
 of his enterprise and diligence we have from his pen 
 a considerable number of stately volumes, mostly 
 dealing with Catholic institutions, the list including 
 "A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages," 2 
 volumes; "A History of the Inquisition of Spain," 4 
 volumes; "A History of Sacerdotal Celibacy," 2 
 volumes; "Inquisition in Spanish Dependencies," 
 "History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences," 
 3 volumes ; "Chapters from the Religious History of 
 Spain," "Moriscos of Spain," "Studies in Church 
 History," and, "Superstition of Force." 
 
 If the scope and size of these works is considered, 
 the diligence and perseverance of their author com- 
 pels our esteem, notwithstanding the fact that LEA 
 by his wealth was enabled to delegate to others a con- 
 siderable portion of the preparatory labors, as also 
 of the technical work in getting the books ready for 
 the press, a circumstance which explains the quick 
 succession in print of the volumes. In mentioning 
 this fact we do not mean to claim that hired assist- 
 ants are to any degree responsible for essential
 
 6 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 statements in any of LEA'S works. In the treatment 
 of their subjects, in tendency and conclusions, we be- 
 lieve to have before us LEA'S own and individual 
 labor. 
 
 A peculiarity of LEA'S method, observed in all 
 his volumes, and one which renders the tracing of 
 his deductions at times difficult, is his habit to 
 quote his sources in more or less slipshod fashion. 
 His authorities for various matters, dealt with on 
 two or more pages, are frequently lumped together 
 in one common annotation; the books quoted from 
 are enumerated in the informal fashion of tha old 
 French and Italian schools; various editions of 
 quoted books are hardly ever distinguished; biblio- 
 graphical exactness is lacking, folios of quoted pass- 
 ages are omitted oftener than is to the liking of the 
 critical reader, and not infrequently are the sources of 
 quoted documents only suggested. Thus the critical 
 reader has his troubles due to this supreme disre- 
 gard for the requirements of modern scientific writ- 
 ing. It may be suggested in passing that this indif- 
 ference does not seem to manifest any great amount 
 of respect, on part of the author, for the readers to 
 whom he addresses himself. 
 
 These deficiencies, however, indicate the probable 
 extent of the preparatory work done by others, 
 which, as is plainly perceptible, was not always, or 
 not duly, revised by the author. In the course of 
 my review I shall have to draw attention to defects 
 which explain themselves most readily under this 
 assumption. But these defects are so frequent and 
 numerous, that I am compelled to open my review 
 with this general arraignment.
 
 Introduction. 7 
 
 It must be admitted that the author has managed 
 to provide himself with a much better knowledge on 
 many points of Catholic doctrine and usages than 
 is generally the case with non-Catholic historians 
 who venture to deal with such matters. He has 
 taken pains to study important theological ques- 
 tions, no doubt with a desire to arrive at their per- 
 fect understanding. In many instances he has been 
 successful in his efforts, to this I gladly bear wit- 
 ness. But opposed to these instances there are 
 others, no less numerous or important, which clearly 
 prove that his good intention did not suffice to pre- 
 serve him from lamentable misconceptions, inex- 
 cusable in one who would be an historian of Catholic 
 institutions. For the purpose of dealing in a fair 
 manner with these matters, so difficult for him, he 
 should have informed himself thoroughly, more 
 thoroughly than he has evidently done, about the 
 purport and application of terms, opinions and doc- 
 trines, no matter whether he agreed with these 
 doctrines or not. This no doubt is a just demand, 
 one to which no objection can be made. When, 
 therefore, LEA interprets Catholica according to his 
 individual taste and views, unmindful of established 
 theological and historical definition, he not only ex- 
 poses himself to the charge of prejudice, but puts 
 the reader on his guard against the consequent un- 
 reliability of his researches. The obvious fact that 
 there must be made a distinction between the official 
 definition of a doctrine by the Church, on the one 
 hand, and individual opinions of Catholic writers on 
 the other, LEA has, to his disadvantage, in many 
 cases ignored.
 
 8 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 It is true, here and there in his works we meet 
 with censure of one or another adversary of the 
 Church. These instances we may regard, wherever 
 their context leaves them any value, with satisfac- 
 tion as a defense of the Church by a non-Catholic, 
 Opposed to these relatively rare instances, however, 
 there is so frequently the highest praise, or at least 
 approbation, bestowed upon enemies of State and 
 Church in the Middle Ages, as to forfeit the author's 
 claims to an impartial estimate of the facts. The 
 Church and her representatives are, with ill con- 
 cealed zeal, and in an unjustifiable manner, fre- 
 quently 'accused of most hideous vices and crimes, 
 with a levity which is fairly astonishing. 
 
 The above remarks had been written for some 
 time when there came to my notice JOSEPH JACOBS") 
 review of LEA'S fourth volume of A History of the 
 Inquisition of Spain. Although an admirer of LEA'S 
 achievements, he is constrained to make these ob- 
 servations : 
 
 Similarly Mr. LEA does justice to the general 
 beneficent effect of the Inquisition's attitude toward 
 that curious amalgam of mysticism and licentious- 
 ness known as quietism. Only in one direction can 
 one trace the slightest evidence of any prepossession 
 in Mr. LEA'S mind, causing him to. look with dis- 
 torted vision on the affairs of the Spanish Inquisi- 
 tion. Wherever the amount of guilt has to be appor- 
 tioned between the Inquisition itself and its ultimate 
 source, the Roman Papacy, I fancy I can observe a 
 tendency to weight the scales of justice against 
 
 *) The New York Times, Saturday Review of Books, 
 November 2, 1907, page 694.
 
 Introduction. 9 
 
 Rome. It is strange that the two chief historic 
 zvorkers of our generation in the Anglo-Saxon 
 world the late Professor MAITLAND and Mr. LEA 
 should both have shown this anti-Romanist bias. 
 After all, Anglo-Saxondom is Protestant. This is 
 the more to be regretted, as in my judgment the 
 whole key of the annals of the Inquisition has to be 
 found in its comparative independence from the 
 State on the one hand and from Papal jurisdiction 
 on the other. 
 
 Ecclesiastical ordinances rarely find favor with 
 the author. The reason for this lack of appreciation 
 of the ecclesiastical, as well as in general of State 
 and Civil life in the Middle Ages, may be sought in 
 the fact that LEA only occasionally undertakes to 
 interpret events of the periods treated by him in the 
 spirit of the times, by the views, laws and cus- 
 toms prevailing in those ages. He is, almost in- 
 variably, the twentieth century censor, and that ac- 
 counts for his deprecating and unfavorable com- 
 ments. The calm and even tenor in which LEA 
 usually makes his statements results in giving to 
 them the distinction of well considered judgment, 
 which, upon closer inspection, is proved not to be 
 their due. I regret to note that many, even among 
 those who read with a critical eye, have not infre- 
 quently been deceived in this way. If, as we shall 
 see further on, the picture sketched by LEA of the 
 twelfth century must be regarded as an example of 
 LEA'S lack of understanding for the phenomena of 
 past ages, his estimates of the character of im- 
 portant personages give abundant proof that LEA 
 conveniently varies his opinions according to mo-
 
 io Henry Charles Leas Historical Writings. 
 
 mentary requirements. It certainly won't do for an 
 historian to declare in one place a certain person to 
 be a thoroughly honorable man and to denounce a 
 few pages further this same person as a notorious 
 thief. That LEA is guilty of similar practice I shall 
 illustrate in a prominent instance. 
 
 Whenever there is lack of documentary proof, 
 LEA chooses to present his matter in a form which a 
 careful and conscientious historian would endeavor 
 to avoid. The words doubtless and evidently play 
 a conspicuous part in his writings, and, as a sig- 
 nificant fact, chiefly there, where the matter allows 
 of most diverse conjectures. And LEA'S conclusions 
 in a great many instances are not so doubtless as he 
 would fain have them believed to be. We can readily 
 conceive; we may easily imagine; it can be readily 
 understood; such and similar expressions, often oc- 
 curring, will warn the reader to look sharp unless 
 he is willing to accept LEA'S hypothesis as a proved 
 fact, proved by one of LEA'S phrases. 
 
 It is LEA'S undisputable merit that for his labors 
 he has assembled with considerable diligence an 
 abundance of material, some of it from very remote 
 sources. He, furthermore, induced a number of 
 librarians to look up, and copy for him, a consider- 
 able number of heretofore unpublished documents 
 and records, he himself, as I am informed, only 
 rarely exercising an influence upon their selection. 
 Not the author, therefore, but these librarians used 
 their judgment as to what was of value for these re- 
 searches, and consequently LEA was furnished with 
 what librarians forwarded to him, without seemingly 
 being aware that there might be still other matter of
 
 Introduction. 1 1 
 
 importance for the subject under treatment. As a 
 wealthy and intelligent collector, LEA has purchased 
 many rare manuscripts, documents and incunabula, 
 thus enriching his library with many unica within 
 the sphere of his researches. From his works it is 
 apparent that LEA must have a card index of extra- 
 ordinary dimensions, which afforded him ready, 
 though sometimes misleading, answers to most of his 
 questions. Whenever he crossed the ocean he has 
 brought back with him considerable additions to his 
 book treasures, so that there is at present hardly a 
 public library in the United States in which the liter- 
 ature of LEA'S special field is so completely repre- 
 sented as it is in the private library of this scholar. 
 We can readily understand that LEA among his coun- 
 trymen enjoys a great reputation, and this justly so 
 in a certain respect. For even if I am of the opinion 
 that his History of the Inquisition and the History 
 of Auricular Confession and Indulgences cannot be 
 taken for what their author wishes them to be, yet 
 these works, and others written by him, will un- 
 doubtedly be of the greatest advantage to future his- 
 torians as a basis for their researches. This applies 
 especially to his History of the Inquisition in Spain. 
 The future historian will remedy the most glaring 
 defects in LEA'S statements by refusing to accept his 
 literary and documentary material at its face value, 
 and by sifting it critically. A few weak attempts at 
 discrimination in the use of sources excepted, such 
 necessary sifting is not done by LEA. Though one 
 may become qualified in a general way for scientific 
 historical research by autodidactic effort, the method- 
 ical valuation of sources is a too intricate affair to be
 
 12 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 learned without guidance to such an extent that the 
 results of such research will under all circumstances 
 stand the test. LEA'S efforts are only another proof of 
 this. Of course this lack of training in LEA may be 
 taken as a mitigating circumstance in an examination 
 of LEA'S works; for had he had himself instructed 
 in the methodical valuation of sources, and still 
 ignored the necessity of applying such discrimination 
 to his material, then a more severe reproach would 
 be warranted and LEA'S own individuality would to 
 a greater extent be involved. To allow this mitigat- 
 ing circumstance is a welcome relief in my task. 
 
 LEA'S use of many quotations, from sources in 
 print or manuscript, admits, with the most generous 
 allowance, of no other characterization but that of a 
 misrepresentation of their meaning, the meaning 
 they will convey in connection with their context. 
 The earmarks of the card index product are here 
 plainly and painfully apparent. 
 
 But this is not the worst. There are quotations in 
 LEA'S books which can only be described as falsifica- 
 tions of their sense in the full meaning of the term. 
 Until proof to the contrary is at hand let us suppose 
 that we have before us objective falsifications. The 
 knowledge of medieval theology and of the Canon 
 Law prevailing at that time, with which LEA ob- 
 viously equipped himself, affords the basis for this 
 severe reproach for which I shall furnish proof in 
 the course of this review. It is difficult to understand 
 why LEA should have resorted to such questionable 
 means, when he had ample opportunity to give, in 
 other ways, expression to his aversion for the Church 
 and her representatives. He actually availed him-
 
 Introduction. 13 
 
 self to a great extent of such opportunities, and 
 frequently uses expressions of such coarseness that 
 the reader asks himself in astonishment whether they 
 are warranted by the facts described according to 
 LEA'S method. These are phenomena whose psycho- 
 logical and scientifical explanation is not apparent 
 to me ; I simply record the fact, therefore, and leave 
 it to the reader to draw his own conclusions. 
 
 I said before that LEA'S language flows usually in 
 a calm and even tenor. The reviewer of the New 
 York Times, JOSEPH JACOBS, already quoted above, 
 states this in a more drastic manner in the following 
 words : 
 
 But its [viz., Mr. LEA'S book] form leaves much 
 to be desired. Mr. LEA seems to have almost gone 
 out of his way to avoid making his history "interest- 
 ing" by vivid presentation or captivating style. It is 
 difficult to read continuously, and even his indigna- 
 tion fails to give vividness to his presentation. He 
 deals occasionally with interesting personalities like 
 ANTONIO PEREZ, that puzzle of Spanish history, but 
 it cannot be said that he makes him or others interest- 
 ing to the ordinary reader. It is to be feared that his 
 work will be consulted more as work of reference 
 than read continuously for interest and vividness. 
 
 It is true that a perusal of the volumes of LEA 
 requires a considerable amount of will power, be- 
 cause his manner of presentation, as well as the sci- 
 entifical methods employed and the deductions made, 
 render the critical reading a wearisome and disheart- 
 ening task. That any one of these many volumed 
 works will circulate to any extent beyond the circles
 
 14 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 of professional historians, is rendered unlikely 
 by LEA'S style of writing. 
 
 In the following chapters I shall occupy myself 
 with an examination of LEA'S chief works, and I 
 shall have occasion to refer here and there to other 
 recent publications by other authors dealing with the 
 same, or related, subjects.
 
 II. AURICULAR CONFESSION. 
 
 The year 1896 witnessed the appearance of LEA'S 
 work: A History of Auricular Confession and In- 
 dulgences in the Latin Church, in three volumes. 
 ( Philadelphia : LEA BROTHERS & Co. ) The two first 
 volumes, with separate index and a plate, bear the 
 subtitle: Confession and Absolution; the third vol- 
 ume, with individual index and eight plates, has the 
 subtitle : Indulgences, and this volume will be the 
 topic of my next chapter. The plates are reproduc- 
 tions (from manuscript or print) of indulgence 
 briefs, or summaries of indulgences, among them 
 two prints of fraudulent indulgences. 
 
 The first volume deals in separate chapters with : 
 
 Primitive Christianity, Discipline, Public Penance, 
 Reconciliation, The Heresies, The Pardon of Sin, 
 The Power of the Keys, Confession, Enforced Con- 
 fession, Jurisdiction, Reserved Cases, The Confes- 
 sional, The Seal of Confession, and, Absolution. 
 
 The second volume contains the following chap- 
 ters: 
 
 Requisites for Absolution, Public and Private 
 Penance, The Penitential System, Redemption of 
 Penance, Satisfaction, Classification of Sin, Pro- 
 babilism and Casuistry, and, Influence of Confession. 
 
 The logical sequence of this classification invites 
 dispute, but I shall not lose time with such compara- 
 tively unimportant matters and will accept LEA'S di- 
 visions without argument. In his introduction the 
 author lays stress upon the fact that he intends no 
 controversy, but rather a description of the historical
 
 16 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 development, and that he has therefore refrained 
 from consulting Protestant writers, and has adhered 
 exclusively to original sources and to Catholic au- 
 thorities, by which process he hopes to gain in exact- 
 ness and impartiality more than what possibly might 
 be lost in completeness. He claims to have been 
 careful to draw but few conclusions, as he wishes 
 to submit the facts and to leave it to the reader to 
 make his own deductions. 
 
 When LEA excluded Protestant literature he 
 should have likewise avoided the Anglican transla- 
 tion of the Bible. As a matter of fact we find that 
 his literal quotations from the Bible do frequently 
 not agree with the approved Catholic version of 
 DOUAY and RHEIMS. 
 
 The preface states, furthermore, that the author 
 has not restricted himself to the standard theologi- 
 cal treatises, but has also extensively drawn from 
 popular works of devotion, because in them is to 
 be found the practical application of the theories 
 enunciated by the masters of theology. This pro- 
 cedure would be free from objection only then, if 
 the contents of these popular tracts had been ex- 
 amined under application of strict critical methods. 
 As in all other popular publications of this kind at 
 the close of the Middle Ages, there are so many ex- 
 aggerations, even bare fabrications in that sort of 
 popular literature that they can be used only with 
 extreme caution. 1 ). This obviously prerequisite dis- 
 crimination is completely lacking in LEA, and he em- 
 ploys the frequently confused, and sometimes stag- 
 
 *) The Mirabilia Urbis Romae are a flagrant example of 
 such falsifications.
 
 Auricular Confession. 17 
 
 gering, declarations of such tracts to twist there- 
 from a rope for the Church, retailing them with 
 zealous characterization as views approved by the 
 Church. And thus originate the astonishing carica- 
 tures of the Church's doctrine on practical piety on 
 which LEA dwells manifestly in high glee. 
 
 A surprising wealth of material, brought together 
 with great diligence, frequently from sources not 
 easy of access, is discovered in this work of over a 
 thousand pages. If the author, with considerable 
 success, has endeavored to master, and to under- 
 stand in an unobjectionable manner, many points 
 of Catholic doctrine, these instances are opposed by 
 at least as many in which he shows how unable he 
 has been, perhaps in spite of the best intention, to rid 
 himself of his Protestant prejudices. Constitutional 
 matters in the primitive Church, and their later de- 
 velopment are thoroughly misunderstood by him, 
 and in consequence the distribution of faculties to 
 individual servants of the Church is undertaken by 
 LEA in an arbitrary manner and not corresponding 
 with the facts. The obligations which God imposes 
 upon Himself in relation to the Sacraments insti- 
 tuted by Him, and to their dispensers appointed by 
 Him, appears to LEA as preposterous, and he at- 
 tempts in this connection to involve St. AMBROSE in 
 serious contradictions. We quote thus : 
 
 Stimulated by conflict with the Novations, in some 
 passages he (Sx. AMBROSE) asserts the power of the 
 keys in the hands of bishops in an unqualified man- 
 ner. Christ, he says, could remove sin by a word, but 
 he has ordered that it should be done through men. 
 Thus he pushes this to an extent so insane that he
 
 1 8 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 represents God as wishing to be asked to pardon and 
 as virtually unable to do so without the action of the 
 priest. 
 
 If LEA (Volume I., p. 115) superscribes the chap- 
 ter containing these words with Inconsistent Utter- 
 ances this superscription applies correctly only to 
 his own words. Under this head comes also the 
 question of the priest's jurisdiction for the hearing 
 of confessions. While LEA in the same volume (p. 
 274) states this matter theoretically correct, yet his 
 conceptions become in the course of his further 
 comments so hopelessly confused, that it is astonish- 
 ing how so many intricacies can be injected in so 
 simple a matter : 
 
 There was an incongruity in this, for if the power 
 to bind and to loose came from God, it was granted 
 with the priestly character; if a delegation from the 
 bishop, he certainly bestowed it in the ordination 
 rite. 
 
 Not the frequency of confession, not the time 
 when the Christian was required to go to confession, 
 is of moment in the historical inquiry into the origin 
 of confession, but solely the fact that actually at all 
 times there has been mention of Sacramental Con- 
 fession, in public or private. Obligation of confes- 
 sion, and the appointed time for this obligation, are 
 absolutely indifferent side issues for such inquiry. 
 
 While speaking of the newly discovered 1 } Sacra- 
 ment of Penitence (p. 215) LEA is guilty of a dexter- 
 
 ') In the Capitular of Majordomus Karlmann, of April 
 21, 742 (Man. Germ. Cap., I., 25, 15), we find that unus- 
 quisque praefectus unum presbiterum, qui hominibus pec- 
 cata confitentibus iudicare. . . . possint [secum habeat] 
 LEA holds that the imposing of the obligation of Confession
 
 Auricular Confession 19 
 
 cms falsification 2 ) ; Quod quidem, so ALEXANDER III. 
 writes to the Bishop of Beauvais 8 ), sicut asserts, 
 ad confessionem de criminibus veniunt, et quamvis 
 confiteri velint, se tamen asserunt abstinere non 
 posse, consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod 
 eorum confessionem recipere debes, et eis de crim- 
 inibus consilium exhibere, quia, licet non sit vera 
 huiusmodi poenitentia, admittenda est tamen eorum 
 confessio, et crebris et salubribus monitis poenitentia 
 est indicenda. 
 
 Any one only superficially familiar with the ele- 
 ments of the Sacrament of Penance will understand 
 that there is question here of a most salutary effect 
 upon the confessing but unabsolved sinner. LEA, 
 who carefully refrains from quoting literally the 
 Pope's decree, could not fail to understand its mean- 
 ing, nevertheless he writes : 
 
 The natural consequence of the tendency thus dis- 
 played was the popularization of the confessional by 
 converting it into an avenue to sin, giving rise to 
 active protests from the stricter members of the 
 clergy. 
 
 This flagrant misrepresentation of the real sense 
 of the passage from the decree, which moreover 
 bears the superscription: Non est vere poenitens, 
 qui peccandi animum non deponit, tamen recipitur 
 
 by the Lateran Council of 1216 was done possibly with an 
 eye to legacies for pious uses. (Vol. I, p. 262). There is 
 no warrant whatever for such insinuating suggestion, but 
 LEA cannot refrain from making it. 
 
 2 ) In this connection it is to be stated that numerous dis- 
 tortions of quoted passages border on falsification, as has 
 been pointed out with severe censure by several of LEA'S 
 critics. Compare especially Vol. III., p. 283. 
 
 *) C. 5, Extra Lib, V. tit. XXXVIII.
 
 2o Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 eius confessio is an example of LEA'S impartiality 
 on which he so proudly dwells in the preface. That 
 LEA actually includes absolution in his interpreta- 
 tion of the tit. XXXVIIL, is evident on page 216, 
 where he says : 
 
 The shocking laxity of ALEXANDER III. was not 
 yet accepted, for after confession the priest is told 
 (in a decree of the Council of Paris, 1198) to ask the 
 penitent whether he will abstain for the future, and 
 if he will not promise he is to be refused penance 
 and absolution lest he rely upon them. 
 
 From the writings of ALEXANDER III. (Magistri 
 Rolandi Summa) LEA derives his privilege to claim 
 that in Rome at that time it was evidently not be- 
 lieved that the confession of sins was of divine in- 
 stitution, or an indispensable part of the Sacrament 
 (Vol. L, p. 209). On page 476, however, LEA has 
 to admit that the Pope terms confession a Sacra- 
 ment, but he disposes of this fact as of no moment 
 with stating that he had only done so as a matter of 
 convenient nomenclature. The absolutio ad tumbain 
 with the words requiescant in pace, the joined use of 
 the terms reconciliatio and absolutio in confession, 
 their independent and separate use, and many other 
 things which are obvious to the Catholic theologian 
 from their application, present to LEA great difficul- 
 ties, and he wastes much idle speculation upon the 
 solving of difficulties which are only imaginary. That 
 the priests, as LEA records it, in the twelfth century 
 sought to share in the Episcopal faculty to forgive 
 sins, he ascribes to an inordinate desire to secure to 
 themselves participation in the fat income yielded by 
 the administration of the Sacrament of Penance.
 
 Auricular Confession. 21 
 
 And such stuff LEA asks his readers to accept as 
 history. So we find in the second volume (p. 160) 
 that the handsome business done in selling releases 
 from the poena, suggested a similar opportunity 
 in releasing from the culpa. Since the people of 
 those days, trained in POPE BONIFACE'S happy com- 
 merce 1 ) and accustomed to see the power of the keys 
 exploited in every way for gain, submitted to such 
 shameless barter of spiritual benefits, there was no 
 reason why the system should not be further de- 
 veloped. And the papal penitentiary was a natural 
 outgrowth of the system. I shall have to deal in the 
 last chapter of this book more explicitly with this 
 achievement of LEA'S researches. 
 
 LEA'S undoubted great business acumen, and his 
 equally great ignorance of the agencies that led to 
 the establishment of the various diocesan and Roman 
 offices occupying themselves with reserved cases, in- 
 duce LEA to see in this department of the absolution 
 only a highly objectionable scheme to pocket the pen- 
 nies from a plundered Christianity. All the author's 
 learned phrases do not succeed to conceal this in- 
 dividual view. Against such historical argument 
 it seems simply impossible to reason with any pros- 
 pect of success. The commemoration of the souls 
 of dear departed, or of those of the living, in the per- 
 formance of pious works, familiar to every Catholic, 
 is ridiculed by LEA in unbecoming business slang (in 
 Vol. II., p. 156) : 
 
 Perhaps even if the land ceded were especially de- 
 sirable ( for the particular church or cloister) , the sins 
 
 *) The first Jubilee of the year 1300 is meant
 
 22 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 of the grantor's parents or children or kindred would 
 be thrown in. 
 
 He simply lacks all appreciation of the Catholic 
 way of thinking in these matters, although he would 
 pose as thoroughly familiar with it. This circum- 
 stance is responsible for LEA'S interpretation of the 
 words of BONIFACE VIII. : terrena in coelestia ci 
 transitoria in aeterna felici commercio commutando, 
 which he renders in the following manner: The 
 mercantile character of these transactions, by which 
 the Church sold claims on heaven in exchange for 
 worldly wealth is unblushingly expressed by BONI- 
 FACE VIII. (Vol. II., p. 158). The half-hearted 
 concession that it would be unjust to conclude that 
 in its use of the authority to bind and to loose the 
 Church looked solely to its own aggrandisement in 
 wealth and power (Vol. II., p. 167) is lost after all 
 the scorn, the expressed and implied contempt for 
 the Church and her institutions, heaped up in the 
 preceding pages. 
 
 When KING JOHN of England granted the Magna 
 Charta, in the year 1215, he caused the sentence to 
 be inserted et pro salute animae nostrae et anteces- 
 sorum omnium et haeredum meornm, which in- 
 duces LEA to make the intelligent (?) observation 
 (p. 157, note 2) : 
 
 Apparently the scribe who drew the charter did 
 not pause to ask how the salvation of JOHN'S an- 
 cestors could be effected by his acts. Even yet the 
 distinction between culpa and poena was imperfect- 
 ly apprehended. 
 
 I must candidly admit that I have in vain tried 
 to penetrate the sense of this utterance of LEA.
 
 Auricular Confession. 23 
 
 Numerous chapters in these two volumes are 
 without any interest to the readers of this review, 
 as they deal with matters which any good manual 
 of Moral Theology, and the historical literature 
 about the disputes in questions of Moral Theology 
 within the Catholic Church, set forth in a much 
 clearer and more correct manner. Moreover LEA 
 grants to every author who sets forth and ex- 
 presses views at variance with ecclesiastical doc- 
 trine or the consensus theologorum, such importance 
 as if conclusively proving all his assertions. 
 
 The sharp definition of Church doctrine is not 
 what LEA is after, he is far more interested in the 
 varying opinions of individual theologians, which 
 afford him opportunity for malicious conclusions, 
 his vouchsafed impartiality notwithstanding. Thus 
 LEA sums up: In practice the Sacrament be- 
 comes the ultimate object; the sinner is taught how 
 to secure it with the least sacrifice of worldly en- 
 joyment; the question is not how to earn the grace 
 of God, but how to win it at the smallest cost; how 
 to sin without sinning; how to escape hell without 
 deserving heaven, to adopt, as GIOBERTI says, a 
 line of conduct towards God which a good son would 
 scruple to adopt with his father. 
 
 Quite an impression made upon LEA the medieval 
 stories of confessions to lay persons. In full earnest 
 he discusses the possibility whether lay persons may 
 absolve, because S. THOMAS and others bring in 
 this question for the sake of completeness. To our 
 days, even, there are current among the Catholic 
 populace farcical anecdotes of mutual confession 
 between married couples, and other absurdities.
 
 24 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Had LEA ever heard these tales he would probably 
 have at once recorded it as a fact that the belief a 
 priest was requisite to absolve sins was not univers- 
 ally established even in our days. In his investigation 
 into lay confession all sorts of quotations and anec- 
 dotes are pressed into service, in lieu of sworn evi- 
 dence, and historians such as CAESAR VON HEISTER- 
 BACH are his favorite authorities. Instead of stating : 
 the Church has never taught that a non-priest can 
 validly absolve from sins; and all assertions to the 
 contrary in medieval literature can be traced to 
 individual theological opinion of doubtful value, or 
 to intentional distortion, or ignorance, we are re- 
 galed with a learned dissertation which is not with- 
 out highly amusing allegations 1 .) When laymen in 
 danger of death, and in absence of a priest, con- 
 fessed their sins to a layman, that was a matter, in 
 its theological aspect, only of profound humilia- 
 tion, calculated to excite a greater contrition, re- 
 gardless as to whether the parties were of opinion 
 that a valid confession had taken place. I have 
 gathered a number of new cases from the four- 
 teenth century, in which deacons, either from ig- 
 norance or being pressed by others, heard confession 
 and gave absolution. What does this fact signify? 
 Obviously nothing else but that these individuals, 
 
 *) Under this head comes a discussion upon the hearing 
 of confession by women, which, of course, shows an unpar- 
 donable ignorance of the difference between the manifesta- 
 tion in monastical chapters of all exterior infractions either 
 of rules or of commandments, which was, of course, never 
 followed by Sacramental absolution in the chapter, and 
 sacramental confession proper. An historian who in full 
 earnest can dish up such things, as LEA does in self com- 
 placent verbiage, should really not be taken seriously on 
 these questions.
 
 Auricular Confession. 25 
 
 who subsequently turned to Rome for forgiveness, 
 had no correct notion of the extent of their author- 
 ity; it cannot mean that the teaching of the Church 
 had in any way been wavering. In spite of LEA'S 
 clever attempts to lend importance to this discus- 
 sion (Vol. I., p. 219) I must state that there are 
 few weaker chapters in this work. The relatively 
 wide spread of lay confession in the early Middle 
 Ages belongs in the realm of psychology, and in 
 these occurrences originated the tracts of various 
 writers in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, 
 which express to some extent quite confused no- 
 tions. 
 
 In an appendix to this book I submit a number of 
 documents which extend over the largest part of 
 LEA'S field of research. Seven of them deal with 
 the condonation and absolution of persons who, as 
 non-priests, heard a single confession and bestowed 
 absolution. The expression used that they had done 
 it tamquam simplices et iuris ignari, is, in the terms 
 customary in petitions to the penitentiary, the 
 acknowledgment that they had been unaware of the 
 inability to absolve validly. I have arranged the 
 facts in the order of time. 
 
 No. 3 is the case of a deacon who, so commanded 
 by his former teacher who desired to say Mass, 
 heard his confession. Due to his lack of informa- 
 tion about this occurrence his ordination followed 
 without having first obtained absolution and dis- 
 pensation. He is suspended for six months, and 
 then allowed to resume his full powers. 1335, 
 Jnnii 8.
 
 26 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 No. 4 deals with a deacon who heard the confes- 
 sion and absolved a priest de mandate, consensu et 
 voluntate of this priest, asserentis, quod ipsiun 
 absolvere poterat, et dicentis, quod peccatum totum 
 supra se retinere volebat. There had been no other 
 priest in the place to hear the confession of the 
 penitent who was obliged to celebrate Mass. Before 
 ordination he had omitted, in his ignorance, to obtain 
 absolution. Decision as in case No. 3. 1335, 
 Junii 9. 
 
 No. 6 is the case of a deacon who, at the behest of 
 a priest who desired to say Mass, heard this priest's 
 confession and absolved him. He had not meanwhile 
 received ordination. Decision as in No. 3. 1335, Oc- 
 tobris 1 8. 
 
 Nos. 7 and 8 concern two priests, who, as deacons, 
 had once heard the confession of a priest, and had 
 each subsequently been ordained without having 
 secured absolution and dispensation. Decision as in 
 No. 3. 1335, Octobris 18. 
 
 No. 9. An acolyte had heard the confession of a 
 priest, who wished to say Mass; he had then trav- 
 elled to Rome, where he was absolved by one 
 of the penitentiaries. He now asks permission for 
 further ordination, which is allowed him after a 
 three months' suspension. 1336, Februarii 10. 
 
 No. 10 renders the same decision as in No. 3 ; the 
 case is identical, but we note the modification: et 
 ipse dubitat, licet non recordetur plene, ipsum pres- 
 biterum a peccatis sibi confessio absolvisse de facto. 
 The petitioner is even allowed to accept a benefice. 
 1336, Maii 8.
 
 Auricular Confession. 27 
 
 No. 20 is a collective case which includes all those 
 members of the Carthusian Order who had been in- 
 volved in such matters. We have no means of de- 
 termining whether a relatively large or small num- 
 ber is concerned, it is simply stated multi de or dine; 
 neither do we know how many priest members the 
 Order numbered at that time. Priors and monks 
 had, as subdeacons or deacons, before or after en- 
 tering the order, in case of necessity as well as 
 otherwise, heard confessiones plurium and had ab- 
 solved per simplicitatem et ignorantiam iuris. Some 
 of them had believed post religionis ingressuni se 
 esse absolutes privilegio felicis recordationis domini 
 Alexandra pape predecessoris vestri, per quod con- 
 cessit dicto ordini, quod singuli priores in conventi- 
 bus sibi commissis fratribus constitutis ibidem ab- 
 solvere et dispensatione indigentibus a quibus- 
 cumque excommunicationis sententiis et irregulari- 
 tatibus possint absolutionis et dispensations bene- 
 ficium impertiri, nisi adeo gravis et enormis esset 
 excessus, quod merito essent ad sedem apostolicam 
 destinandi. Others had, before joining the order, en- 
 joyed beneficia ecclesiastica, etiam curata, drawn 
 the emoluments and received Holy Orders. Others, 
 finally, had been promoted by degrees to prioratus 
 conventuales. Because of the difficulty of sending 
 these monks and priors to Rome, CLEMENT VI. 
 granted to individual priors the authority, -quod 
 fratres sibi commissos, the Vicars, quod omnes et 
 singulos predictos priores absolvere valeant et dis- 
 pensare cum eis. The priors were also allowed to 
 retain their posts. The decision reads : 
 
 Fiat hac vice, suspensis ad tempus prout viderint
 
 28 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 expedire; exceptis irregularitatibus ex homicidio rel 
 mutilatione contractis. 
 
 The powers asked for were transmitted by the 
 grand penitentiary in his missive to the order. 1344, 
 Janiuarii 8. 
 
 Six of the petitions, namely, Nos. 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 
 and 9 are directed to the diocesan Bishop. No. 10, 
 the petitioner being present in Curia, was disposed 
 of by the Grand Penitentiary, and likewise No. 20, 
 because the petition contained the petition : Et sup- 
 plicant, fieri per litteras domini, . . . Albancn. 
 
 It is of importance to state that no set form for 
 replies to this kind of supplication was used in 
 those days 1 ). Though the recital of the facts is simi- 
 lar in the various cases the verdict is in every in- 
 stance specially drawn up by the minutantes. For 
 the connoisseur of curial conditions this fact points 
 to a caution to avoid all generalization. If it is con- 
 sidered that, with exception of the general petition 
 for the Carthusians, all these documents refer to 
 French dioceses, and if France's political conditions 
 in those days are remembered, it cannot surprise to 
 meet manifestation of profound ignorance in these 
 deacons and priests. 
 
 Without a single exception the case is always 
 that of just once hearing a priest's confession; this 
 must be kept in mind when dealing with these cases, 
 especially as persuasion, command, timor reveren- 
 tialis and similar inducements played a chief part. 
 The spiritual condition of the priest who made such 
 
 *) In GOLLER, Die Papstliche Ponitentiarie von ihrem Ur- 
 sprung bis su ihrer Umgestaltung unler Pius V. First 
 volume, part I., p. 108 (Rome, LOSCHER, 1907), this case is 
 tinder the head de promotis not even mentioned.
 
 Auricular Confession. 29 
 
 requests of the non-priests, no doubt often with per- 
 fect understanding of their unlawfulness; vide the 
 words : quodpeccatumtotum supra se retinerevolebat, 
 is hinted at above. It was probably a case of rather 
 this than nothing. I must state here that I have not 
 so far found a single case of this description re- 
 corded under the predecessors of BENEDICT XII. 
 
 Repeated performances of various priestly func- 
 tions are related in document No. 5. ADAM SELE DE 
 ALDEPORTE, in the diocese of Lichfield, was troubled 
 by his conscience, and made a pilgrimage to Rome, 
 there to obtain absolution. He submitted to the 
 Pope a petition in which he sets forth, that, as 
 deacon, he baptized two children, one of them being 
 at the point of death, buried the body of the one 
 deceased, and administered Extreme Unction to a 
 sick woman. He had done this at the bidding of a 
 priest, who had said, quod ei ex officio licebat hoc 
 cfficere ac debebat. Without securing absolution and 
 dispensation, in his ignorance, he had been ordained 
 priest. At his solicitation sedes apostolica super eis 
 cum ipso in forma solita dispensavit, but he was 
 not to perform any priestly functions for the time 
 being, and was directed to enter an order. For more 
 than a year ADAM endeavored to comply with these 
 conditions, but on account of his advanced age no 
 order would accept him. He therefore made an- 
 other pilgrimage to Rome, related his experience in 
 a second petition, in which he remarked that he per 
 huiusmodi tempus non ministravit in sacerdotali or- 
 dine. Since his offences had been entirely private, 
 BENEDICT XII. commissioned his Grand Peniten- 
 tiary, CARDINAL GAUEELMUS, Bishop of Albano, to
 
 30 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 give dispensation to ADAM consideratis angustiis 
 suis per tempus, quo non ministravit in eodem 
 sacerdotali or dine, gravibusque ipsius laboribus, 
 quos pro expeditione predictorum pertulit mine el 
 alias ad Romanam Curiam personaliter veniendo, 
 and after the imposition of a suitable penance to re- 
 instate him in his privileges. 
 
 As regards ADAM'S punishment, it appears more 
 severe to us than that imposed in the preceding 
 cases of Confession, although his offense of itself 
 was not as grave as that of the others. This may 
 be regarded as proof that at the Curia these cases 
 occurred so rarely that a fixed procedure had not 
 been adopted, but that such cases were decided 
 individually whenever they came up for considera- 
 tion. 
 
 We find in LEA'S two volumes a number of ob- 
 servations about the administration of Baptism: 
 these I will supplement by some accounts from the 
 fourteenth century. In document No. n we have 
 a decree of BENEDICT XII., which maybe joined to 
 that of CLEMENT VI., in No. 17. PETRUS ARMENUS 
 DE MAIORI ARMENIA had been baptized and or- 
 dained to the priesthood in his native land. In the 
 year 1336 he arrived at the Curia, and as he 
 doubted an in partibus suis fuisset in forma Eccle- 
 sie veraciter baptisatus, he was at the Curia again, 
 conditionally, baptized. PETRUS now requested the 
 Sacrament of Confirmation, and permission to re- 
 ceive all holy orders. The Pope commissioned the 
 Archbishop of Genoa, in whose diocese PETRUS had 
 taken up permanent residence, to accede to this peti- 
 tion if conditions were as stated. Some years later
 
 Auricular Confession. 31 
 
 a friar, JOHANNES ARMENUS DE MAIORI ARMENIA 
 related of his having heard in his monastery in Tus- 
 cany that BENEDICT XII. intended to imprison as 
 heretics all Armenian Regulars who had not been 
 conditionally rebaptized. Thereupon JOHANNES went 
 to the Curia et cum fuisset ad presentiam domini 
 abbatis quondam de Pina ductus, ac per eundem 
 dominum abbatem interrogates, qua forma fuerit 
 primitus baptizatus, ipse respondit sic ; JOHANNES 
 servus Christi veniens ad cathecummitatem (sic) 
 ad baptismum baptizetur in nomine Patris et Filii et 
 Spiritus Sancti, etc. The abbot then declared that 
 this Greek form of baptism was not recognized by 
 the Church of Rome, and he rebaptized JOHANNES 
 conditionally. Later on PRATER JOHANNES heard from 
 the lips of BENEDICT XII. himself quod dicta forma 
 valebat ad verum baptismum, and in consequence 
 he resumed his priestly functions. Now he begs to 
 be enlightened as to whether he acted correctly. The 
 Pope's reply says : Fiat, et ministret in susceptis 
 rite ordinatus, non obstante rebaptizatione sub con- 
 ditione facta. The Armenian affairs at that time 
 occupied for years the attention of the Curia, to 
 which numerous acts in the Vatican archives bear 
 witness ; the most important of them have been re- 
 published by RAYNALD in his Annales. 
 
 The three documents, 12, 13 and 14, refer to three 
 Orientals who represented themselves falsely as 
 Catholic dignitaries and deceived the people with 
 forged Papal Bulls ; they especially oppressed the 
 large number of Armenians residing in Italy, whose 
 baptism secundum formam Sanctae Romanae Eccle- 
 siae abominabantur. Unfortunately I have been
 
 32 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 unable to find further information about the fate of 
 these knaves whose arrest was ordered in these docu- 
 ments. 
 
 HEINRICH FINKE, in his recent work on the 
 Order of Templars, takes exception to LEA'S views 
 about the lay confession in this Order 1 ). I quote 
 from his work the following: The latest research 
 has shown that in the thirteenth century there ex- 
 isted a certain inclination among the lay members of 
 religious orders to extend lay confession further 
 than cases uf necessity, and that also in other circles 
 it was advocated in cases where some, though not 
 pressing, need obtained. LEA has now built up an 
 elaborate system to establish his contention that lay 
 confession was the original and only form of con- 
 fession in this order, until with the Lateran Council 
 confession to a priest was introduced, and that in 
 this fact, the imposition of penance being consider- 
 ably more lenient, lay one of the reasons for the de- 
 moralisation of the order. This opinion is based 
 upon unproved, and partly false, premises. I cannot 
 possibly attribute to the question of lay or priest 
 confession such importance for the religious life of 
 the Templars, especially as we see that the original 
 manifestation of conscience still existed in the order. 
 
 To this FINKE makes the following annotation: 
 Compare LEA ///. (p. 325 in the French transla- 
 tion). Also his paper: The Absolution formula of 
 the Templars, in: Papers of American Church His- 
 tory Society, Vol. V. (1893), P- 37- In his quota- 
 tions from THOMAS AQUINUS, the Summa Astesana, 
 
 l ) Papsttum und Untergang des Temflerordens. Miinster, 
 1907, Vol. I., p. 397-
 
 Auricular Confession. 33 
 
 and the Summa Rosella, he has overlooked passages 
 that express a different view. The most serious 
 oversight happens to LEA when he quotes JOHANNES 
 of Fribourg: Summa casuum 1. HI. t. XXXIII. 
 quaest. 48 (not 47): Quis possit absolvere Templa- 
 rios, Hospitalarios et alios religosos non habentes 
 prelatum sacerdotemf Respondeo secundum Ray- 
 mundum XVIII. Item quod Templarii: Credo 
 quod non possint absolvi a talibus prelatis, cum non 
 habeant ordinem dericalem, nisi habeant hoc de 
 speciali privilegio sedis apostolicef 
 
 Then further: Hodie autem expressum est de 
 fratribus Hospitalis Jerosolimitani, quod possint a 
 suis prioribus, qui presbiteri debent esse, absolvi, 
 sicut regulares alii a suis prelatis. LEA is under the 
 impression that there is question here of the absolu- 
 tion in confession, while in reality the absolution 
 from excommunication is referred to. LEA would 
 have avoided this blunder, had he himself examined 
 the passages, since the preceding par. 47 begins 
 U'ith: Deinde quero, utrum regulares possint ab- 
 solvi a prelatis suis a canone late sententie. And 
 there folloivs par. 48, stating that while the priors of 
 the Dominicans and Minor Friars may absolve their 
 monks, the priors of other regular orders could not 
 so absolve, because they stand ad nutum of their 
 superior. The entire question brought up by LEA is 
 in need of a new and careful investigation. 
 
 FINKE has here ably pointed out another proof of 
 my contention that LEA, to a great extent, works 
 with material which others prepared for him. 
 
 With this I conclude my remarks about the two vol- 
 umes on Auricular Confession. Their perusal is not
 
 34 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 a pleasant task since the author's presentations are 
 in many cases unreliable, and the reader is therefore 
 permanently in doubt as to whether the matter actu- 
 ally is so as LEA puts it. These volumes are valu- 
 able only in so far as their references to the literature 
 on the subject are surprisingly complete, and, fur- 
 thermore, because they cleverly bring up questions, 
 the thorough handling of which, by a schooled theo- 
 logian, would be welcomed with great satisfaction 
 by all those concerned.
 
 Ill INDULGENCES. 
 
 I turn now to the volume which deals with In- 
 dulgences. This volume is composed of the fol- 
 lowing chapters : 
 
 General Theories, Requisites for Indulgences, 
 Development, The Jubilee, The later Middle Ages, 
 Application to the Dead, The Reformation, The 
 Counter-Reformation, The Stations of Rome, The 
 Religious Orders, The Confraternities, Indulgenced 
 Objects, Modern Expansion, Apocryphal Indulg- 
 ences and Influence of Indulgences. 
 
 With considerable satisfaction I can state that 
 LEA manifests in this volume a better knowledge 
 of his subject than is the fact in the preceding two 
 volumes. 
 
 His introductory observations, relative to the age 
 of indulgentiae, are entirely devoid of a clear dis- 
 tinction of what in early Christianity might be rec- 
 ognized as indulgences in the widest sense, and 
 what must be properly understood by indulgences 
 since the eleventh century. The decision of the 
 Council of Trent, and the note on II Cor. 2, 8-10 in 
 the official edition of the Vulgate, will be made to 
 agree without difficulty if, as is proper, the term 
 indulgentia is interpreted in the general sense of 
 remission. All of LEA'S quotations refer to Indul- 
 gences in the sense of our present time, they are 
 therefore correct in allowing to them only a rela- 
 tively early origin. With LEA'S investigations con- 
 cerning the invention of the thesaurus ecclesiae, 
 about the middle of the thirteenth century, and the 
 
 35
 
 36 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 theology he deduces therefrom I will not occupy 
 myself here 1 ) nor with his entirely miscarried ex- 
 aminations of the term a culpa et poena, which I 
 shall have to take up at some length in my last chap- 
 ter. 
 
 Although LEA makes sincere efforts to work up 
 in an unobjectionable manner the entire casuistry of 
 the foundations for indulgences, and though he does 
 point out many interesting facts, yet withal he fails 
 to arrive at theologically and historically safe con- 
 clusions (pp. 96-130). The then following discus- 
 sion of the development of Indulgences, in which a 
 large number of false grants are introduced with 
 critical appreciation, are related in some extent to 
 Chapter 14, which deals ex professo with Apocry- 
 phal Indulgences. We must agree with LEA when 
 he singles out the Carmelite forgeries 3 ) as the most 
 extensive of all those emanating from religious 
 orders. It is, as should here be recorded, a favorite 
 trick of our impartial Mr. LEA, found in all his 
 works, to use the expressions sell, payment, as if 
 there was concerned a transaction by some one who 
 wished to secure a personal profit, whenever there 
 is imposed the condition to give alms to the poor, 
 to lepers, hospitals, churches, the Holy Land, etc. 
 Had he confined himself to the use of the word taxes 
 in the technical sense and not, as he does in his usual 
 
 *) Some huge theological blunders found on pp. 54-57 do 
 not call for special mention ; they are familiar occurrences 
 after the numerous instances of this kind in the preceding 
 volumes. 
 
 *) Compare the recent Chevalier paper, Un document en 
 faveur de Lorette,in Melanges d'Archeologie etd'Histoire, 
 XXVII., pp. 143-151.
 
 Indulgences. 37 
 
 sneering fashion, as a commercial term, the matter 
 might be passed over with allowance for bias. The 
 cession of any part of movable possessions for re- 
 ligious purposes is never characterized by him as a 
 meritorious work, but invariably as a mercenary 
 transaction, usually reprehensible, as pointed out by 
 him in a short paragraph on page 179. Had he re- 
 stricted this characterization to instances which ac- 
 tually suggest such interpretation, there would of 
 course be no objection. At any rate LEA'S theologi- 
 cal schooling is not thorough enough to allow the 
 reader of invariably accepting his occasional con- 
 structions of Simony as satisfactorily proved. 
 
 The fourth chapter, on the Jubilee, and his refer- 
 ences in other chapters to this subject, are far sur- 
 passed by HERBERT THURSTON'S') investigations, so 
 that in all these matters I may refer to the latter's 
 thorough and very interesting work. 
 
 With LEA'S criticism of the Portiuncula Indul- 
 gence (p. 236), I refer for further information upon 
 this matter to the recently published authoritative 
 work by KiRSCH 2 ) we can only agree, where it is 
 expressed in befitting manner. The then following 
 
 J ) The Holy Year of Jubilee. An account of the history 
 and ceremonial of the Roman Jubilee (London, SANDS & 
 Co., 1900). Richly illustrated. Of LEA the author has this 
 to say on p. 332: Mr. LEA, in particular, is one of those 
 gentlemen whose principle of historical investigation is to 
 devise a theory first and to make the facts fit in with it 
 afterwards. If they will not fit in with it, so much the 
 worse for the facts, and, as the investigator who follows 
 up Mr. LEA'S trail soon begins to discover, they suffer a 
 Procrustean curtailment which alters their appearance very 
 considerably. 
 
 *) Der Portiunkula Ablass. Erne Kritisch-historische 
 Studie. (Tubingen, LAUPP, 1906).
 
 38 Henry Charles Leas Historical Writings. 
 
 discussion of the Carmelite Indulgences excite in 
 the reader the lively desire that to this question may 
 soon be devoted a special inquiry by a theologian 
 versed in history. It would 'be well worth while. 
 
 Scriptural quotations in favor of purgatory, only 
 partially cited on page 296, are carelessly dismissed 
 by LEA with the remark that they plainly have no 
 bearing on the matter. Thus the road is cleared 
 for the invention of purgatory, and we are treated 
 to a theological lecture which must be counted 
 among the most curious achievements of the author. 
 The universal acceptance of the newly invented doc- 
 trine of purgatory is laid in the time of HUGO OF 
 ST. VICTOR, and, singularly, it coincides with the 
 sacramental theory, developed at this period. These 
 matters were now mixed and the basis for the ap- 
 plication of Indulgences to the departed was fur- 
 nished. Can a simpler and yet more effective pro- 
 cedure be imagined? Catholic Theology has much 
 to learn before it can boast of the acuteness of LEA'S 
 discernment 1 ) ! It cannot surprise us then if we 
 are told on page 330: 
 
 The liturgies of the period are full of formulas 
 which show that the prayers in the masses were not 
 to relieve fram purgatorial pains, but to release from 
 hell, and a survival of this in the modern ritual, 
 after such power has been disclaimed, has not been 
 found easy of explanation. 
 
 According to this the ancient Church laid claim to 
 power even over the damned in hell, until me- 
 
 *) This discernment is demonstrated most forcibly in 
 LEA'S passage (page 557) : The Church had long been ac- 
 customed to the use of forgery in substantiating its dogmas 
 and its claims. Compare also p. 570.
 
 Indulgences. 39 
 
 dieval theology resolved to abandon them to their 
 fate. This is an illustration of the fatal risk one 
 takes by the reckless juggling of undigested ideas 
 and of arbitrarily distorted quotations. Without 
 having exhausted the passages of the volume that 
 call for criticism I will end this chapter by quoting 
 LEA'S final verdict which he clothes in the following 
 words : 
 
 Step by step it (the church) has abandoned its func- 
 tion as the guardian of morality and has devoted itself 
 to smoothing and broadening the steep and narrow 
 path. In each successive age it has claimed that 
 the increasing -wickedness of man renders impossible 
 the maintenance of the old severity, and by con- 
 descending to that wickedness it has stimulated, 
 rather than repressed the evil. Its effort has been, 
 not to make men better, but to save them from the 
 consequences of their sins. The power which it 
 claims as entrusted to it by God has been wielded to 
 elude and not to vindicate the justice of God. 
 Deeming its mission to be the saving of souls, it has 
 mattered little how that end was attained in accord- 
 ance with the artificial theories of scholastic theol- 
 ogy as interpreted by the rules of moral theology. 
 If the sinner cannot be induced to abandon his sin 
 he can at least be kept in ignorance that he sins; 
 his fear of hell can be removed by absolution, and of 
 purgatory by an indulgence; his conscience can be 
 soothed and he can be kept in obedience to the kind- 
 ly Mother Church whose benignity thus assures him 
 of heaven without imposing burdens on earth too 
 heavy for his weakness.
 
 4O Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 In LEA'S writings we see it plainly demonstrated 
 how it does not suffice to gather with tremendous 
 industry, material, even the most remote, but that 
 sufficient theological learning is requisite to examine 
 and use such material in a suitable, correct and un- 
 objectionable manner.
 
 IV. THE INQUISITION OF THE MIDDLE 
 AGES. 
 
 LEA has gathered loosely connected gleanings, on 
 the subject Superstition and Force, into a volume 
 which has already been published in the fourth 
 edition 1 ). To the adept in the history of medieval 
 jurisprudence the matters treated here are familiar 
 from numerous German and French works that 
 deal with this subject in a much more scientific form 
 than is the fact in LEA'S volume. Since its first 
 edition in the sixties of the last century, the author 
 has made revisions so numerous that they amount 
 to a complete rewriting. I can save myself the 
 trouble to deal with this book in detail, as it is but 
 the introduction to LEA'S researches into the Inqui- 
 sition of the Middle Ages, with which work it shares 
 all its peculiar merits and defects. 
 
 In the year 1888 there appeared LEA'S A History 
 of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages. The sale 
 of the work having been very unsatisfactory, its pub- 
 lisher brought out in 1906 a new edition of the first 
 two volumes, which upon closer inspection proves 
 to be the old book with a new title page 2 ), a pro- 
 cedure by which the author has been rendered the 
 worst possible service, for the purchaser will ask 
 
 J ) This edition I know only from references and reviews. 
 The second edition, which I have before me, appeared in 
 1870. 
 
 2 ) Three volumes. New York : The MACMILLAN Company. 
 It is seen by the water mark that only the title page was re- 
 printed. This is even the second remarketing of the original 
 sheets with a new title page, as, according to HANSEN, one 
 such was brought out also in 1900. 
 
 41
 
 42 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 himself wonderingly why the literature, which for 
 the twenty years previous appeared in abundance 
 on this subject, has not been considered. That this 
 is a misleading of the buying public, even though 
 unintentional, can hardly be disputed, no announce- 
 ment or explanation of the fact being furnished. It 
 may be presumed that the author had no part in this 
 deception, brought about, I suppose, by a change of 
 publishers. The third volume, the paper of which 
 is quite different from that used in the two others, 
 bears on a front page, quite small and in an insig- 
 nificant place, the information First published else- 
 where. Reprinted February, ipo6. This, there- 
 fore, is an unchanged reprint. It was only due to 
 careful search for some kind of notice about the 
 new title page, that I discovered this remark. It 
 will completely escape the attention of most pur- 
 chasers. 
 
 The entire work comprises three books, coincid- 
 ing with the volumes, namely : 
 
 7. Origin and Organisation of the Inquisition, II. 
 The Inquisition in the several Lands of Christen- 
 dom, III. Special Fields of Inquisitorial Activity. 
 
 Upon the foundation laid in the first chapter, 
 which deals with the situation of the Church in the 
 twelfth century, there are built up the other thirteen 
 chapters of the first book, headed as follows : 
 Heresy; The Cathari; The Albigensian Crusades; 
 Persecution; The Mendicant Orders; The Inquisi- 
 tion founded; Organization; The Inquisitorial Pro- 
 cess; Evidence ; The Defense; The Sentence; Con- 
 fiscation: The Stake. The second book occupies it- 
 self with The Inquisition in Languedoc; France; The
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 43 
 
 Spanish Peninsula; Italy; The Slavic Countries; Ger- 
 many; and Bohemia. 
 
 The third volume takes up the particular objects 
 of inquisitional activity, such as the Spiritual Fran- 
 ciscans ; Guglielma and Dolcino ; the Fraticelli ; Sor- 
 cery and Occult Arts, Witchcraft; the eighth chap- 
 ter discusses the problem: Intellect and Faith, the 
 ninth is the Conclusion. All three volumes are fur- 
 nished with appendices of documents, and in the 
 third volume is found an elaborate general index 
 covering seventy pages of two columns each. 
 
 It may here be conceded that though there have 
 since 1887 appeared many works on the Inquisition, 
 there is not one that treats the subject to this ex- 
 tent in detail and period 1 ). This is not by any 
 means to be understood to mean that LEA has 
 written a real and true history of the Inquisition ; 
 he has not; notwithstanding the fact that many of 
 his critical admirers claim this with considerable 
 reiteration, without thereby strengthening their as- 
 sertion. Any one who has followed with some at- 
 tention the researches in this direction, knows that 
 the time for the writing of a reliable history of the 
 Inquisition can only arrive after the most important 
 documents in all countries have been thoroughly 
 sifted and critically published. LEA'S enterprise, in 
 so far as it pretends to be a history of the Inquisi- 
 tion must therefore be viewed as an effort made 
 
 ') Despite the diligence with which LEA has collected his 
 authorities he has not succeeded in making them complete. 
 This is best proved by HENNER'S work : Beitrdge zur Or- 
 ganisation und Kompetenz der Papstlichen Ketzergerichte 
 (Leipzig, 1890), in which the author makes use of a large 
 number of data which have completely escaped LEA'S notice.
 
 44 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 with inadequate means, despite his considerable 
 pains to gather the material. 
 
 A sketch on The Domination of the Church in the 
 Twelfth Century forms the foundation of his presen- 
 tation of the subject. I must here quote the captions 
 of the subdivisions of the first chapter. As Causes 
 of the Antagonism with the Laity he enumerates: 
 Election of Bishops; Simony and Favoritism; Mar- 
 tial Character of Prelates; Difficulty of Punishing 
 Offenders; Prostitution of the Episcopal Office; 
 Abuse of Papal and Episcopal Jurisdiction; Oppres- 
 sion from the Building of Cathedrals; Neglect of 
 Preaching; Abuses of Patronage; Pluralities; 
 Tithes; Sale of the Sacraments; Extortion of Pious 
 Legacies; Quarrels Over Burials; Sexual Disorders; 
 Clerical Immunity; The Monastic Orders. As part 
 of the religious history of the Middle Ages LEA dis- 
 cusses Tendency to Fetichism 1 ), Indulgences, and 
 Magic Power of Formulas and Relics, to which is 
 appended an anthology of Contemporary Opinion. 
 
 Whatever there could be unearthed of scandalous, 
 smutty, cruel, incidents and anecdotes, confirmed and 
 more frequently unconfirmed, in the entire lit- 
 erature, LEA has diligently and industriously 
 brought here together, under aspects suitable to his 
 purpose, without any attempt at a critical discrim- 
 ination, and this sort of thing he retails as Church 
 history! Even the erection of the glorious church 
 
 *) Vol. I., p. 40, The theory of justification by works, to 
 which the Church owed so much of its power and wealth, 
 had, in its development, to a great extent deprived religion 
 of all spiritual vitality, replacing its essentials with a dry 
 and meaningless formalism . . . religion had become in 
 many respects a fetichism.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 45 
 
 edifices, to this day the pride of European countries, 
 LEA characterizes as an evil outgrowth of that 
 wicked period. In this discovery the Philadelphia 
 scholar stands, of course, completely isolated. I 
 have taken the trouble to go through this part re- 
 peatedly and can only state that its matter, its in 
 places coarse and disgusting language, together with 
 its absolute lack of theological and historical per- 
 ception, combine in presenting a sad picture of LEA'S 
 erudition 1 ). Any one in search for a historical work 
 thoroughly saturated with bias and prejudice, may 
 have his curiosity gratified by taking up this one. 
 
 LEA frankly avows that his sympathies are on 
 the side of the heretics (p. 61), although on page 
 1 06 he admits that the Cathari with their teachings 
 would have undermined all culture, would have even 
 put in question the propagation of the human race 
 had they been successful. LEA'S keenest partisan- 
 ship is manifested in the fourth chapter, which deals 
 with the Albigensian Crusades. Without the slight- 
 
 J ) If the history of LEA'S own country in the nineteenth 
 century were written according to LEA'S recipe, it would 
 come under the following heads : Bloody Persecution and 
 Massacre of Catholics, Their Social Ostracism; Lynch Law; 
 Representatives of Political Moral-?, AARON BURR, MARTIN 
 VAN BUREN, Tammany Hall, POLK, Carpet-Baggers, TWEED ; 
 Commercial Morals: Pools, Trusts, Wall Street Bucket 
 Shops, Club of Millionaire-Senators ; Organized Fleecing 
 of Immigrants in New York; Benevolence toward the 
 Indian ; Devastation of the Forests ; Land Frauds ; Know- 
 nothingism; A. P. A.; Abortions of Elections; Hypocrisy 
 toward the Negro ; Religious Excesses ; Superstition ; 
 Literary Piracy; Corruption in the Administration of 
 Union, States and Cities, etc. This list could, of course, be 
 much extended, if required. In point of fairness such a 
 schedule of American history would be equal to LEA'S pic- 
 ture of the Church in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in 
 this volume.
 
 46 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 est regard for authoritative, critical, valuations of the 
 particular sources, such as have, for instance, been 
 undertaken by genial DE SMEDT*) he narrates the 
 great struggle in Southern France entirely from his 
 own authorities, and these prove to be at every turn 
 almost worthless owing to grossest partiality. The 
 Pope, legates, and bishops are made out liars, hypo- 
 crites, avaricious, cruel ; the Crusaders, with few ex- 
 ceptions, were loafers and knaves ; on the other hand 
 the Albigenses and their protectors are all highly 
 respectable, even saintly, men, the Counts of Tou- 
 louse unfortunate noblemen of most exalted senti- 
 ments and worthy of all praise. If the soldiery of 
 SIMON DEMoNTFORT had been the disreputable rabble 
 as which LEA pictures them to us dozens of times, 
 we must ask in astonishment 'how it was possible 
 that MONTFORT achieved with them such surprising 
 results ! To ascribe these achievements solely to 
 his personal ability would be a poor subterfuge. 
 Page after page we meet with biased and en- 
 venomed narration, so that there are few chapters 
 in all of LEA'S numerous books that can be com- 
 pared to this one in unreliability and distortions of 
 the most painful kind. Since the great Pope, Ix- 
 XOCENT III., is in this chapter remembered by LEA 
 with various epithets, it occurred to me to collect 
 
 x ) Revue de Questions Historiques XVI. (1874) : Les 
 sources de I'histoirc de la Croisade centre les Albigeois. 
 Since LEA, either personally or by proxies, looked up all the 
 literature bearing on his subject, it is most difficult to be- 
 lieve that this effective, convincing, proof of the complete un- 
 reliability of the chief witness for his charges should have 
 remained unknown to him. However, that may be, LEA'S 
 argument receives through this omission the character of a 
 violent harangue of an attorney at court who by vituperous 
 abuse seeks to offset the weakness of his evidence.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 47 
 
 these characterizations as they are found in the first 
 volume, and thus we read on page 13 ; A resolute and 
 incorruptible Pontiff like INNOCENT III. ; on page 
 18, An upright Pope like INNOCENT III. ; on page 
 
 127, The vigorous ability of INNOCENT III. ; on page 
 
 128, It is fortunate for civilization that he possessed 
 the qualifications which enabled him to guide the 
 shattered bark of ST. PETER through the tempests and 
 among the rocks, if not always wisely, yet with a 
 resolute spirit, an unswerving purpose, etc.; on page 
 
 129, INNOCENT'S fearless spirit; on page 130, His 
 dealings manifest an evident desire to do exact jus- 
 tice; on page 132, He resolutely bent his energies; 
 on page 150, INNOCENT played skillfully, cruelly, 
 and remorselessly; on page 151, faithful to his pre- 
 arranged duplicity; on page 163, he returned to the 
 duplicity which thus far had worked so well; on 
 page 164, All this was fair seeming enough, yet it is 
 impossible not to see the purposed deceit; on page 
 165, INNOCENT'S approbation of this cruel comedy ; 
 INNOCENT kept an eye on the profitable side of per- 
 secution; on page 169, INNOCENT seems to have been 
 aroused to a sense of the scandal created by .... his 
 policy; on page 170, place INNOCENT in an unfor- 
 tunate light as an upright and impartial judge; on 
 page 173, justifying doubts of the sincerity of IN- 
 NOCENT'S orders; on page 174, the struggle was 
 hard for a proud man, but he finally yielded to the 
 pressure; on page 178, another act in the comedy 
 which INNOCENT and his agents had so long played; 
 on page 180, It was but a small share of the gigantic 
 plunder and INNOCENT would have best consulted 
 his dignity by abstention; on page 234, DOMINIC
 
 48 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 and FRANCIS, BONA VENTURA and THOMAS AQUINAS, 
 INNOCENT III. and ST. Louis were types, in their 
 several ways, of which humanity, in any age, might 
 well feel proud; on page 306, The enlightenment of 
 INNOCENT. 
 
 The character of the great Pope 1 ) has therefore 
 been endowed by LEA with the following traits : 
 
 Resolute, forceful, able 
 intrepid, energetic, en- 
 lightened, sincere, the 
 pride of humanity, in- 
 corruptible. 
 
 Insincere, playing com- 
 edy, eager for plunder, 
 unconscientious, double- 
 dealing, deceitful, partial, 
 cruel. 
 
 I think this parallel, which anyone may verify 
 for himself, will suffice to show how LEA suits 
 his verdicts to momentary requirement, rather 
 than to evidence and fact. That a historian may 
 charge most conflicting qualities to one and the same 
 person, and then expect to be taken seriously is 
 of course absurd. The above example of con- 
 flicting opinions about INNOCENT III. could be fol- 
 lowed up by similar parallels about other person- 
 ages dealt with by LEA, but I must forego the task 
 for this time. 
 
 The aggregate of his remarks concerning Church, 
 Popes, Curia, Bishops and priests is that they were, 
 with few exceptions, dishonest, avaricious, worldly, 
 intemperate, ignorant 2 ), usurers, sharks, scourges 
 
 *) What the chroniclers of the Middle Ages thought of 
 INNOCENT may be ascertained in the brief account in POTT- 
 HAST'S Regesta, I., 461. By the way, LEA should have in- 
 formed himself as to the Pope's correct date of death. 
 Compare his false statement in Vol I., p. 185. 
 
 *) LEA forgets in this oft repeated charge to suggest what 
 became of the thousands of graduates from the universi- 
 ties. Again, LEA frequently lays stress upon the fact that 
 the clergy at that time were almost the only persons of
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 49 
 
 for the people, simonists, unjust, oppressors, etc. 
 LEA'S charges, it is true, are warranted in some 
 single instances; things have occurred which de- 
 serve such characterization; this no historian will 
 deny. But his unwarranted generalization must be, 
 in this as in many other matters, the reason that the 
 author will with unbiased readers utterly fail in his 
 purpose of making everything Catholic contemptible. 
 The fashion of piling quotations at the end of 
 paragraphs sub una conclusions seems to have been 
 purposely designed to put the greatest obstacles in 
 the way of an examination of LEA'S statements. 
 One is left in the dark as to which particular as- 
 sertion is supposed to be supported by the 6, 7, 8, 
 10 and more references jumbled together. After 
 the reader has grappled with a number of them 
 without obtaining the desired elucidation, he gives 
 the matter up as perfectly hopeless, especially as 
 most references are of such laconic brevity as to 
 suggest a purpose, unless we prefer to believe that 
 the author commissioned others to make excerpts 
 for him, which he then, it appears, employed care- 
 lessly and indifferently, the titles often misstated 
 and unrecognizable. Some staggering assertions of 
 LEA on the admission of evidence, have been closely 
 examined by RINIERI, in the Civilta Cattolica, Nos. 
 1364 and 1365. Thus LEA writes (Volume I., p. 
 
 43 ): 
 
 Yet the subject of evidence as treated by the In- 
 quisition is not tvholly to be passed over, for it a/- 
 schooling, so that by means of their mental superiority they 
 could plunder the people so much more readily. How these 
 different assertions can be made to harmonize it is for LEA 
 to explain.
 
 50 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 fords fresh illustration to the manner in which the 
 practice of construing everything, in favor of the 
 faith, led to the development of the worst body of 
 jurisprudence invented by men and to the habitual 
 perpetration of the foulest injustice. The matter- 
 of-course way in which rules destructive of every 
 principle of fairness are laid down by men presum- 
 ably correct in the ordinary affairs of life affords a 
 wholesome lesson as to the power of fanaticism to 
 warp the intellect of the most acute. 
 
 And to this LEA adds, on page 434 : 
 
 Two witnesses were usually assumed to be nec- 
 essary for the condemnation of a man of good re- 
 pute, though some authorities demanded more. Yet 
 when a case threatened to fail for lack of testimony, 
 the discretion of the inquisitor was the ultimate ar- 
 bitrator; and it was agreed that if two witnesses to 
 the same fact could not be had, single witnesses to 
 two separate facts of the same general character 
 would suffice. When there was only one witness in 
 all, the accused was still put on his purgation. With 
 the same determination to remove all obstacles in 
 the way of conviction, if a witness revoked his testi- 
 mony it was held, if his evidence had been favorable 
 to the accused, the revocation annulled it; if adverse, 
 the revocation was null. 
 
 It is plainly stated here by LEA that if two wit- 
 nesses could not be secured against the accused, 
 and if the action for complete want of evidence 
 would have had to be dropped, the arbitrary opin- 
 ion of the Inquisitor decided as court of final ap- 
 peal. This statement LEA bases upon the following 
 enigmatical references :
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 5 1 
 
 Archidiaconi Gloss, super c. XI / Sexto v. 2 
 Joann, Andreae Gloss, sup. c. XIII 7 Extra v. 
 7. Eymeric. Direct. Inquis. pp. 445, 615 16. 
 Guid. Fulcodii Quaest. XIV. Zanchini Tract, de 
 Haeret. c. XIII, XIV. Bern. Guidon, Practica P. 
 IV. (Doat, XXX). 
 
 When RINIERI had, with much difficulty, ascer- 
 tained the passages alluded to in these references, 
 he subjected them to an examination in which he em- 
 ployed great erudition and caution as to their pre- 
 cise wording and meaning. The result is that NOT 
 EVEN ONE of the historians quoted by LEA to 
 support his severe charges states what LEA makes 
 him state. Nay, more; an examination of these 
 passages in the original shows that their sense is the 
 exact opposite of LEA'S statements, so that RINIERI 
 is well justified in remarking: 
 
 Delle sei citazioni di autori allegati da lui, nor una 
 sola e riscontrata vera. Ami le autorita da lui ac- 
 campate con magno sfarzo di citasioni, non solo non 
 comprovano i suoi aggravamenti, ma si rivolgono 
 contro di lui. Le quali per conseguenza, checche 
 ne sia delle intenzioni dell' uomo, pongono certa- 
 mente lo scrittore in una condizione assai delicata; 
 in quella doe di un attore, il quale, fallita la prova, 
 ex act ore fit reus*) . 
 
 It would lead me too far, were I to adduce proof 
 that this state of affairs exists also in many other 
 instances of this work, and yet, if there ever was a 
 book the statements of which have without examina- 
 
 ') No. 1365, p. 285.
 
 52 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 tion been accepted by many in blind faith, as unerr- 
 ing truth, it is the one before us. 
 
 Moreover, it is also a fact that a large number of 
 quotations are false or mutilated, that LEA'S dates 
 of election, installation and death of Popes, the 
 dates of appointments of Bishops and their names, 
 the dates of Bulls and other documents, and kindred 
 matters can never be accepted without verification, 
 since in these important particulars there are so 
 many blunders in these volumes. It happens, fur- 
 thermore, that in one annotation the same reference 
 is given twice; all of which is significant of LEA'S 
 manner of working, as regards his revision of the 
 literary material supplied by his hired assistants 1 ). 
 
 It is by no means sufficient to ascertain and read 
 all the related literature, the historian must also un- 
 derstand its purport. This is possible only then when 
 he realizes the spirit of the century in which those 
 
 *) In Vol. I., on pp. 381 and 419, GUILLEM GARRIC lan- 
 guished in prison for about thirty years, until he was sen- 
 tenced in 1321; on p. 467 the time is thirty years; on pi 517 
 he is sentenced in 1319 for a deed committed in the year 
 1284, while the date of the crime is laid on p. 425 in the 
 year 1285. ST. PETRUS MARTYR is on p. 239 declared in- 
 sane. Of FRANCIS OF Assist it is declared, on p. 250, that 
 not without reason he was suspected of insanity. Just to 
 give an illustration of LEA'S accuracy I quote here a few 
 instances of false dates found in the first volume, p. 185: 
 INNOCENT III. died on the i6th, not the 20th of July, 1216; 
 p. 231, the body of POPE FORMOSUS was disinterred by 
 STEPHEN VII. after nine months, not seven; SERGIUS III. 
 disinterred the same body again in 904, not in 905; p. 
 284, ALEXANDER IV. was elected, not after a hvo weeks' 
 vacancy of the See, but after one of five days; the 3ist of 
 December is the I9th, not the loth, day after ALEXANDER'S 
 ascension to the throne, and the nth after his coronation; 
 the Bull here in question was not granted on the 3ist, but 
 on the 22nd December (POTTHAST, 15602), so that the ten 
 days intermission becomes correct ; p. 288, CLEMENT IV. was 
 elected, not 1264, but on the 5th of February, 1265.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 53 
 
 writings and documents were composed; when, for 
 the comprehension of juridical 1 ) questions, he has 
 fully grasped the mental condition of the people in 
 those times in relation to culture, religion and State ; 
 if he, briefly, presents conditions of those times not 
 measured by our standards but in the light of the 
 views and usages of their own times. In this re- 
 spect LEA bears witness, on almost every page of 
 his volumes, that he was not equal to his task. 
 
 That LEA, however, had no intention to do the 
 work in this manner is evident from the following 
 suggestive words in his preface (page IV.) : 
 
 No serious historical work is worth the writing 
 or the reading unless it conveys a moral, but to be 
 useful the moral must develop itself in the mind of 
 the reader without being obtruded upon him .... 
 I have not paused to moralise 2 ), but I have missed 
 my aim if the events narrated are not so presented 
 as to teach their appropriate lesson. 
 
 Unless the plain sense of these words is intention- 
 ally ignored they must leave a most painful im- 
 pression. For here it is clearly avowed that LEA'S 
 rendering had the intention to serve certain definite 
 purposes. 
 
 The uncommonly keen activity of the last twenty 
 years to throw light upon the history of the Tem- 
 plars and their downfall, renders that particular 
 section in LEA'S third volume (pp. 237-378) espe- 
 cially interesting. In FINKE'S opinion 3 ) LEA has 
 
 *) The Inquisition is described as a hideous system of 
 foulest injustice. Similar forceful expressions are abundant. 
 
 2 ) This claim is false, the work is a continual moralizing. 
 
 3 ) Papsttum und Untergang des Templerordens. 1907, 
 Vol. I., p. viii.
 
 54 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 greatly helped to bring it about that the majority 
 of historians now believe in the guiltlessness of the 
 Order; yet LEA is, in his individual statements, ex- 
 tremely incorrect, often prejudiced, and in his final 
 verdict of the entire problem, he has, as PRUTZ 
 rightly points out, been wanting in consistency. 
 And on page X FINKE refers to LEA'S unwarranted 
 accusations, about which he counsels caution. 
 
 LEA'S habit, due to long commercial occupation, 
 to regard everything in the light of dollars and 
 cents, causes him to characterize as greed also 
 CLEMENT V.'s attitude toward PHILIP OF FRANCE 
 in the year 1307. FiNKE 1 ) opposes this with the 
 words : First of all LEA is here guilty of numerous 
 positive mistakes; proceeding from an undeniable 
 characteristic of the Pope, his love of money, LEA 
 seeks to explain CLEMENT'S entire conduct solely 
 by his fear that the possessions of the Templars 
 might be lost to him (p. 277). LEA does not con- 
 sider other nobler, even more natural motives, and 
 thus creates a caricature. 
 
 On page 249 LEA writes, in discussing the Tem- 
 plar's wealth : 
 
 An anonymous contemporary tells us that the 
 Templars were so rich and powerful that they could 
 scarce have been suppressed but for the secret and 
 sudden movement of PHILIPP LE BEL. 
 
 In the passage in Bouquet, Recueil XXI., page 
 149, which FINKE has ascertained, it is said, Us 
 estorent bien se puisans et si grans gens, but not 
 a word is mentioned of PHILIP and his secret as- 
 sault. This is a further instance of LEA'S peculiar 
 
 *) FINKE, Vol. I., p. 172.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 55 
 
 fashion in using authorities and records, a fashion 
 to which I have repeatedly alluded. 
 
 The greed for money of which the author has 
 repeatedly accused CLEMENT V., he charges against 
 JOHN XXII. in a still higher degree. Without 
 even an attempt at verifying the rumors of the so- 
 called treasure of this Pope, LEA dishes up, in dis- 
 gusting loquacity, all anecdotes related to this mat- 
 ter which he has been able to hunt up, and where 
 his informants fail, he exerts his own fancy to get 
 in an extra whack at this Pope. Thus he writes, 
 on page 68 of the third volume : 
 
 We can, PERHAPS, MOREOVER, IMAGINE*) how, in 
 its passage to the papal treasury, it (the money) rep- 
 resented so much of simony, so much of justice sold 
 or denied to the wretched litigants in the Curia, so 
 much of purgatory remitted, and of pardons for sins 
 to the innumerable applicants for a share of the 
 Church's treasury of salvation. The permanent evil 
 which he wrought by HIS SHAMELESS TRAFFIC IN 
 BENEFICES*), and the reputation which he left behind 
 him, are visible in the bitter complaints which were 
 made at the Council of Sienna, a century later, by the 
 deputies of the Galilean nation. 
 
 The dispute, not important of itself but attain- 
 ing great celebrity through accompanying circum- 
 stances, about the throne-succession in Ferrara un- 
 der CLEMENT V., is related by LEA (Vol. III., page 
 194) in a gloating and somewhat fantastic manner, 
 while his regard for exact statements and dates, as 
 usual, is very slight. If his presentation is compared 
 
 *) Capitals mine.
 
 56 Henry Charles Leas Historical Writings. 
 
 to EiTEi/s 1 ) who is equipped with a much more 
 exact knowledge of the material, and who accords a 
 calmly estimating criticism to all those concerned, it 
 will be realized how much LEA in his writings really 
 allows himself to be biased by his enmity toward the 
 Papacy. 
 
 The above discussion of various important points 
 allows to the reader a glimpse into LEA'S work- 
 shop, and characterizes the atmosphere which there 
 prevailed when he composed this work. Yet with 
 all its pronounced bias, and with all the evil re- 
 sults proceeding from its partisanship, there are, 
 though not frequent, lucida interualla. Hence he 
 who would condemn these three volumes as abso- 
 lutely worthless would be greatly in error. There, 
 for instance, where the actual process or the Church 
 and her representatives cannot be made to play a 
 conspicuous part of the recital, there prevails a 
 greater calm and ease of perception, which render 
 possible an absolutely appropriate employment of 
 the rich material. The work can therefore in 
 many matters, of course with the indispensable pre- 
 caution as regards LEA'S authorities, be used to real 
 advantage. 
 
 I do not care to take up further details of the 
 work. LEA'S verdict upon the medieval Inquisi- 
 tion 2 ), however, I will not withhold from the 
 reader : 
 
 *) Der Kirchenstaat unter KLEMENS V. Abhandlungen 
 zur mittleren und neueren Geschichte, herausgegeben von 
 BELOW, FINKE und MEINECKE. No. i (Berlin-Leipzig, 
 ROTHSCHILD, 1907). Kapital VII., Ferrara und die Este, 
 p. 170. 
 
 2 ) Volume III., p. 650.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 57 
 
 A few words will suffice to summarise the career 
 of the medieval Inquisition. It introduced a system 
 of jurisprudence which infected the criminal law 
 of all the lands subjected to its influence, and ren- 
 dered the administration of penal justice a cruel 
 mockery for centuries. It furnished the Holy See 
 with a powerful weapon in aid of political aggrand- 
 izement; it tempted secular sovereigns to imitate the 
 example; and it prostituted the name of religion to 
 the vilest temporal ends. It stimulated the morbid 
 sensitiveness to doctrinal aberrations until the most 
 trilling dissidcnce was capable of arousing insane 
 fury, and of convulsing Europe from end to end. 
 On the other hand, when atheism became fashion- 
 able in high places, its thunders were mute. En- 
 ergetic only in evil, when its powers might have 
 been used on the side of virtue, it held its hand 
 and gave the people to understand that the only 
 sins demanding repression were doubt as to the ac- 
 curacy of the Church's knowledge of the unknown, 
 and attendance on the Sabbat. In its long career 
 of blood and fire, the only credit which it can claim 
 is the suppression of the pernicious dogmas of the 
 Cathari, and in this its agency may be regarded as 
 superfluous, for those dogmas carried in themselves 
 the seeds of self-destruction, and higher wisdom 
 might have trusted to their self-extinction. Thus 
 the judgment of the impartial history must be that 
 the Inquisition was the monstrous offspring of mis- 
 taken seal, utilised by selfish greed and lust of power 
 to smother the higher aspirations of humanity and 
 stimulate its baser appetites.
 
 58 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 In conclusion I will say that I join fully and un- 
 reservedly in BLOETZER'S comprehensive opinion : 
 
 After all that has been said the verdict upon this 
 History of the Inquisition cannot possibly be favor- 
 able. The idea of writing a general history of the 
 Inquisition was daring, the assembling of the ma- 
 terial gigantic, the execution of some parts not with- 
 out ability; however, of defects and misstatements 
 of historical dates there are so many, the argument 
 of the advanced propositions is so weak, the refer- 
 ences to literature so incomplete and unsatisfactory, 
 the most venomous and baseless thrusts against the 
 Catholic Church so numerous, and the general con- 
 ception of the Inquisition so absolutely mistaken 
 that the reviewer must confess a history of the In- 
 quisition, complying with the most modest demands 
 for dispassionate, objective, historical investigation, 
 
 has even now not yet been written, to our regret. 
 
 * * * 
 
 From my not inconsiderable collection of docu- 
 ments on the Universal Inquisition I have selected a 
 few, the contents of which are suitable to com- 
 plete LEA'S material. They are found in the ap- 
 pendix of this book, along with those relating to the 
 administration of the Sacraments as mentioned in a 
 previous chapter. I will here briefly explain their 
 bearing. 
 
 BONIFACE VIII. , on July 7, 1303, addressed him- 
 self to the Inquisitors of the Roman province (doc- 
 ument No. i) and enjoins them from entering into 
 procedures against the Rectors of the fraternitas 
 Romana 1 ) and the clergy of Rome (compare LEA 
 
 *) Compare ARMELLINI, Le Chiese di Roma,
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 59 
 
 vol. I., p. 347) ; if they would so do, nothwithstand- 
 ingly, all their procedures would be void. He trans- 
 ferred to the office of the Vicar in spiritualibus of 
 Rome the inquisitionis officium against all clerics 
 included in the classes aforementioned, he being 
 held, however, to comply with the statutes of the 
 Inquisitional process : 
 
 Proviso quod ad diffinitivam sententiam super 
 crimine, confiscatione, publicatione bonorum vel 
 statu persone cuiusvis ex rectoribus vel clero predic- 
 tis, contra quern erit diffinitiva sententia proferen- 
 dum, absque apostolice sedis speciali licentia non 
 procedatis, et si secus feceritis, illud decernimus ir- 
 ritum et inane. 
 
 Whenever the Vicars and the Inquisitors were 
 called upon to proceed against a blood relation unto 
 the third degree of those mentioned, communiter 
 vel divisim, then both si divisim processum fuerit, 
 were held to communicate one to the other their 
 processes ut per hoc possit melius veritas inveniri. 
 While the Vicar could proceed to the sententia dif- 
 nnitvva without the Inquisitors, the latter could not 
 do so without the Vicar, under pain of nullity. In 
 a disagreement about the sententia, both pleaders 
 must lay their 'suits suincienter instruct! before the 
 Holy See. Not included in this inhibition were the 
 former Cardinals Colonna, their relations and ad- 
 herents. 
 
 Concerning the still largely unexplored labors of 
 the Inquisition in Middle and Southern Italy, under 
 JOHN XXII. (compare LEA, vol. I., p. 44), I submit, 
 in document No. 2, an extended extract from the 
 record of the treasurer of the province of Ancona.
 
 60 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 It comprises the expenditures of the Inquisition in 
 the years 1321 and 1322, and depicts in an instruct- 
 ive way the activity of the Inquisitor LAURENTIUS 
 DE MONDAYNO, who preached the Holy Cross 
 against Recanati, Osimo, and other places, as also 
 against FREDERIC DE MOXTEFELTRE. In Tuscany 
 and the Maritima we find occupied in a similar way 
 the Inquisitor GUIDO DE PASANO; in Sicily and 
 Apulia the Friar GUIDO DE LAVICTORIA, and 
 Magister GUADAMBIUS DE ALMANDULA. The ac- 
 counts about the armed attendance of Inquisitor 
 LAURENTIUS gives us to understand that his activity 
 was not without perils. Among the data about 
 several prelates who were sent to preach the Holy 
 Cross in different provinces, we find an embassy 
 to Germany for the same purpose. It consisted of 
 the two Franciscans THOMASSUTIUS DE MACERATA, 
 and PALMERIUS DE SANCTO HELPIDIO, furthermore, 
 of the SER GRATIANUS DE LUCCA and the German 
 PAULUS GOLDESTEN. On March 7, 1322, they re- 
 ceived for a four months' journey 192 gold florins, 
 for each therefore 12 gold florins per month. On 
 March 30, however, the two cursores FATIOLUS and 
 CORRADUS DE CAMERiNO were despatched after them 
 to make search for them and to recall them: 
 
 Ut non presentarent dictas litteras Crucis per 
 Alamaniam, cum sit aliud ordinatum per dominum 
 nostrum sinmnum pontificem. 
 
 The Cursores received 24 gold florins. This 
 search must have been futile for the two Franciscans 
 and their Italian attendant (PAULUS GOLDESTEN 
 must have remained in Germany), received on Au- 
 gust 30 another payment of 45 florins, having remain-
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 61 
 
 ed away one month and eight days longer than had 
 been anticipated. For a horse which had perished 
 on the way propter nimium laborem Friar THOMAS- 
 SUTIUS was refunded seven gold florins. A num- 
 ber of remarks about the placing of contribution 
 boxes in churches for the crusade, and about their 
 being emptied by special envoys, deserve attention. 
 In addition to numerous references to the salaries 
 of notaries who copied papal letters and other docu- 
 ments, we find mention of a decapitated German 
 traitor named HUGO DE BRANDESTAN. From his 
 belongings the treasurer gives to Friar THOMASSU- 
 TIUS on March 7, 1322, two gold florins. 
 
 In No. 15 we have, under date of November 19, 
 1338, the final balance of accounts of the Inquisitor 
 FRANCISCUS MACHARELLI, O. F. M., who had been 
 active in the provincia Sancti Frandsci. For the 
 Apostolic Camera there resulted upon inspection of 
 the account a credit of 258 gold florins which he as- 
 signed to the Chamber per manus MARCELLI DE As- 
 sisio, BARTHOLI PHILIPPI et MARCHONIS DAVICZ 
 campsorum de Florentia. In contrast to this 
 smooth settlement there is: i. The commission of 
 February 2, 1353, (No. 24), in which the Nuncio 
 Abbot RAYMUND is charged, quod exigat ab iniquisi- 
 toribus pravitatis terciam partem bonorum confisca- 
 torum et duas paries condemnationum; 2. the com- 
 mand to the Nuncio in the kingdom of Naples, of 
 February 16, 1359, (No. 29), to proceed with all 
 means against all former and present Inquisitors 
 who had withheld from the Apostolic Camera its 
 share in confiscations and penances ; 3. The order 
 to ARNALDUS DE MOLERIIS of July 23, 1359, (No.
 
 62 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 30) , on account of similar offenses, to take energetic 
 measures against present and former Inquisitors of 
 upper Italy as far as concerned. 
 
 The general power of the appointment of French 
 Inquisitors by the provincial prior of the Dominicans 
 in France*) is, in regard to the Toulouse Inquisi- 
 tor, restricted (No. 16) to the effect that he must 
 appoint the one named by the provincial prior of 
 Toulouse. The prior of Toulouse himself may also 
 be appointed as Inquisitor. This concession of in- 
 dependence to the Toulouse Tribunal has to my 
 knowledge not been previously pointed out. 
 
 A further peculiarity, relating to the appoint- 
 ment of Inquisitors is presented in No. 18. Over 
 the head of the provincial prior of France, the Pope, 
 upon request of the general procurator of the Dom- 
 inicans at the Curia, appointed February 27, 1343, 
 the prior of Angouleme, ARNANDUS MANDAVINI, to 
 be Inquisitor of Poitiers and the province of Tours. 
 Incidentally the Pope, however, expressly acknowl- 
 edges : quod ex commissione huiusmodo nullum ex 
 hoc preiudicium ordini vel illis, ad quos spectat es 
 indultis privilegiis providcre, generetur. The fit- 
 ness of the appointed is, however, to be testified to 
 by the Dominican Cardinal GERARDUS GUARDIA and 
 others of the Order. 
 
 Finally, document No. 34 records, on October 1 1 , 
 1463, a further exemption from the appointing 
 faculties of the French provincial prior. The dio- 
 cese of Cambrai was situated in the ecclesiastical 
 province of Rheims, but politically subject to the 
 
 *) See FINKE, Papsttwn und Untergang des Templer- 
 ordens, Vol. I., p. 147 ; Vol. II., pp. 44 and 49.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 63 
 
 German sovereign. Part of the diocese belonged to 
 the French, the other to the German, Dominican 
 province. Heretics who were hailed before the Ger- 
 man Inquisitors claimed to be subjects of the French 
 province, and vice versa, so that, through raising the 
 question of competency, many went unpunished. 
 The Bishop petitioned the Pope to transfer to him 
 the appointment of a general diocesan Inquisitor. 
 Pius II. did not agree to this but only allowed him 
 pro hoc vice dumtaxat to appoint the Dominican 
 MICHAEL DE MARICOLIS as proposed by him. 
 
 In the momentous Florentine dispute (compare 
 LEA, Vol. I., p. 345, and Vol. II., p. 270) one of 
 their citizens, MICHAEL DOMINI LAPI DE FLORENTIA, 
 was appointed at the motion of the General Minis- 
 ter of the Franciscans as Inquisitor for two years, 
 to pacify the Florentines. The General Minister 
 adduces in his petition (No. 23), which was ap- 
 proved April 27, 1347, the words: 
 
 Nisi, quod absit, interim racione excessus vel de- 
 fectus in officio sedi apostolice vel ministro generali 
 ordinis sui videretur amovendus. 
 
 A probably unique description of the destruction 
 of houses of heretics and the actual use of the 
 premises as sterquilinium, is offered in the petition 
 No. 19, of August 22, 1343. The Inquisitor of 
 Carcassonne, where, according to LEA, (Vol. L, p. 
 482), other houses of the heretics had been razed 
 to the ground, relates in this petition to the Pope 
 the following: A vacant plot had been created in 
 one of the best sections of the city of Carcassonne 
 by the tearing down of the two, adjoining, houses of 
 the condemned heretics RAYMUNDUS GUILELMUS
 
 64 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 MATE and GUILELMUS MARTINI FRENERII. The 
 same was in detestationem dicti criminis sur- 
 rendered to perpetuo sterquilinio. In consequence 
 in eadem platea tot sordes et immunditie, qiie inibi 
 continue proicicbantur et poncbantur, adco cumula- 
 bantur ibidem, that the stench, especially in sum- 
 mer time, not alone in the vicinity but to a large 
 part of the town had become dangerous and unen- 
 durable. Many cases of sickness in adjoining 
 houses would oblige their tenants to vacate the 
 same if there was no redress, although they were in 
 part pretiosae, sole-nines et magnae. Many of the 
 most prominent citizens had begged the Inquisitor 
 for the permission : 
 
 Claud en di dictam plateam undique, -non de muro, 
 sed de palis ligneis usque ad altitudinem octo vel 
 novem palmorum super terram, ita tamen, quod 
 dicta platea desuper apcrta et per totum inhabitabilis 
 in detestationem dicti criminis perpetuo remaneret. 
 
 The Inquisitor ventured not to permit this on his 
 own authority, but made inquiry of the Pope, who 
 replied, quod idem inquisitor, se sibi viderctur ex- 
 pediens, audacter dictam licentiam largirctur. This 
 reply the Inquisitor now requests to be given in the 
 form of a Bull which should expressly prohibit that 
 the place ever be enclosed in any other than the 
 proposed way, or that anything should ever be 
 erected upon it without the express sanction of the 
 Pope. This request was complied with. 
 
 In connection with the aforementioned document 
 No. 23, stands No. 21 of August 4, 1340. In LEA'S 
 biased account (Vol. II., p. 278) of the interdict 
 of Florence, which had been induced by the Floren-
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 65 
 
 tines placing under their protection the banking 
 house of the Acciaiuoli in opposition to the just de- 
 mands of Cardinal PETRUS GOMETII, there are miss- 
 ing important points which give to the entire pro- 
 cedure a different aspect, which, however, I can- 
 not discuss here. From this petition of PETRUS DE 
 AQUILA, Inquisitor of Tuscany, it is clear that even 
 the Bishop, and almost the entire clergy of Flo- 
 rence, did not trouble themselves about the interdict, 
 and that the hostile attitude of the whole city ren- 
 dered it impossible for the Inquisitor to carry out' 
 his commission. For this reason the Inquisitor pe- 
 titioned the Pope that he delegate a Cardinal who 
 contra predictos sic graviter excedentes procedat et 
 invent os culpabiles puniat according to Canon Law, 
 and who would compel them to observe the inter- 
 dict. The Commissary, whom the Pope appointed 
 in the person of Cardinal GUILELMUS DE CURTE, 
 was to proceed summarie, simpliciter et de piano 
 sine strepitu iiidicii et figura; and as summonses 
 propter civium saevitiam could not be made in Flo- 
 rence, their posting in the principal church of 
 Avignon should legally suffice. What measures 
 were taken subsequently by the Cardinal is not 
 known in detail. The final passages of great se- 
 verity show what importance was attributed at the 
 Curia to the defiant attitude of the Florentines. 
 The by no means prevailing total insolvency of the 
 banking house is nevertheless diligently asserted by 
 LEA in order to make the Pope's procedure appear 
 as entirely unjustified. At any rate the advisability 
 of paying the debt should have suggested itself 
 upon reflection to the town, under provision to hold
 
 66 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 the original debtor liable, as it was later compelled 
 to do anyway. Their defiance and rebellion caused 
 the inhabitants of Florence a tenfold greater loss 
 than the particular debt amounted to. 
 
 Calabria was a favorite refuge of heretics, be- 
 cause in its mountain recesses they could easily go 
 in hiding, (compare LEA, Vol. II., p. 245). INNO- 
 CENT VI. directed the Inquisitor FRANCISCUS DE 
 MESSANA on June 6, 1366 (No. 25), to proceed 
 against them with all possible energy, in order that 
 the evil might not spread, and that the guilty ones 
 be punished. In the kingdom of Naples and more 
 so in Venice, the Inquisitors had to overcome great 
 friction with the government before they could 
 properly exercise their official powers. The docu- 
 ments 26, 27, and 28 speak of such difficulties in 
 Venice in the year 1356 (compare LEA, Vol. II., p. 
 2 73)- Obstacles of another kind are mentioned in 
 No. 31, of August 5, 1366. In the Val Pute of the 
 Archdiocese of Embrun (LEA, Vol. II., p. 152), 
 which was difficult of access and very poor, a large 
 number of heretics had settled down. On account 
 of the objection by landlords, and of the impossibil- 
 ity to find shelter and sustenance, the Inquisitors un- 
 til now had been unable to settle there. The parish 
 priests, dependent upon extremely meagre mannalia, 
 could not undertake the work as they had to labor 
 hard for their sustenance. The tithes belonged to 
 the prior of Augustinians at Vulci and to other 
 claimants. In order to make possible the proper 
 spiritual care and instruction of the people, part 
 of these tithes might be retained so that persone 
 y donee et literate might be supported from them,
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 67 
 
 to whom the parishes upon becoming vacant should 
 be entrusted. In this way heresy would soon be 
 vanquished with the assistance of these learned men. 
 Furthermore, it is suggested that, on account of the 
 favor shown to heretics by quidam potentes, the 
 processes against them had better take place extra 
 loca. As the prior of Augustinians in Vulci, who 
 received a large share of the tithes, was involved in 
 this proposition the Pope commissioned the Augus- 
 tinian Cardinal RAYMUNDUS DE CANILHACO with 
 the whole affair, whereby he was permitted to pro- 
 ceed: 
 
 Summarie et de piano et sine strepitu et ngura 
 iudicii ac etiam sine libello vel quocumque processu 
 iudiciali. 
 
 We learn in No. 32, of December 16, 1366, of 
 three convicted heretics, in an order to the Chamber 
 to pay to the Inquisitor of Carcassonne, GUILEMUS 
 MILITIS, forty gold florins. This sum is the re- 
 imbursement for traveling expenses eundo Carcas- 
 sonam et dcinde Avinionem rcdeundo, and daily 
 allowances for a five weeks' sojourn at the Curia 
 in the matter of the process of the three unnamed 
 heretics. A second mandate, of January 6, 1376, 
 (No. 33), assigns to the notary JACOBUS CORE DE 
 AVINIONE forty-five gold florins pro II C foliis pro- 
 cessus, against the heretic PETRUS GARILHI, burned 
 at the stake in Avignon, and several of his likewise 
 condemned associates. The amount covered the 
 work of 123 days: 
 
 Quibus idem magister Jacobus etiam inqitisitiones 
 facias contra predictos hereticos in Romana Curia 
 vacavit, et pro abreviatione dicti processus et ordina~
 
 68 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 tione II sententiarum latarum ac aliis laboribus per 
 eum factis. 
 
 These two processes from the years 1366 and 
 1376 have probably not before this been made 
 public. 
 
 From a brief notice (No. 35) finally, about the 
 year 1550, it is learned that the bona haereticorum 
 in Rome were divided in three parts, quorum due 
 dcntur filiis, tertia vero applicetur camere. 
 * * * 
 
 Important corrections of LEA'S views about IN- 
 NOCENT III. in general, and of his conduct in the 
 wars of the Albigenses in particular, are supplied in 
 two small, poorly printed, volumes by LucHAiRE 1 ), 
 published in 1904 and 1906. The greater number 
 of the serious charges by LEA, especially the one of 
 fanatical zealotry, are there refuted, so that the 
 picture of the Pope's personality becomes a more 
 correct, and with that a more pleasing one. The 
 reproach of vacillation and indecision in deal- 
 ing with COUNT RAIMUND of Toulouse has not 
 been substantiated by the author. A careful analy- 
 sis of the communications exchanged in the trans- 
 actions referred to, combined with a broad view of 
 the entire situation, lets the Pope simply appear as a 
 ruler who demanded exactest information. Upon 
 being furnished with the same he made individual 
 decision in each case, a proceeding the justice of 
 which must be admitted. This proceeding, however, 
 resulted in changes of views, and consequently in 
 the mode of procedure, which must be attributed to 
 
 *) I. INNOCENT III., Rome et I'ltalle (p. 267) : II. INNO- 
 CENT ///., La papaute et I'Empire. (Paris, HACHFTTE.^
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 69 
 
 a perhaps purposely imprecise and faulty supply of 
 information, but not to any weakness in the charac- 
 ter of the Pope. 
 
 These two volumes may be warmly recommended 
 as a generally excellent and instructive account of 
 scientifical value. 
 
 Almost simultaneously there appeared, toward 
 the end of 1906, the books : VACANDARD, Etude his- 
 torique et critique sur le pouvoir coerticif de 
 I'Eglise 1 ), and, Douais, U Inquisition, ses origines, sa 
 procedure 2 ). In examining the opinions of reviewers 
 about these works, it develops that VACANDART/S 
 is the more appreciated"). I would also mention the 
 paper by PAULUS, Zur Beurteilung der Inquisition, 
 in the literary supplement to Kolnische Volks- 
 zeitung, No. 14, April 4, 1907. There is mention 
 made in this article of a few other works on the 
 Inquisition that have appeared within the last 
 twenty years. I would mention, by the way, that I 
 cannot accept as correct the opinion of PAULUS: 
 The recent declaration of MONSIGNOR DOUAIS 
 (L' Inquisition, p. 83) that GREGORY instituted the 
 Inquisition to prevent the Emperor from interfer- 
 ing in matters of faith, is not tenable. 
 
 Recently HEINRICH FINKE has brought nearer to 
 solution the question of the Templars to which 
 LEA devotes so much attention in the fifth chapter 4 ) 
 
 *) Paris, BLOUD, 1907. 
 
 *) Paris, PLON-NOURRIS, 1906. 
 
 *) Compare, however, the paper, Intorno all'origine storica 
 dell'inquisizione, in the Ciirilta Cattolica, No. 1359. pp. 315- 
 324- 
 
 4 ) Pp. 258-333-
 
 70 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 of his third volume. In FINKE'S two volumes 1 ), the 
 first devoted to the argument, and the second 
 to newly adduced pertinent documents, the his- 
 tory of the suppression by CLEMENT V. of this 
 highly meritorious military Order is depicted, and 
 it is shown that notwithstanding the vast literature 
 on the subject there had been wanting a work that 
 gives plain answers to many of the most moment- 
 ous and much mooted questions. I do not hesitate 
 to declare that FINKE, by reason of his highly 
 significant discoveries and the comprehensive ap- 
 plication of the same, by reason of his clear in- 
 sight into the general conditions of those times, 
 by reason of his correct appreciation of the Inquisi- 
 torial process as employed in the Templar affair, by 
 reason of his extensive knowledge of the prin- 
 ciples and practices of the Curia, by reason of his 
 clear perception of pertinent theological problems, 
 and, last but not least, by reason of the correct 
 interpretation, in their purport and spirit, of 
 long known but wrongly understood documents, 
 has spoken the last, decisive, word in all questions of 
 prime importance. With ready acknowledgment 
 of the labors of his predecessors in this realm, to 
 which belongs LEA'S correct and positive assertion 
 of the exclusive employment of the process of the 
 Inquisition 2 ), FINKE examines thoroughly all opin- 
 
 *) Papsttum und Untergang des Templerordens. Vols. 
 IV. and V. of Vorreformations-Geschichte Forschungen. 
 (Minister, ASCHENDORFF, 1907). 
 
 *) Vol. I., p. 149, Without presuming the Inquisition as 
 the basis of the Templar trials, the entire process is unin- 
 telligible; hence the appreciation of the events remained so 
 long indistinct and wavering, as insufficient knowledge was 
 had of the procedure of the Inquisition, and was not ap-
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 71 
 
 ions, without however entering upon long and 
 polemical discussions. The gratifying repose of the 
 argument, supported step by step with most re- 
 markable and forceful quotations, has a convincing 
 effect, and the masterly arrangement of the matter 
 draws the reader completely under the spell of the 
 highly dramatic development. Matter which has 
 long been positively determined is only touched upon 
 in passing, to save the connection of events, and 
 consequently the student is never unnecessarily de- 
 layed by a long recital of well established facts. 
 
 All things considered, the work must be pro- 
 nounced to be a scholarly production of the first 
 order, one calculated to attract greatest attention. 
 
 In his argument the author relies on previously 
 published researches, on original material which 
 fell into the author's hands in Barcelona, while 
 collecting the Acta Aragonensia, and upon glean- 
 ings in the archives of Paris and Rome. In the 
 treatment of the chief problem, so FINKE remarks in 
 his preface, an accurate formulating of questions 
 was absolutely necessary in order to arrive at a 
 result that was convincing. Were the denial of 
 Christ, spitting upon the Cross, immoral kisses, so- 
 licitation to Sodomy, and worship of an idol, cus- 
 
 plied to the Templar process. Only the research instituted 
 for the last quarter of a century in regard to the Inquisi- 
 tion has laid the foundation for a better knowledge and 
 LEA in his work has first and energetically applied it to the 
 Templar process. This merit, however, severely I must con- 
 demn in this connection some particulars in LEA, must not 
 be denied to the American scholar. . . . One overlooks 
 largely the development and imagines that whatever was 
 customary in the fifteenth century prevailed also in the 
 thirteenth. To this latter utterance FINKE adds the note: 
 This reproach must also be made to LEA'S statements.
 
 72 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 tomary at the admission into the Order and at its 
 chapters? Only in this sense can I perceive a 
 problem. Not the transgression of an individual 
 Templar, not the shortcomings of the Order in other 
 directions, come here in question as the Templars' 
 guilt*. This chief problem I must solve, after the 
 opinion of other inquirers, that the gravely incul- 
 pating self-confessions of Templars are not of the 
 least weight for the solution of this question of guilt. 
 Aside from this chief problem, there are, as the 
 author emphasizes, still some unexplained side is- 
 sues; above all: What induced PHILIP LE BEL to 
 warfare against the Order? The traitor ESQUIU DE 
 FLOYRAN we now know. His denunciation of course 
 
 has its great significance, but the principal 
 
 motive for the extermination was probably afforded 
 by the precarious economical condition of France. 
 And here I must acknowledge the chief weakness 
 of my book. I have not been able to give a true 
 picture of the social condition of France and of its 
 royalty. For such a picture the foundations are still 
 lacking, despite BOUTARIC : to make progress here is 
 the task of the French historians. 
 
 The first part concerns itself with the history of 
 the Order of Templars in the I3th century (pp. 3 
 
 *) WENCK points out (Gottingische Gelehrtc An- 
 zeigen, 158, p. 535) LEA'S services in throwing light upon 
 the guilt. He says : The adopted methodic principles have 
 for the greater part already been practiced by H. C. LEA. 
 The documentary evidence serves him only in presenting 
 the history of the process, not to confirm accusations 
 against the order, or for sealously disputing them. With 
 thorough penetration and broad view he points in impartial 
 tone to the improbability of the grave abuses and heresies 
 attributed to the Order.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 73 
 
 85), and it depicts, after some introductory re- 
 marks, the work of the three last Grand Masters, 
 the exterior history of the Order, the remarkable 
 segregation of Aragonese (and Spanish) Templars, 
 the relation of the knights to the Papacy within 
 their last hundred years, PHILIP LE BEL'S relations 
 with the Templars until 1305, the interior and ex- 
 terior development of the Order, as well as its repu- 
 tation in the last period. 
 
 A depiction of the characters of the French King 
 and the first Avignon Pope fills the second chap- 
 ter (pp. 86-110) ; King, Pope and Templars up to the 
 imprisonment of the French members of the Order 
 on October 13, 1307, are the subject of the third chap- 
 ter (pp. 111-143). Here is related the history of the 
 great treason by ESQUIU DE FLOYRAN, and one of 
 the most celebrated of controversies in the history 
 of the Templars is thus set at rest (p. 113). Not- 
 withstanding his thorough and penetrating research 
 the author has not succeeded, on account of insuffi- 
 ciency of the material, in laying bare the entire 
 connection of the great treason, particularly in its 
 inception. We must, however, be grateful for what 
 is given, because it makes clear the chief points. 
 A critical discussion of the trials in the year 1307 
 is found in the fourth chapter (pp. 144-171), and 
 brings up the question of the French General In- 
 quisitor. The matter rests, as it seems to me, upon 
 the use of the name without a fundamentum in re; 
 for JOANNES GAETANUS URSINUS, the inquisitor 
 generalis cardinalis, of the I3th century 1 ) had been 
 
 *) Compare BAUMGARTEN'S Aus Kanzlei und Rammer. 
 (Freiburg, HERDER. 1907). (Pp. 185-188.
 
 74 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 given no successor, not even for other countries, 
 Since the prior provincialis provindae Franciae had 
 received the privilege to appoint all French Inquisi- 
 tors, the Inquisitor residing with him in Paris was 
 to a degree the most notable. If it so happened 
 that he was also the King's confessor, the term of 
 Inquisitor generalis may easily have come into use; 
 a title and office of this kind, however, has never 
 been created, neither by Papal nor by royal grant. 
 An occasional commission per regnum Franciae 
 generalitcr, in certain restricted matters, under 
 simultaneous suspension of the powers of other 
 Inquisitors in the same matters, does certainly not 
 establish the official title of General Inquisitor. 
 Concerning the use of the rack by the Inquisition 1 ) 
 FINKE correctly remarks (p. 162) : 
 
 Only twenty years ago JUNGMANN was of the 
 opinion, that in the first investigation of Grand 
 Inquisitor WILHELM no use whatever (sic) was 
 made of the rack. There is no mention of its 
 employment found in the records, although as 
 the rack was a legal means it had to be recorded 
 if admissions were obtained by its use. This is 
 energetically denied by LEA and others who de- 
 clare that there was no need of mentioning the 
 use of the rack in the records of the Inquisition. 
 In this sweeping form LEA'S opinion is certainly 
 incorrect: there is no ordinance of the Inquisition 
 to that effect. 
 
 Notwithstanding the scanty material, and the 
 long- interruptions in the correspondence between 
 
 *) Compare WENCK, Gottingische Gelchrte Anseigen, 158, 
 1896, p. 533
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 75 
 
 CLEMENT and PHILIP after the I3th of October, 
 1307, the author was able, in his fifth chapter 
 (pp. 172-230) to elucidate in an appreciable manner 
 the relation of the two after the imprisonment of 
 the Templars until the conclusion of the proceed- 
 ings at Poitiers, thus promoting research to a con- 
 siderable degree. Especially in this matter new 
 discoveries, particularly of confidential letters, 
 would be of essential value. FINKE'S investigation 
 has done away with a gross misinterpretation in re- 
 gard to the date of the numerous documents of 
 August I2 1 ). In a very extensive group (of these 
 Bulls) the trial of the dignitaries at Chinon is min- 
 utely described, although it only began on August 
 17, five days later, therefore, than the date of the 
 Bulls. Previous inquirers, even HEFELE-KNOPFLER, 
 have all sharply censured this seeming deceit of 
 CLEMENT V. LEA especially speaks of the lying 
 Pope, of the revolting equivocation. More cautious 
 inquirers could find no answer to the question : Why 
 should CLEMENT have spoken an untruth here ? and 
 they sought, as did PRUTZ and FINKE, all kinds of 
 unsuccessful interpretations. Apart from other con- 
 siderations, a charge of stupid prevarication and of 
 a most awkward fraud means a misestiination of 
 the papal Chancery and Curia which both assuredly 
 least deserve. 
 
 The sixth chapter (pp. 231-281) relates the things 
 
 1 ) It is here referred to 483 Bulls, ordered to be issued 
 under this date, the execution of which, however, was de- 
 layed many months, so that events that took place after the 
 date, could conveniently be mentioned in these Bulls. This 
 is, therefore, simply an instance of a somewhat far-going 
 conventionalism in office routine.
 
 76 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 that happened to the Templars at the episcopal In- 
 quisition, and at the hands of the papal commission 
 in France. The former concerned itself with in- 
 dividual Templars, the latter with the entire Order. 
 The working up of these two fundamentally different 
 commissions belongs to the most important inves- 
 tigations of the book 1 ). With the aid of a sump- 
 tuous compilation of the Aragonese KING JAMES 
 II, FINKE was able to write his seventh chapter 
 (pp. 282-325) about the Aragonese Templars, to 
 which are added some observations about trials in 
 other countries. In discussing the question of guilt, 
 in the eighth chapter (pp. 326-344), the author em- 
 phasizes LEA'S merit in proving the guiltlessness of 
 the Templars, but adds the remark: 
 
 Even LEA and GMELIN practise a certain eclecti- 
 cism; their long handling of the process records 
 have had an influence upon them: they would 
 gladly deny everything but cannot get themselves 
 to do so; they would not altogether deny lascivious 
 kisses, Sodomy, even certain frivolous mockeries of 
 the Saints. This is inconsistent and deviates in its 
 effect very little from the views which PRUTZ repre- 
 sents and which both valiantly combat.*) 
 
 *) FINKE (p. 246) warns against the extensive GMELIN 
 Tables: GMELIN has, after LEA'S example (pp. 375-386), 
 given a summary about the alleged varying demeanor of 
 the Bishops of Clermont, Saintes, Limoges, Tours, Paris, 
 Orleans, Rheims, Noyon, Soissons, Amiens, Nevcrs, 
 Rhodes, Toulouse and Carcassonne, at the episcopal In- 
 quisition, which contains some good statistical information, 
 but otherwise abounds in errors of all kinds. The schedule 
 is absolutely useless. 
 
 *) Pp. 326-327.
 
 The Inquisition of the Middle Ages. 77 
 
 In this connection may be quoted a well warranted 
 admonition which FINKE gives in his preface (p.x.) : 
 
 He who would still defend the truth of the 
 charges must also have the courage to announce his 
 belief in the appearance of the devil in the form of a 
 cat at the Templar's banquets; for his appearance, 
 and at times also his carnal intercourse with them in 
 the disguise of a beautiful woman, was, as we now 
 know 1 }, sworn to by numerous Templars, the same 
 as the other charges. 
 
 The brilliant defense of the Templar's freedom 
 from guilt, in the eighth chapter, is followed in the 
 ninth (pp. 345-369) by a description of the events at 
 the Vienna General Council, and in the tenth (pp. 370 
 386), by the inquiry into the Pope's attitude on 
 the question of the Templar's possessions, and a 
 concluding chapter. The documents in the ap- 
 pendix bear the following superscription : i. The 
 Master of the Templars, and the Crusade at the 
 Council of Lyons, 1274; 2. The draft of the Bull 
 Letamur in te, of June i, 1307; 3. Excerpts made 
 from the trials of Templars in Cyprus for the Vien- 
 na Council (1311)*); 4. The Templars and Con- 
 fession*). 
 
 ^ Vol. II., p. 342. 
 
 2 ) FINKE remarks to this reprint (p. 395) : He who 
 contemplates objectively the nature and aim of these ex- 
 cerpts cannot possibly agree with the crushing criticisms of 
 SCHOTTMULLER GMELiN and LEA. Errors occur, it is true, 
 but an intention to forge is nowhere discoverable. Such an 
 attempt would at that have been unsuccessful, as the ex- 
 aminers had before them also the process records. By the 
 way, who made use of these excerpts? In their rough 
 draft they could only serve their author. Transcripts from 
 them have so far not become known. 
 
 *) Compare pp. 23 and 24.
 
 78 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 The contents of the second volume is arranged 
 in three parts: I. Letters, Discourses and Opinions 
 on the History of the Fall of the Order of the 
 Templars (pp. 61-229), some of which are only 
 loosely connected with the subject, but neverthe- 
 less of interest; 2. Accounts of the Aragonese am- 
 bassador of the general Council at Vienna, and the 
 King's replies, 1311 and 1312 (pp. 230-306); 3. 
 Processes of Templars (pp. 307-379). The utiliza- 
 tion of this vast material was made in the first vol- 
 ume. In addition to the Templar items, there is a 
 great deal of other important information, as, for 
 instance, concerning the affairs of the papal Chan- 
 cery and its mode of procedure. As far as t*he 
 Consistories are concerned, an exact dating by the 
 aid of other records would frequently have been 
 desirable.
 
 V. FRENCH AND GERMAN EDITIONS OF 
 LEA'S HISTORY OF THE INQUISITION. 
 
 SOLOMON REINACH published in 1900 a French 
 edition of LEA'S work, in a wretched shape. Ex- 
 treme cheapness was sought, and attained, to as- 
 sure a wide circulation of the volumes. With the 
 work now available in both the English and the 
 French languages it would appear that the needs of 
 the world of letters had been sufficiently cared for as 
 far as LEA'S researches are concerned. About fif- 
 teen years ago 1 ) FINKE, in a short review of LEA'S 
 books, had warned against their translation into the 
 German. Among other things FINKE pointed out: 
 I. The entire work was premature 2 ) ; 2.. LEA'S per- 
 ception was largely perverted owing to his insuffi- 
 cient knowledge of the medieval systems of Church 
 and State and of their interworking ; LEA being fre- 
 quently totally lacking in appreciation; 3. There 
 were serious faults in the composition (to these 
 items should be added the often unendurable volu- 
 bility), and FINKE doubted whether a publisher could 
 be found for a German version of the work in its 
 present shape. 
 
 In this FINKE was thoroughly mistaken. A Ger- 
 man version has not only been undertaken, but, by 
 reason of what assurances of its saleability I am not 
 aware, even found a publisher. 
 
 The archivist of the municipal archives at Co- 
 logne, Professor Dr. HANSEN, arranged with LEA 
 
 ') Historisches Jahrbuch, XIV. (1893), p. 332. 
 ') See p. 43- 
 
 79
 
 8o Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 for a German edition, and its first volume appeared 
 under the title: Geschichtc der Inquisition im Mit- 
 telalter, von HENRY CHARLES LEA. Autorisierte 
 Uebersetsung bearbcitct von HEINZ WIECK und 
 MAX RACHEL. Revidiert und herausgegeben von 
 JOSEPH HANSEN. (Bonn, Georgi, 1905). Joined to 
 the original contents we find in this edition a pref- 
 ace by HANSEN, and a dissertation by PAUL FRED- 
 ERICQ, entitled : Die Inquisition und die Geschichts- 
 forschung. I forego speaking of this rather shal- 
 low treatise, the bibliographical parts of which 
 show large gaps, in order to draw attention to a 
 passage in HANSEN'S preface, which here follows : 
 
 Shortly after its appearance (of the English work ) 
 there were, in opposition to the unanimous acclam- 
 ation by those proficient in these matters, objections, 
 general and particular, raised by a certain school 
 of German historical research, thus demonstrating 
 how little it was capable of appreciating labors that 
 astonished the scholars of Europe. These objec- 
 tions, for which in i8po the Historische Jahrbuch 
 of the Gorres Society (XL, 302-323) gave spate to 
 a representative of this school, namely to the edi- 
 tor of the Laacher Stimmen, J. BLOTZER, S. J., arc 
 of that typical kind which excludes discussion 
 within scientific limits. 
 
 Then HANSEN proceeds to explain to the world 
 why the Historical Department of the Gorres 
 Society undertook the publication of Cameral 
 records and not of Inquisition records. He avers 
 that in those circles an inquiry into the opera- 
 tions of the Roman Church in such a critical 
 sphere as the Inquisition is, was by preference
 
 French and German Editions. 8r 
 
 avoided. If HANSEN, in this and similar asser- 
 tions, thinks he is playing a trump card, he is 
 not only greatly mistaken, but overestimates in a 
 portentous manner his own judgment of the ne- 
 cessity of this or that historical research. No his- 
 torical inquirer of positive Catholic views has the 
 least fear of approaching such problems, as a glance 
 at pertinent publications of recent years proves. 
 HANSEN'S aspersions are, therefore, unwarranted ; 
 he evidently is not aware of their latitude. 
 
 Why BLOTZER'S criticism of LEA'S work precludes 
 a discussion within scientific limits HANSEN has not 
 explained. He depreciates this criticism because he 
 is at a loss to oppose a better argument to BLOTZER'S 
 thorough and positive statements. This convenient 
 manner of shoving aside troublesome opponents is 
 fortunately not prevalent in scientific circles. It 
 proves, however, that HANSEN so greatly praises 
 this notoriously partial work of LEA SOLELY for 
 the sake of its anti-Catholic tendencies, and that he, 
 on these same grounds, tries to justify his transla- 
 tion of the same. 
 
 In the preface HANSEN also informs us that LEA'S 
 text has first of all been corrected by the author and 
 subsequently by HANSEN. A number of small 
 errors have been corrected and newer editions of 
 authorities have been substituted for those of the 
 original. 
 
 What I said of the German edition in Allgemeinc 
 Literaturblatt (XV., No. 112, columns 395-396) 
 may here be repeated : When a German professor, 
 director of a great archive, causes to be translated 
 into the German an English work which appeared
 
 82 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 nearly nineteen years previously, and of which there 
 has been obtainable for some years also a French 
 translation, this undertaking can only be justified if 
 by means of a thorough revision of the book at least 
 its most glaring mistakes have been eliminated. 
 This HANSEN has not done. In blind faith 'he ac- 
 cepted as gospel truth the many dozens of false 
 dates 1 ), citations, etc., without even making an ef- 
 fort to verify them. He made no attempt to set 
 right LEA'S grave offences, but even becomes spon- 
 sor for LEA'S method and findings by his unlimited 
 eulogies of the author, and by advertising his Re- 
 vision on the title page. We have seen how a 
 sound criticism of authorities has been attempted by 
 LEA only in rare instances, and then only in a half 
 hearted way. Nor has he any respect for the criti- 
 cism of others. The German editor, therefore, would 
 have found abundant work here, particularly in one 
 of the most important parts of the book, the Albigen- 
 sian Crusades, should he have given fullest consid- 
 eration to the genial criticism of sources by DE 
 SMEDT: Not only was this omitted, but HANSEN 
 had not even heard of this work, although even LEA 
 should have been acquainted with it in 1887. Fla- 
 grant contradictions found in the volume entirely 
 escaped HANSEN'S attention; his Revision leaves 
 them severely alone. HANSEN could, of course, not 
 correct LEA'S theological blunders, as he has no 
 schooling in these matters. For this reason I can- 
 not well reproach him on this score. But in enum- 
 
 *) HANSEN should at least have verified and corrected the 
 false dates of documents No. II., XVIII. and XX. at the 
 end of that volume.
 
 French and German Editions. 83 
 
 crating the things which an editor, who writes such 
 a pretentious preface, should have done and did not, 
 I could proceed for quite a while longer if suf- 
 ficient space were here at my disposal. 
 
 My purpose here can only be to inquire whether 
 the German edition was warranted, and to examine 
 its editor's work. In HANSEN'S preface (p. XI.) I 
 come across a sentence which, on account of its 
 significance, I will quote here: 
 
 In the first volume before us, dealing with the 
 inception and organisation of the Inquisition, em- 
 endations were hardly required arid would not have 
 been without risk because they might have dis- 
 turbed the How of the author's thoughts and inter- 
 fered with the character of his argument which, of 
 course, was to be strictly preserved. 
 
 I had to read this sentence several times over 
 to convince myself that HANSEN could actually 
 allow anything like this to be printed. His words 
 really mean : Regardless of the fact that the author's 
 conclusions are often wrong, and indifferent to the 
 fact that the character of his statements is not always 
 above reproach, neither was to be disturbed. Such 
 principles, of course, open the door for an indiscrim- 
 inate admission of all the improper matter referred 
 to. They are, moreover, a convenient excuse for the 
 neglect of a laborious scrutiny and the difficulty of 
 rewriting faulty matter. HANSEN'S carelessness in 
 editing this German edition merits severest con- 
 demnation. 
 
 Those acquainted with HANSEN'S scientific labors, 
 those aware of his views of Christianity and the 
 Church, cannot be surprised that HANSEN under-
 
 84 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 took a German edition of this work. But that he 
 characterizes an undeniable duty of every truth- 
 seeking historian as not without risk, is a procedure 
 that should come in for well deserved censure. 
 With regard to this plain duty the author's flow of 
 ideas and the character of his argument simply 
 have no claim to consideration. And if such en- 
 croachments upon the work had been prohibited by 
 the author 1 ) HANSEN should have promptly drop- 
 ped any attempt at translation. I think this would 
 have been the only possible, logical action, unless 
 he had chosen to point out in his preface, and proved 
 by instances, LEA'S unsupportable claims and state- 
 ments. 
 
 When perusing the German edition it did not re- 
 motely occur to me to think that the translation, 
 on which three men had worked, and for which 
 HANSEN had assumed full responsibility, was not 
 scientifically unassailable. To my great surprise I 
 learned subsequently how XIKOLAUS PAULUS, not 
 so trustful as I, had made comparisons which justi- 
 fied the suspicion of a poor translation. PAULUS 
 writes, in the literary supplement of the Kolnische 
 Volksseitung (No. 2 of January 10, 1907), as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 LUCHAIRE emphasises the fact that IN- 
 NOCENT III., in his letters never demanded the 
 death penalty for heretics. But now we find in the 
 
 *) SALOMON REINACH tells us on p. 32 of the first volume 
 of the French translation: Qttand j'ai ecrit a Pauteur pour 
 solliciter son consentement a une adaptation, II m'a repondu. 
 Traduisez comme vous I'entendrez, mais, je vous prie, ne 
 vous departissez pas du ton impartial que je me suis impost. 
 Les iatts doivent parler d'eux-memes.
 
 French and German Editions. 85 
 
 German translation of LEA'S book (L, 150) that, in 
 the year 1198, the Pope despatched two legates to 
 Southern France with letters, wherein he demanded 
 that all heretics, who would not return to the true 
 faith, should be burned (verbrannt). In LEA'S 
 original (L, 138), however, there is no mention of 
 "burning" but of "banishing." It may be claimed 
 that this is merely a printer's error and unfortunate- 
 ly overlooked in the revision. But there are other 
 errors in the translation which cannot be so ex- 
 plained away. In one of his letters INNOCENT III. 
 admonishes the Crusaders, making use of a biblical 
 passage, that they should fight the followers of the 
 old serpent (Epp. XL, 230) : "Pugnate cum serpen- 
 iis antiqui ministris." LEA (L, 152) translates the 
 word "pugnate" with "strike down." This already 
 improved term still does not satisfy the translator, 
 who makes the Pope write: "Strike dead" (Schlaget 
 tot) the followers of the old serpent! (p. 169). 
 Vastly more serious it is when in another part of 
 the German translation (p. 202) the English word 
 "including" is simply changed into the opposite and 
 translated with "apart from" (abgesehen von). 
 This falsification occurs in the account of the trans- 
 fer of the domain Melgueil over to the Bishop of 
 Maguelonne. The Pope, it is said there, sold the 
 domain to the Bishop, who paid for it the enormous 
 sum of thirty-three thousand marks, "apart from" 
 gratifications to the staff of the papal Chamber. 
 This sum, it is also averred, was only a very small 
 part of the "colossal robbery." LEA, however, says 
 in the original (I. 180) expressly that the Bishop 
 paid thirty-three thousand marks "including gratifi-
 
 86 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 cations to the creatures of the papal Camera." Nor 
 is, for that matter, even LEA'S version correct. While 
 in the authority quoted by him (VAISSETTE, Histoire 
 generate du Languedoc. Paris, 1737) the Bishop's 
 expenditure is stated at thirty-three thousand "ster- 
 ling neufs de semi livre," further information is 
 found in an old work to which VAISSETTE refers: 
 GARIEL, Series praesulum Magalonenisum. (Tolosa? 
 166^) and here -we are informed, on the evidence of 
 documents from the archives, that the Pope re- 
 ceived 1220 marks. (The Bishop had previously 
 offered only 500 marks. Compare the letter of the 
 Pope to the Bishop, of September n, 1212. Epp. 
 XV., 172). Even the gratifications to the officials 
 of the papal Chamber were precisely enumerated, 
 as also the traveling expenses of the agents whom 
 the Bishop sent to Rome, and the interest on a fi- 
 nancial loan. All this aggregated the sum of 6600 
 livres. In the same place it is mentioned that 320 
 livres are equal to 100 marks. To this are added 
 various amounts paid by the Bishop in the domain 
 of Melgueil for abrogation of privileges and the 
 like. If, therefore, GARIEL and VAISSETTE mention 
 an expenditure of 33,000 sterlings "neufs de demi 
 livre" only the total disbursement can be meant. 
 
 I have only compared a few passages that have 
 reference to INNOCENT III. and which appeared 
 suspicious to me. If in the other parts there are 
 similar errors in translating, then LEA'S work, 
 already in the original so frequently unreliable, has 
 become more so in its German translation. 
 
 After reading this considerately expressed, and 
 yet of its character so damnatory finding, I de-
 
 French and German Editions. 87 
 
 termined to make some tests from all parts of 
 HANSEN'S volume, in order to obtain for myself an 
 independent opinion of the merit of the translation. 
 The result of my investigation compels me to declare 
 that this is one of the most unreliable translations 
 ever made of a scientific work.
 
 VI. THE SPANISH INQUISITION. 
 
 LEA'S researches concerning the Spanish Inquisi- 
 tion form a separate group of volumes. He began 
 to study this subject after finishing his History of 
 the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, having dis- 
 covered that the Spanish institutions would not well 
 permit of being included in a general history of the 
 Inquisition. As an introduction to this comprehen- 
 sive history, LEA wrote Chapters from the Religions 
 History of Spain connected with the Inquisition, 
 a work which I need not further consider here. 
 Then appeared from his pen The Moriscos of 
 Spain: Their Conversion and Expulsion 1 ), which 
 forms an elaborate chapter in the History of thp 
 Spanish Inquisition. LEA justifies in the preface a 
 separate edition of the same with the words: 
 
 For it not only embodies a tragedy commanding 
 the deepest sympathy, but it epitomises nearly all 
 the errors and tendencies which combined to cast 
 down Spain, in little more than a century, from its 
 splendor under CHARLES V. to its humiliation under 
 CARLOS II. 
 
 Here LEA suggests, and in the concluding chap- 
 ter of the fourth volume he retails it at length as a 
 fact which he regards as the principal achievement 
 of his studies, his discovery that Spain's struggle 
 for the purity of faith and race was, exclusively, 
 responsible for the economical and simultaneous 
 political ruin of the country. 
 
 *) London, BERNARD QUARITCH, 1901, XII, 463 pages. 
 88
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 89 
 
 If matters had been allowed to proceed in the 
 religious sphere as they had shaped themselves since 
 the fourteenth century, a kind of Islamism, by an 
 indirect route through some sort of syncretism, 
 would have been the inevitable result. ALFONSO 
 VI of Castile (1072-1109), the Shield and the 
 Light of Spain, had already assumed the title of 
 imperador de los dos cultos, and the amalgamation 
 of Moors and Spaniards was steadily progressing, 
 socially and otherwise, despite their numberless con- 
 flicts and wars. If not wishing to look on indolently 
 while a systematic undermining of Christian life 
 and faith took place, the Church had, for the pro- 
 tection of the faith, to resort to means which cor- 
 responded to the conditions of the period and to the 
 general ideas of the times. The victorious struggle 
 that had been carried on against the Albigenses sug- 
 gested the method. The long-continued wars of 
 conquests carried on by Spanish rulers, rarely sug- 
 gested by really religious motives, now received a 
 special consecration by the fact that the Church 
 bestowed upon them the spiritual and material bene- 
 fits of the Crusades. Even Templars and Hos- 
 pitalers received permission to fight against the in- 
 fidels in Spain. 
 
 This quite natural reaction of the Church, as 
 against the great dangers of the cohabitatio of be- 
 lievers and unbelievers, dangers equally realized by 
 the learned scholar and by the common man of that 
 period, LEA calls in his book (page 4) intolerance. 
 Where great numbers of subjected Moslems were 
 assembled, the Church insisted upon rigorous sepa- 
 ration of the races, and the Lateran Council under
 
 90 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 INNOCENT III. ordered that Jews and Saracens must 
 wear a certain distinctive garment or mark. This 
 ecclesiastical ordinance, regarded as a matter of 
 course by all contemporaries, and followed by 
 various others, gives LEA occasion to say : 
 
 The Church was succeeding in gradually awaken- 
 ing the spirit of intolerance, but its progress ivas 
 slow (p. 9). 
 
 The Jews and the Mudejares, as the subjected 
 Moslems were called, are designated already in the 
 introductory chapter as in education and affairs so 
 advanced, and so much superior to the Spanish 
 population, that any reasoning person must con- 
 clude the greater majority of the real Spaniards 
 had been consummate imbeciles. These assertions 
 are in evidence throughout the whole volume, 
 which indeed reads like a protracted apology, if not 
 apotheosis, of Jews and Mudejares, while of the 
 great perils which these foreign bodies obviously 
 meant to a Christian realm, there is, significantly 
 enough, never any mention. All the wrong and 
 injustice is on the side of the Spaniards, of the 
 Church, of the Inquisition, of the Kings; and all 
 virtue and justice on the side of Jews and Saracens. 
 The expert in Spanish Church history will there- 
 fore not be unduly surprised to find grave methodi- 
 cal faults in the book. The mistake of the Span- 
 iards, so incomprehensible to us, to compel con- 
 versions by force, to offer the alternative of bap- 
 tism or deportation, furthermore the neglect of in- 
 structing these newly won Christians, the waver- 
 ing policies of spiritual and temporal authorities, 
 and other lamentable happenings, can under no
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 91 
 
 circumstances serve as a threadbare excuse for such 
 partiality 1 ). 
 
 A validly baptized Christian remains a Christian 
 for life, a principle which according to LEA : 
 
 was duly carried through the canons and served 
 as a justification for vitiating in practice the essential 
 genius of Christianity and as an excuse for un- 
 numbered horrors. 
 
 In this strain he continues throughout the en- 
 tire book, from which circumstance we may infer 
 with what understanding the author meets all ques- 
 tions bearing upon theological matters. 
 
 The great banishment of the Moors from Spain, 
 in the year 1609, is the end of the drama described 
 by LEA in the following eleven chapters: 
 
 /. The Mudcjares, 2. Ximenes, j. The Her- 
 mania"), 4. Conversion by Edict, 5. The Inquisition, 
 6. Conversion by Persuasion, 7. Condition of the 
 Moriscos, 8. The Rebellion of Granada, p. Dangers 
 from Abroad, 10. Expulsion, n. Results. 
 
 To this is joined, on pages 403-4^, an appendix 
 of fourteen documents, followed by an index. The 
 
 ') In this connection LEA significantly expresses himself 
 in the conclusion (p. 394) as follows : Whether this was so in 
 reality is a plain question of fact about which there ought 
 not to be a dispute among those who have studied the 
 abundant sources of information and can exercise their 
 powers of observation on the existing situation, but the 
 answer to the question involves such deep-rooted convic- 
 tions in religion and politics that the diversity of opinion 
 expressed affords an instructive illustration OF THE SUB- 
 JECTIVITY FROM WHICH SO FEW HISTORIANS CAN EMAN- 
 CIPATE THEMSELVES. The words in capitals would most par- 
 ticularly be true of LEA. 
 
 2 ) The insurrection of the Hermania, or Brotherhood, 
 was a rising of the commons against the cruelty and op- 
 pression of the nobles.
 
 92 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 assembling of this material, partly consisting of 
 heretofore imprinted chronicles, deserves acknowl- 
 edgment, so far as the technical part is concerned. 
 As to the interpretation, however, and the arbitrary 
 filling of gaps in the tradition, my admonitions to 
 use caution should be remembered. 
 
 In January, 1906, appeared the first volume; in 
 September of that year the second; in January, 
 1907, the third; and in October, 1907, the fourth 
 volume of this History of the Inquisition of Spain 1 ). 
 In manuscript it had been completed in October, 
 1905. Referring to the vast number of documents 
 on the Inquisition in the prodigious Spanish ar- 
 chives, the author remarks in his preface : 
 
 There can be no finality in a history resting on so 
 vast a mass of inedited documents and I do not flat- 
 ter myself that I have accomplished such a result, 
 but I am not without hope that what I have drawn 
 from them and from the labors of previous scholars 
 has enabled me to present a fairly accurate survey 
 of one of the most remarkable organisations record- 
 ed in human annals. 
 
 Notwithstanding the great number of works that 
 have been written about the Spanish Inquisition, 
 systematical, foundation-laying monographs 2 ) have 
 
 *) New York, the MACMILLAN COMPANY; London, MAC- 
 
 MILLAN & Co. 
 
 *) For the best monograph of an important episode we 
 are indebted to German industry which produced: Bci- 
 tr'dge sur Geschichte des Spanischcn Protestantism** und 
 der Inquisition im sechsehntcn Jahrhundert, compiled from 
 the original documents at Madrid and Simancas, by Dr. 
 ERNST SCHAFER, 3 vols. (Giitersloh, BERTELSMANN, 1902). 
 Upon HOENSBROCH'S Forschungen on the Spanish Inquisi- 
 tion, SCHAFER comments in the Leipzig periodical, Alter
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 93 
 
 hardly ever been undertaken. The superabund- 
 ance of documents will not permit of mastering 
 the entire material until the activity of the In- 
 quisition territorially has been clearly established, 
 under proper distinction of the individual tribunals 
 and their territory. The qualification expressed 
 in LEA'S words is therefore quite proper, as they 
 draw the reader's attention timely to the futility 
 of an attempt to write a conclusive history of this 
 institution. Hence it should have suggested itself 
 
 Glaube (No. 10) (compare Kolnische Volksseitung No. 
 1095, December 16, 1907), as follows: Claiming our atten- 
 tion in the first place, we have here the celebrated work of 
 the secretary to the Spanish Inquisition and Freemason, 
 DON JUAN ANTONIO LLORENTE, the "Histoire critique dc 
 I'lnquisition d'Espagne," first published at Paris in 1817, 
 which made so much more of a sensation as any history of 
 the Inquisition theretofore had been dependent upon second 
 hand sources, while LLORENTE boasted, in his former official 
 capacity as secretary to the Inquisition, and later as com- 
 missioner of KING JOSEPH BONAPARTE, to have copied and 
 compiled from numberless original records of the Inquisi- 
 tion, thus laying claim to unconditional reliability. This was 
 actually conceded to him in an extraordinary degree, all the 
 more readily, as in this former official of the Inquisition was 
 soon recognised a severe opponent of the Institution. His 
 book had extraordinary success, and it has been translated 
 into various other languages. For a long while it played in 
 science the part of a unique authority on the history of the 
 Inquisition, and as such was used by every one. Already 
 LEOPOLD RANKE, however, in the first edition of his "Fiirsten 
 und Volkcr von Siideuropa," pointed out that LLORENTE'S 
 statements were in certain respects colored, and since then, 
 especially through the exertions of Catholic writers, who 
 singled out this dubious Catholic with Masonic proclivities 
 as a renegade possessed of particular bitterness, he has in 
 many respects been exposed as unreliable. As a matter of 
 fact, LLORENTE' s work is so greatly tainted by bias that his 
 statements must be subjected to the most rigid examination 
 His most objectionable part is probably the one in which he 
 seeks to compute, ostensibly on the authority of his num- 
 berless excerpts, in reality, however, by frivolous guess*
 
 94 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 to LEA, instead of using the pretentious title, A His- 
 tory of the Inquisition of Spain, to name his work 
 Contributions to the History, or similarly*). 
 
 The entire work is divided into nine books: I, 
 Origin and Establishment; 2, Relations with the 
 State; (vol. 1)53, Jurisdiction; 4, Organization; 5, 
 Resources; 6, Practice I.; (vol. II.); 6, Practice 
 II.; 7, Punishment; 8, Spheres of Action I.; (vol. 
 III.) ; 8. Spheres of Action II. ; and, 9. Conclusion; 
 (vol. IV.). LEA claims that : 
 
 ... a somewhat minute analysis has seemed to be 
 indispensable of its structure and methods of pro- 
 cedure, of its relations with the other bodies of the 
 State and of its dealings with the various classes 
 
 work, the number of Inquisitorial victims, and arrives at 
 quite awful figures. So is also his boast of original in- 
 formation in many points absolutely unjustified ; unfortun- 
 ately it has led to most serious blunders by later writers. 
 If in recent times he nevertheless has once more been 
 eulogized without substantiation as an authority of the 
 first order and thoroughly trustworthy, by COUNT HOENS- 
 BROECH, in his book, "Das Papsttum in seiner Kulturellen 
 Wirksamkeit," this fact is much to be deplored in the in- 
 terest of science, and HOENSBROECH only proves by this 
 opinion that, as far as the history of the Spanish Inquisi- 
 tion is concerned, he has no idea of the true state of the 
 matter, however pretentiously he may proclaim his knowl- 
 edge. . . . The historian must under no circumstances 
 do violence to the facts, such as HOENSBROECH has done in 
 his book, at least as far as the Spanish Inquisition is con- 
 cerned. We do not mean to assert that all his statements 
 are false, for they are not, only the way in which he mis- 
 uses and mixes proven and unproven facts should here be 
 put in the proper light. 
 
 *") In FINKE'S magnificent collection, Acta Aragonesia. 
 2 volumes (Berlin, ROTHSCHILD), there is reprinted in the 
 XVII. chapter (p. 840), a number of documents on the In- 
 quisition.
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 95 
 
 subject to its extensive jurisdiction. This has in- 
 volved the accumulation of much detail in order to 
 present the daily operation of a tribunal of which 
 the real importance is to be sought . . . in the silent 
 influence exercised by its incessant and secret labors 
 among the mass of the people and in the limitations 
 which it placed on the Spanish intellect in the reso- 
 lute conservatism with which it held the nation in the 
 medieval groove, etc. (p. V .). 
 
 But this justification of reciting endless trivialities 
 is untenable. The same end would have been at- 
 tained much better by a clear, comprehensive 
 statement than with a tiresome abundance of de- 
 tails, and specimina would have sufficed for the 
 reader's enlightenment. The comfortable verbosity 
 with which the author, in a frequently superficial 
 way, retails the unprinted material furnished by 
 librarians is not always in due proportion to the 
 importance of their subject. Concerning the lat- 
 ter part of above quotation, I have in my preceding 
 chapters said all that is necessary. In general, 
 LEA is of the opinion that solely through the in- 
 stigations of the Church the Spaniards, from being 
 the most tolerant people of Europe, were turned 
 into the most intolerant (p. 35). It quite cor- 
 responds with the absolutely partial attitude of the 
 author when he interprets laws and ordinances, ac- 
 cepted by the entire cultured world of those times 
 as suitable, even necessary, and therefore to be 
 regarded as a plain, unmistakable expression of 
 the mental condition of the people of the age, ex- 
 clusively according to modern views and standards,
 
 96 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 not accepted by everyone, and characterizes them 
 as ignominy and disgrace 1 ). 
 
 Concerning the position of the Inquisition in 
 Spain, LEA sets forth that it represented there both 
 Pope and king, combined therefore the two swords. 
 FERDINAND permitted its establishment only on con- 
 dition that to him be conceded the power to appoint 
 and dismiss Inquisitors, and he wrote to SIXTUS IV. 
 in plain terms that he would admit as Inquisitors 
 only persons of his own selection. 
 
 As the institution developed and became more 
 complex he nominated to the Pope the individ- 
 ual to whom the papal delegation as Inquisitor-gen- 
 eral should be given and he appointed the members 
 of the Suprema which became known as the Conse- 
 jo de su Magestad de la Santa General Inquisicion. 
 Although the papal commission granted to the In- 
 quisitor-general faculties of subdelcgating his pozv- 
 ers and appointing and dismissing his subordinates, 
 thus rendering his action indispensable, FERDINAND 
 was careful to assert his right to control all appoint- 
 ments and to assume that at least they were made 
 with his assent and concurrence (Vol. I., p. 290). 
 
 ') I regard it as peculiar that so many who write about 
 the Inquisition and kindred subjects, consider it necessary 
 to avow that they do not approve of the things that hap- 
 pened, of the laws, the misuses and the outgrowths. From 
 what suspicion do they seek to clear themselves? That 
 which was universally regarded in those times as befitting 
 and appropriate is evidently not so to-day, nor need it be 
 so ; but it is a great mistake to designate as cruelty, etc., 
 that which formerly passed for an adequate expression of 
 justice. If by omission of such deprecating reservations 
 respecting these occurrences I should possibly be suspected 
 to be an oversealous apologist, I shall endeavor to bear this 
 great misfortune with becoming dignity.
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 97 
 
 This attitude of the king, assumed at the estab- 
 lishment, continued essentially unaltered. Even 
 the subsequent protracted disputes between the 
 Curia and Spain about the appointment of the 
 General Inquisitor did not materially change it. 1 ) 
 
 If the biographical and other statements about 
 the General Inquisitors, which LEA has gathered 
 in a creditable way (vol. I., p. 300) are not more 
 correct and reliable than those concerning the Ger- 
 man Jesuit NIDHART (pp. 310-313 and 500), they 
 merit but very moderate confidence. 
 
 An astonishing instance of ignorance in simple 
 liturgical matters is furnished by LEA in vol. I., p. 
 361. The Inquisitors demanded, in 1635, that, at 
 the reading of the Edict of Faith, the officiating 
 priest should, before beginning Mass, make to them 
 the same reverentia as due to a Bishop. Of this LEA 
 tells us : 
 
 It was the custom that the celebrant should make 
 a bow to the bishop, if present, and in his absence, 
 to the Eucharist. 
 
 The king was against this, and he ordered that 
 in the absence of the Bishop the reverence must 
 be made to the Sacrament, and not to them. Any 
 beginner in theology could have enlightened LEA 
 in this matter from the Caeremoniale*) 
 
 From LEA'S statement, even if perused cum bene- 
 
 *) It depended, of course, upon the individual rulers how 
 far they would, or could, interest themselves in the affairs 
 of the Inquisition. This varied greatly. But to my knowl- 
 edge no fundamentally important changes ever took place in 
 the constitution of the Inquisition. 
 
 2 ) It is astonishing even for a man of LEA'S calibre, that 
 he speaks, in his fourth volume, of an adoration of the 
 Saints without any qualifications whatsoever.
 
 98 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 ficio inventarii, it is plainly evident that the Spanish 
 Inquisition had matured into a court, which, under 
 the extensive protection of kings and high poten- 
 tates, powerfully and callously pursued its aims, 
 and attained the same by not always unobjection- 
 able means. Frequently, therefore, even without 
 attributing the importance to exaggerated details 
 which LEA in ill-concealed ardor would accord to 
 them, it is evident that the desire and thirst for 
 power caused the individual tribunals to over- 
 step all lawful bounds, resulting in injustice and 
 greed. The Inquisitors could allow themselves 
 cavillationes against Rome only because they knew 
 that the State power would screen them always and 
 in all things. For the great public many of the 
 familiares of the Inquisition became a veritable 
 plague which was hardly ever acknowledged by 
 their superiors. Solely to preserve the unassail- 
 ability of the Inquisition, even criminal familiares 
 were given a protection and favor by their imme- 
 diate superiors that must justly cause astonishment. 
 The relation of the Inquisitors to the Bishops was 
 often a very strained one, and, owing to the power 
 of that institution, occurring conflicts resulted most 
 frequently in the defeat of the Bishops. The elab- 
 orate description of the celebrated case of Arch- 
 bishop CARRANZA of Toledo (vol. II., pp. 45-85) re- 
 quires a thorough testing, particularly the insinua- 
 tion on pages 84 and 85. 
 
 The fourth book offers a very valuable, but per- 
 haps too much stretched, survey of the organiza- 
 tion of the Inquisition. The first chapter (vol. II., 
 pp. 161-204) treats of the General Inquisitor and
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 99 
 
 the Supreme Council (la Supremo), the second (pp. 
 205-262) of the constitution of the various Tribunals 
 and of the salaried officials as : Inquisitors ; pro- 
 motor fiscalis or attorney general ; Notaries or Sec- 
 retaries; Alguazil; Cur sores (Nuncio), Major- 
 domos, Jailers, Physicians, Surgeons, Officials of 
 Finance; the third (pp. 285-314) of the Limpieza. 
 All officials of the Inquisition had to give proof, by 
 pedigree, that they neither descended from Jews 
 nor from Moslems. Converses and their descend- 
 ants were not admitted. Later this exclusion was 
 extended to the descendants of all those who had 
 ever been sentenced by the Inquisition, even if they 
 undoubtedly had been so-called old Christians. The 
 Observants were the first Order that obtained 
 from CLEMENT VII. in 1525 the privilege that 
 they could not be held to accept descendants from 
 Jews or from victims of the Inquisition. Any poor 
 fellow, though his monastic vocation was undoubted, 
 had to prove first that his blood was pure. This 
 remarkable and pernicious movement seized by de- 
 grees upon all circles; even the Spanish college 
 founded by ALBORNOZ at Bologna admitted only old 
 Christians. The question of the Limpieza became 
 later a veritable plague to the country, affecting 
 destructively all Civil and State conditions, even up 
 to most recent times. 
 
 This extremely important historical fact finds its 
 counterpart in the even more sharply practised os- 
 tracism in LEA'S own country of those who have a 
 strain of Indian or Negro blood in them. He 
 therefore, who in his own home and in our modern.
 
 loo Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 enlightened times tolerates such incredible medie- 
 valism, forfeits the right to condemn the Spaniards 
 on that score and to use about them language such as : 
 
 Wild as all this may seem to us, it gives us a 
 valuable insight into the impulses which governed 
 Spain in its dealings with the alien races within her 
 borders 1 } . 
 
 The extensive sixth book describes the actual 
 process. 
 
 There is such an abundance of utterly superfluous 
 casuistry stored up here that not infrequently one 
 loses the thread of the argument. These disserta- 
 tions unfortunately do not lead to a clearly out- 
 lined statement of the general procedure. If earlier 
 instances raised the suspicion that LEA generalized, 
 in an unpermissible manner, from casual incidents in 
 his records, here this suspicion obviously becomes a 
 
 ') The race question has reached in the United States a 
 much more uncivilized standpoint than it has ever occu- 
 pied in Spain. The emancipation of the negro, brought 
 about with so much bloodshed, and with prodigal waste of 
 grandiloquent phrases, has been shown up as vulgar econ- 
 omical and political hypocrisy, the fruits of which were 
 gathered by carpet-baggers under application of the most 
 oppressive and shameful methods. LEA is invited to answer 
 the question to how many of the educated colored people 
 are tolerated as officials, in the north of the United States, 
 by the very Yankees who were so solicitous for negro 
 emancipation? To my knowledge, after ROOSEVELT'S futile 
 attempt with a colored postmaster, there are hardly any. 
 Wild as all this may seem to us in Europe, it gives us a 
 valuable insight into the impulses which govern the United 
 States of America in their dealings with the alien races 
 within their borders. Thus LEA'S own utterance, mutatis 
 mutandis, is very well applicable to American conditions 
 (compare also my concluding words on p. 135). Comment 
 might also be made here on the attitude of the people of the 
 United States toward Chinese and Japanese, as also on 
 their elevating influence upon the now nearly exterminated 
 Indian.
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 101 
 
 certainty. It must be assumed that a thorough ex- 
 amination would produce here not unimportant dis- 
 placements in LEA'S statements. 
 
 The reader gains the impression of an unwilling- 
 ness to understand from LEA'S passage (vol. III., 
 p. 146) : 
 
 That reconciliation to the Church, which was rep- 
 resented as a loving mother, eager to welcome back 
 to her bosom her erring children, should be regarded 
 as a punishment, seems a contradiction in terms, yet 
 so it was, and the Suprema did not hesitate to speak 
 of those zvho had been condemned to reconciliation. 
 It would not be easy to invent a more emphatic illus- 
 tration of the perversion of the spirit of religion by 
 persecuting fanaticism. 
 
 These almost incredible words, which do not 
 point out the immense difference between the 
 poenitentia publica, as a rigorous corrective, and 
 the poenitentia privata, is an example of many simi- 
 lar passages, which LEA, to heap contempt upon 
 the subjects treated by him, freely intersperses 
 throughout his four volumes. 
 
 In the concluding volume LEA begins with con- 
 tinuing the fifth chapter of the eighth book, on 
 Mysticism, wherein he relates many things which 
 he could have disposed of briefly by referring to 
 the above-mentioned work by SCHAFER on the Pro- 
 testantism in Spain. 
 
 In frequently obscuring diffuseness the solid- 
 tatio ad turpia is discussed in the sixth chapter; 
 the seventh deals with hazardous teachings ; the 
 eighth with occult arts ; the ninth with witchcraft ; 
 the tenth with the political significance of the In-
 
 T02 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 quisition ; the eleventh with Jansenism ; the twelfth 
 with Freemasonry ; and the remaining four with 
 Philosophism, Bigamy, Blasphemy and divers 
 Quisquilia. 
 
 The ninth book presents in its two chapters De- 
 cadence and Extinction and Retrospect, an im- 
 peachment, embellished with many valuable facts, 
 which culminates into an almost unrestricted eulogy 
 of all those who, as individuals or as classes, have 
 ever been persecuted by the Inquisition. The 
 thought that merely worldly prudence and consider- 
 ation for material interests should have guided 
 Inquisition and government is here repeatedly and 
 emphatically expressed. Higher principles are not 
 considered by LEA; indeed, wherever they appear 
 in the proceedings, he ridicules them. 
 
 The chapter about solicitatio ad tnrpia ails of 
 the fundamental evil that all denunciations are 
 equally valued. Anyone even slightly acquainted 
 with the history of this sad chapter, knows that it 
 is often very difficult to bring about a necessary 
 denunciation, and he knows also that the most reck- 
 less and untrue accusations have been made, and 
 will be made, from immoral or morbid motives, 
 against perfectly blameless priests. Therefore this 
 entire paragraph may be considered as almost value- 
 less in so far as its reflections upon cause, extent 
 and punishment of the evil are concerned. It winds 
 up in this fashion : 
 
 There is practically no reason for supposing that 
 the crime was either more or less prevalent, at the 
 close of the eighteenth century, than it had been 
 ever since, in the thirteenth, auricular confession
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 103 
 
 was made obligatory, or than it has been since the 
 nineteenth century opened. The strain of the con- 
 fessional is too great for average human nature, and 
 the most that the Church can do, in its most recent 
 regulations, is to keep these lapses of the fiesh from 
 the knowledge of the faithful. 
 
 Truly a worthy conclusion to the chapter. 
 
 I must abstain from entering into further de- 
 tails here. Attention should be drawn, however, 
 to the fact that LEA, on the last page of his book, 
 sings an enthusiastic hymn of praise to the reli- 
 gious separation of Christian society. He points 
 out that : 
 
 Unity of faith, which was the ideal of statesman 
 and churchman alike in the sixteenth century, is 
 fatal to the healthful spirit of competition through 
 which progress, moral and material, is fostered. 
 
 This peculiar standpoint furnishes a key to many 
 of LEA'S assertions, especially to his frankly hos- 
 tile attitude toward the Catholic Church and all her 
 institutions and enterprises. 
 
 It is not a pleasant task to review a number 
 of volumes by one and the same author, when one is 
 not in a single instance able to acknowledge and 
 praise, unrestrainedly, plan, contents, results or 
 methods. That other historians have bestowed 
 upon this latest of LEA'S works almost unrestricted 
 approval, cannot in the least influence the opinion 
 which I base upon a most precise and conscientious 
 examination. The difficulty of the examination is 
 made appreciably greater in the instance of the His- 
 tory of the Spanish Inquisition, because its author 
 refers in annotations to a prodigious amount of un-
 
 IO4 Henry Charles Leas Historical Writings. 
 
 printed material, without, however, literally quoting 
 from his authorities, very few cases excepted. As 
 experience with earlier works of LEA has taught that 
 in his employment and interpretation of the 
 material, far more let us say misconstructions, 
 occur than is the average in scientific work, it 
 may be assumed without unfairness that the same 
 proportion of misconstructions is present in re- 
 spect to this unprinted material. LEA'S way of 
 filling in gaps in the tradition by his own guess- 
 work, to which I referred in my first chapter, cele- 
 brates its greatest triumph in these four volumes. 
 That this guesswork turns out, without exception, 
 to the prejudice of Popes, Curia, Inquisitors, clergy, 
 etc., should make even the most ardent of LEA'S 
 admirers suspicious. 
 
 To these ardent admirers belongs, among others, 
 JOSEPH JACOBS, already previously referred to, 
 who, however, as is shown by the following quota- 
 tion from his review, does not approve of the plainly 
 hostile tendency of the four volumes. He clothes 
 his adverse comment in the very mildest form, in 
 order not to make the contrast to the eulogistic 
 part of his review too pronounced. I quote the 
 following passages from his extensive review 1 ) 
 to show how the work has been rated by an influen- 
 tial organ : 
 
 With the issue of his fourth volume, MR. HENRY 
 C. LEA completes what is in some respects the great- 
 est historical work yet produced in America. These 
 four volumes are to be taken together with the pre- 
 
 *). The New York Times, Saturday Review of Books, 
 pp. 693 and 604, November 2, 1907.
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 105 
 
 ceding three which gave the history of the Inquisi- 
 tion of the Middle Ages and are not distantly related 
 to another series of volumes in which MR. LEA has 
 dealt with the confessional, sacerdotal celibacy, and 
 other excesses of the Roman Catholic system of 
 which the Inquisition may be regarded as the cul- 
 minating point. This, as will be seen has occasion- 
 ally affected MR. LEA'S judgment of his great topic. 
 But meanwhile it is the first duty of a review of this 
 work to congratulate the venerable author on suc- 
 cessfully carrying out a life work by an achievement 
 which places him at the head of all American histori- 
 cal students now living. It makes him the peer of 
 MOTLEY, PRESCOTT, and PARKMAN, his only com- 
 petitors in the past. 
 
 To put the matter shortly MR. LEA has produced a 
 work on a subject of absorbing interest which for 
 many a long day to come must serve as an authority 
 to European experts on the subject. . . 
 
 MR. LEA has prevented the possibility of his work 
 becoming obsolete from this cause by ransacking the 
 libraries of Europe for every scrap of evidence bear- 
 ing upon the multifarious acts of the Spanish Inquis- 
 ition. It is a comparatively easy task to prove that 
 MR. LEA possesses a fuller, more accurate knowl- 
 edge of the internal workings of this mysterious in- 
 stitution than any of its officials can ever have ob- 
 tained. The standard work on the history of this 
 institution has hitherto been that of LLORENTE*), who 
 was actually secretary of the Portuguese Inquisition. 
 Yet MR. LEA has occasion time and again to correct 
 
 *) Compare SCHAFER'S opinion, on page 92.
 
 io6 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 LLORENTE'S facts and figures, and especially with 
 characteristic impartiality reduce considerably the 
 sensational totals of LLORENTE as to the Inquisition 
 martyrs that have served to condemn the Inquisition 
 for the last century. . . 
 
 Thus on the side on which modern historians lay 
 so much stress the study of the "Quellen" MR. 
 LEA is impeccable. And the spirit with which he 
 views his sources is equally characterised by that 
 impartiality on which the modern historian prides 
 himself. Not that MR. LEA does not feel the natural 
 revolt of a humane spirit against that horrible com- 
 pound of religious intolerance and official stupidity 
 which has made the Inquisition a byword. He re- 
 gards these things with the natural repugnance of a 
 true American, yet gives credit to the Inquisition for 
 having a better record in regard to the treatment 
 of witchcraft than any of the Protestant nations 
 which showed in this particular quarter as much stu- 
 pidity and intolerance as would have done credit to 
 an Inquisitor. MR. LEA gives the facts with true 
 scientific caution, and does not venture upon any 
 hypothesis to explain it. In all probability the wider 
 experience of the Inquisition as to what can be ex- 
 torted from a witness under torture made it more 
 cautious in accepting the confessions of witches than 
 was COTTON MATHER or SIR THOMAS BROWNE. 
 Similarly MR. LEA does justice to the general benef- 
 icent effect of the Inquisition's attitude toward that 
 curious amalgam of mysticism and licentiousness 
 known as quietism . . . 
 
 It will thus be seen that MR. LEA'S great work 
 exhausts almost all aspects of the important institu-
 
 The Spanish Inquisition. 107 
 
 tion, the history of which it gives in so much detail. 
 It would be impossible in such a summary review of 
 so important a publication to criticise it in detail, 
 even if the present writer were competent to do so. . 
 
 It seems signally appropriate that such a work on 
 the worst instrument of intolerance should issue 
 from a land in which toleration*) is in the very air. 
 
 A. ZIMMERMAN, in the literary supplement to 
 the Germania (No. 30, of July 25, 1907), re- 
 views the second and third volumes of the work in 
 question 1 ). The following part of his review may 
 be quoted here: 
 
 LEA, who from a publisher has advanced himself 
 to an independent scientific explorer of a field only 
 slightly touched by others, could not entirely deny 
 the amateur in his earlier books on Priestly Celi- 
 bacy, the History of Auricular Confession and 
 Indulgences, and even in his chief effort: the 
 History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages . . . 
 In the work here referred to, there are found* 
 few traces of superficiality, inaccuracy, and prej- 
 udice . . . Since the sources for the history of 
 the Spanish Inquisition are so abundant, LEA could 
 let them speak for themselves, namely the states- 
 men and jurists of Spain, who all agree that the 
 preservation of purity in faith and race might have 
 
 been achieved by less violent means The 
 
 spreading mania of proscribing those in whose 
 veins flowed Moorish blood, and to deprive them 
 
 *) Has the reviewer, not, by forgetfulness, here omitted 
 the words: of the negroes, Indians, Chinese and Japanese? 
 
 2 ) ZIMMERMAN reviewed the first volume in the His- 
 torische Jahrbuch, vol. 27, p. 669.
 
 io8 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 under this pretext first of their offices and later 
 of their possessions, becomes ever more notice- 
 able. This leads to espionage and heretic-hunt- 
 ing. The sources of revenue were confiscations, 
 fines, dispensations. Of this treats the fifth book. 
 The apprehension of the accused, the process, the 
 secret prison, are dealt with in the sixth book. One 
 cannot forbear to deplore the recklessness -with 
 which the judges so freely made light of legal pre- 
 cepts. 
 
 In the third volume are described the methods 
 by which the Inquisitors endeavored to draw an 
 avowal from their victims. Of confronting tlie ac- 
 cuser with the accused there was no question, nor 
 even of naming the accuser. The milder proced- 
 ure which the Inquisition is supposed to have prac- 
 tised in comparison with the profane criminal pro- 
 cedure was infrequent. Even the most thorough 
 Catholic inquirers censure the persecuting spirit of 
 the Inquisitors, the greed of their servitors, their 
 interference in purely worldly affairs. How little 
 the Inquisition was capable in the eighteenth cen- 
 tury to combat unbelief in higher circles, as also 
 the extreme Gallicanism of the Bourbon rule and 
 the hostility against the Pope and the Orders loyal 
 to him, is shown in the reign of CHARLES III. and 
 his son. The Inquisition became more and more 
 an instrument in the hands of the ministers. LEA'S 
 style is not brilliant, but lucid 1 ). The material 
 which he assembled from the libraries of Spain, 
 
 ') Compare the opinion of JACOBS concerning LEA'S 
 style, on p. 13.
 
 The Spaniel Inquisition, 109 
 
 Germany and England, places us in a position to 
 learn the opinions of Spanish judges, statesmen, 
 and priests about the effects of the Inquisition. The 
 Inquisition at any rate did not prevent the political, 
 religious and scientific downfall of Spain in the 
 eighteenth century.
 
 VII. THE SACRED PENITENTIARY. 
 
 My previous brief reference to LEA'S views on 
 the Penitentiary I must follow up by further re- 
 marks, in connection with a review of his edition of 
 a Formulary from the thirteenth century. In the 
 second volume of his History of Auricular Con- 
 fession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, LEA 
 discusses on pages 160-167 the origin of the Peni- 
 tentiary. He describes the proceeding as follows : 
 
 When the system of redemptions, under the sac- 
 ramental theory 1 ), became restricted to the "poena." 
 there naturally arose a demand for some equally 
 facile method of eluding the "culpa," nor, to genera- 
 tions trained in POPE BONIFACE'S happy commerce, 
 and accustomed to see the power of the keys ex- 
 ploited in every way for gain, could there be any- 
 thing abhorrent in the sale of pardons and abso- 
 
 *) As evidence that the Poenitentiale of ROBERT of 
 Flamesburg could not have been composed after 1215, 
 DIETTERLE remarks in Zeitschrift fur Kirchengeschichte, 
 I QO3, P- 363, that ROBERT did not yet know of Confession 
 as a Sacrament. This curious assertion is made by rea- 
 son of the following passage which I set down here with- 
 out comment: Sacerdotis filius non est f rater spiritualis 
 illius, quam sacerdos admittit ad penitentiam ; idea potest 
 cum ea contrahere. Johannes hoc dicil. Hoc ideo fit, quia 
 plura sacramenta sunt in baptismo quam in penitentia, 
 utpote resurrectionis et aliorum, sed privata penitentia nul- 
 lum est sacramentum, et ideo per earn non gene atur com- 
 paternitas vel fraternitas spiritualis. GANDERT, a self ap- 
 pointed specialist in catholicis, asserts : it sufficed in general 
 to confess, and it was considered as self-understood that 
 one only confessed concerning the past sins, "not also future 
 ones yet to be committed." This is an astonishing proficiency 
 of a Protestant theologian in Catholic doctrine, at all times 
 entertaining when met with. 
 
 1 10
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. in 
 
 lutions. If the priest could derive, as we have seen, 
 a revenue from the confessional, and the abbey 
 could add manor to manor by relieving the sinner 
 from the weight of his guilt, the prelate who had 
 reserved the more heinous offences for his own tri- 
 bunal, and the Pope, who, as the universal bishop, 
 had jurisdiction in first and last resort over all the 
 faithful, would have been curiously indifferent to 
 the opportunities afforded by the customs and spirit 
 of the age, had they not utilised their power in the 
 same fashion. So long as confession was irregular 
 and voluntary, there could be no organised and 
 systematized arrangement for such a traffic, but 
 when confession was made obligatory by the Lat- 
 eran canon of 1216, and sinners were required to 
 obtain absolution annually as a condition precedent 
 to the prescribed Easter communion, it became ne- 
 cessary for the bishops and the Pope to make ar- 
 rangements for the business which commenced to 
 now in to them as enforced confession gradually be- 
 came general. Thus arose the office of peniten- 
 tiaries, to whom the prelates delegated the powers 
 which their other duties and occupations prevented 
 them from exercising personally. The earliest 
 allusions to such functionaries that I have met with 
 occurs in the synod of York, in 1195, where per- 
 jurers are directed to be sent to the general con- 
 fessor of the diocese, in the absence of the bishop 
 or archbishop. The Lateran council, recognizing 
 the necessity of such officials, ordered the bishops 
 to appoint them not only in their cathedrals, but in 
 all conventual churches, and we have seen (I., p. 
 230) that this was gradually though not universally
 
 112 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 obeyed. That these functions were a source of 
 revenue in populous and wealthy dioceses would 
 appear from tlte fact that, in 1263, we find the 
 office of penitentiary in the church of Paris held 
 on feudal tenure of the bishop, to whom homage is 
 paid on investiture. It was probably to protect 
 this means of income that, in 1294, the council of 
 Saumur forbade the archdeacons, deans and arch- 
 priests of the diocese of Tours from granting ab- 
 solution for money in episcopal reserved cases. 
 
 The papal Penitentiary was a natural outgrowth 
 of the system. Penitents, as we have seen, were 
 in the habit of appealing to the Holy See, either 
 to obtain mitigation of penances imposed at home, 
 or sent thither by bishops unable to decide especi- 
 ally difficult cases, or applying for penance in hopes 
 that the devotion manifested by the pilgrimage 
 might procure for them easier terms than they were 
 likely to obtain from their own prelates, and that 
 this was the case is rendered evident by the con- 
 stantly increasing business of the kind, in spite of 
 the remonstrances and efforts of the local authori- 
 ties and councils to suppress it, from the time of 
 ST. BONIFACE in the eighth century to the council 
 of Limoges in the eleventh. There seems, how- 
 ever, to have been no special organization in the 
 Curia for the treatment of these cases until the in- 
 troduction of the enforced annual confession. One 
 of the results of this must have been to increase 
 greatly the number of penitents and to force on the 
 local confessors and bishops the consideration of 
 a vast number of cases which they were ill-prepared 
 to decide, so that the afflux of pilgrims to the Holy
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 113 
 
 See, whether for original judgment or for appeal, 
 naturally grew. In addition to this was the con- 
 stantly increasing list of papal reserved cases, so 
 that a permanent tribunal in perpetual session be- 
 came a necessity. In the existing confusion as to 
 the limits of the "forum internum" and "externum," 
 this tribunal grasped a vast mass of business wholly 
 disconnected with sacramental penance and absolu- 
 tion, but in the latter sphere it was supreme, and to 
 it flocked from every corner of the lands of the 
 Roman obedience criminals and sinners of every 
 kind eager to obtain pardon. In time this par- 
 don came to be recognized as good not only in the 
 forum of conscience, but in the secular courts, and 
 when some ill-advised jurists sought to limit its 
 competence to the spiritual forum, SIXTUS IV., in 
 1484, exploded in indignation at the sacrilegious 
 audacity, and pronounced its decision binding on 
 all courts ecclesiastical and secular, a declaration 
 which had to be repeated by PAUL III., in 1549, and 
 by JULIUS III., in 1550. 
 
 This, briefly, is according to LEA'S revelation of 
 1896, the origin of the Penitentiary. I should do 
 too much honor to this purely commercial account 
 were I to add anything to it. It is abundantly 
 effective of its own force, and reflects a brilliant 
 light upon its author. 
 
 The author, however, goes on, in the same style : 
 Prior to the counter-Reformation it was a matter 
 of course that the absolutions granted by the Peni- 
 tentiary were issued directly or indirectly for money. 
 There was nothing to shock the ordinary public con- 
 science, for the training of centuries had familiarized
 
 1 14 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 men's minds with the idea that pardon for sin was 
 purchasable. . . That it [the Curia] should exploit 
 every available source of revenue was expected. . . 
 
 In view of DENIFLE'S tax list of 1338 LEA has to 
 admit that the arbitrarily drawn groups of sins for 
 which the same taxes applied bore no relation to 
 the quality or degree of the crime pardoned. They 
 evidently were simply scrivener's fees. In the be- 
 ginning only these lesser taxes were demanded, 
 but with the growing of the institute they had been 
 multiplied. 
 
 This does not, however, serve to explain the as- 
 sertions quoted above that the Holy See sold absolu- 
 tions for sin, nor the complaints of its demoralising 
 influence. 
 
 LEA then endeavors to make this influence and 
 these complaints plausible by some reflections 
 wherein the word evidently frequently plays its 
 well-known part. With a few unctious words the 
 author concludes this investigation. 
 
 I can imagine no greater carelessness than LEA 
 has demonstrated in his treatment of an institution 
 of such supreme importance as the Penitentiary. 
 It requires an utterly blind faith in the master's 
 authority to recognize in such representations ob- 
 jective history. 
 
 LEA acquired from the vender of old books, 
 ALBERT COHN of Berlin, a manuscript from the 
 thirteenth century, originating in Italy, which he 
 published under the title A Formulary of the Papal 
 Penitentiary in the Thirteenth Century 1 }. To the re- 
 
 ') Phila.. LEA BROTHERS AND Co., 1892.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 115 
 
 print of the text the editor prefixes an introduction 
 of 33 pages, and appends to it an index of 9 pages. 
 The reliability of the text is moderate, as the colla- 
 tion of one single page of the manuscript shows, 
 in addition to other small blunders, the following 
 errors: read transi(t) instead of transit; cor one 
 instead of communione; quidam instead of quidem; 
 anplitts instead of amplius; quando instead of quod; 
 dimittatis instead of admittatis. The meaning of 
 two dots in place of an omitted or suppressed proper 
 name is not known to LEA; that the under-dotting 
 of letters means their erasure is also unknown to 
 him. LEA'S punctuation of the text is in its capri- 
 ciousness more than once misleading. 
 
 The introduction discusses the origin and author 
 of the formulary. This investigation is surpassed 
 by the similar one of GOLLER. The data of the 
 first appearance of Penitentiaries at the Curia, 
 and of their sphere of labors, are in our day obso- 
 lete. Even though one meets in the introduction 
 with some pleasing observations, yet LEA extracts 
 far more information from his formulary than is 
 contained therein for one acquainted with the Papal 
 correspondence of the thirteenth, fourteenth and fif- 
 teenth centuries. Because INNOCENT IV. personally 
 attended in his Registers to many matters which 
 at the same time are comprised in the work of the 
 Penitentiary, LEA holds that the system was still in- 
 choate and undefined. This however is not proved, 
 because both styles of epistles have always ex- 
 isted side by side, in support of which fact I have 
 abundant proof at hand. It is therefore ill advised 
 to say that the Penitentiary evidently as yet was not
 
 1 1 6 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 recognized as the necessary organ of the Papal au- 
 thority in these matters (p. XXXIV). The spirit 
 of LEA'S comment is obvious from the following 
 words : 
 
 Although occasionally it unquestionably remedied 
 some injustice or prevented an oppression, in general 
 it (viz. the Roman jurisdiction) was undoubtedly an 
 evil, for it assumed to do what was beyond human 
 power to accomplish to decide upon all cases of 
 morals and discipline in virtual ignorance of the 
 facts, and it thus introduced everywhere confusion 
 of morals and relaxation of discipline. 
 
 This generalizing, not at all supported by corre- 
 sponding proof, is quite appropriate to the author's 
 way of thinking. 
 
 As stupidity or malice, LEA may choose which, 
 must be characterized the following passage found 
 in the annotation on page XVIII : 
 
 A very significant instance of latitudinarianism 
 occurs in the conditions imposed by the Penitentiary 
 in the seventeenth century for releasing a man from 
 a vow to enter a religious order, "dummodo vitar.i 
 caelibem ducat," which is explained by the comment- 
 ator to mean that while he must not marry it docs 
 not debar him from other carnal indulgence "si 
 enim voluisset imponere voventi continentiam ab 
 omni copula carnali et venerea delectatione , usurp- 
 asset nomen castitatis non autem caelibatus," which 
 is not improved by the distinction drawn between 
 human law and divine law, "quia quoad alias delecta- 
 tiones carnales et libidinosas a lege divina omnibus 
 hoc est prohibitum" 
 
 The aggrieving part is found in the grotesque
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 117 
 
 words it does not debar him from other carnal in- 
 dulgence. In order that not : pro concessione gratiae 
 neque pro absolutione, sed pro peccati satisfactions 
 possit imponi mulcta pecuniaria expendenda in pias 
 impensas LEA artlessly translates into that it is per- 
 fectly legitimate to receive money for the pardon of 
 sins and the granting of dispensations. When clois- 
 ters of very small revenues desired, or were required, 
 to receive members over and above the number of 
 monks or nuns than could be supported, this was 
 permissible only if the new members brought dow- 
 ries sufficient to cover their maintenance. In addi- 
 tion to quite superfluous etymological examinations 
 into the term dowry we are treated to the informa- 
 tion that such proceeding was Simony. 
 
 SANTA TERESA had no scruple in bargaining with 
 applicants as to what they should pay for admission 
 into her reformed order of Barefooted Carmelites. 
 
 On the question how the cloisters could have 
 otherwise solved this purely economical question, 
 LEA is silent, notwithstanding his eminent business 
 acumen, the evidence of which I have several times 
 had occasion to point out. 
 
 LEA has no idea whatever of the punishment of 
 the various kinds of falsarii bitllae papalis. From 
 the erasing of single letters, or of a word, to the 
 forging of entire documents, with genuine or false 
 lead seals, there were many intermediate degrees. 
 That the transgressors of these various degrees were, 
 at all times, differently punished is a matter of 
 course. In the formulary there are quoted a few 
 of the lesser cases which were punished rather mild- 
 ly. In order to depict in this connection the baneful
 
 n8 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 effect of the Penitentiary, LEA, in absolute ignor- 
 ance of the constant judicature of the Curia 1 ) in 
 these most important affairs, tells us: 
 
 There were few graver offences in the eyes of the 
 Curia than the forgery or falsification of papal let- 
 ters and yet in the rubrics XLVIII and XLIX we 
 have instances of deacons guilty of this who are al- 
 lowed to continue in the exercise of their functions, 
 although the canon law, in the contemporary Decre- 
 tals of GREGORY IX, provided that clerks committing 
 this crime should be perpetually deprived of office 
 and benefice, be degraded and handed over to the 
 secular arm for condign punishment, (p. XII.) 
 
 I possess a numerous collection of immediate 
 Papal verdicts against falsifiers and falsifications, 
 which exactly agree with the decisions of the Peni- 
 tentiary here given. In his supercilious way LEA 
 proclaims, absolutely without evidence: In many 
 cases indeed bribery is the readiest explanation of 
 the uncalled for lenity shown. 
 
 Enough of LEA'S unedifying science or scio- 
 lism.*) After my experience with LEA I turn with 
 
 *) Compare GOLLER'S compilation, Die Papstliche Poni- 
 tentiarie von ihrem Ursprung bis su ihrer Umgestaltung 
 unter Pius V., Vol. i. Die Papstliche Ponitentiarie bis 
 EUGEN IV, Part i, pp. 105-106. 
 
 *) It is to be regretted that LEA did not provide his 
 edition of this highly important text, of which a second 
 copy has not yet become known, with a more fitting in- 
 troduction. Space may be allowed here to a review of 
 LEA'S formulary by J. P. KIRSCH, in Historisches Jahrbuch, 
 Vol. 14 (1893), p. 201: Whether the editor reproduced 
 the text faultlessly I could only ascertain by a close ex- 
 amination and there I found -various mistakes 
 
 In No. I (p. 9) the text of the manuscript "bone memorie 
 abbas et quidem predecessores vestri" is altered without 
 comment and without sufficient reason; some lines further
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 119 
 
 special pleasure to one of his countrymen who 
 has published a small but very meritorious essay 
 under the title: The Sources for the History 
 of the Papal Penitentiary, which first appeared 
 in the American Journal of Theology, XV,3 (1905). 
 The author, PROFESSOR CHARLES H. HASKINS of 
 Harvard University, completely commands the re- 
 lated literature and discusses it with an intimate 
 knowledge. 
 
 HASKINS places the origin of LEA'S formulary in 
 the years 1234 to 1243, an< * ascribes authorship to 
 CARDINAL THOMAS OF CAPUA. Under extensive 
 utilization of manuscript material of great value the 
 author gives us a summary of the development of 
 the manual of the Penitentiary, examines the avail- 
 able records of supplications, and deals with the 
 officials of this institution, invariably inducing fur- 
 ther research. HASKINS did probably not expect 
 that hardly two years after the writing of his 
 
 we find "obnubilat" instead of "obnubilct." In the intro- 
 duction a more detailed account of the development of 
 the Penitentiary would have been desirable; this is dis- 
 posed of by three pages (XXX-XXXII) and various ref- 
 erences on following pages, while the preceding part seeks 
 to prove in a very one-sided manner that the Penitentiary 
 of the Curia has almost always operated in a harmful or 
 futile, only occasionally in a beneficial way. That LEA 
 lets Penance become a Sacrament only in the Middle Ages 
 (p. XXXI) and from the words of Pius IX. on ecclesias- 
 tical immunity: "Dei ordinatione et canonicis sanctionibus 
 constituta," concludes that the latter be an article of faith 
 (p. 26 note), shows how few clear conceptions he possesses 
 of Catholic doctrine. The formulary is in itself of great 
 interest for the history of the ecclesiastical institution of 
 Penance. As a supplement to the issue of the formulary is 
 to be mentioned LEA'S paper on The Taxes of the Papal 
 Penitentiary, in the July number (1893) of the English His- 
 torical Review.
 
 120 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 highly meritorious compilation there would appear 
 the first volume of a prominent work on the Peni- 
 tentiary which sets right also many of his findings. 
 
 Proceeding from the Royal Prussian Historical 
 Institute in Rome one would hardly expect a History 
 of the Penitentiary. EMIL GOLLER, the author of 
 this notable work 1 ), however mentions in his pref- 
 ace (p. VIII) facts which fully justify the appear- 
 ance of the work from this place : The fact that the 
 most important collection of letters was made by the 
 German corrector at the Penitentiary, WALTER VON 
 STRASSBURG; that, moreover, the formulary of sup- 
 plications in its second part, originating from aboiit 
 the same period, contains for the most part German 
 petitioners and for this reason suggests a German 
 author, and, finally, that the Councils of CONSTANCE 
 and BASLE must be considered in a History of the 
 Penitentiary, justifies in a marked degree the publi- 
 cation of a -work of this kind by our historical In- 
 stitute. 
 
 A merit of this thorough-going author that cannot 
 be too highly commended, is that he has based 
 his researches upon the broadest foundation of lit- 
 erary and documentary sources. In his first part 
 he treats of the printed and unprinted treatises of 
 GOMEZ, VESTRIUS, COCCINUS, Cod. Fat. lat 7532, 
 COHELLIUS, LUNADORO, LEO, PYRRHUS CORRADUS 
 A TERRANOVA, DE LUCA, NAVAR, PLETTENBERG, 
 SYRUS, PETRA, SBATTI, DE JUSTIS, BANIELI, MORONI, 
 MARINI, PHILIPPS, HINSCHIUS, SCHERER, BANGEN, 
 
 *) Die Papstliche Ponitentiarie von ihrem Ursprung bis 
 gu ihrer Unigestaltung unter Pius V.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 121 
 
 SAGMTJLLER, WOKER, EUBEL, LEA, LECACHEUX, 
 LANG, HASKINS and TARANI*), thus towering 
 far above all his predecessors. All these author- 
 ities are carefully examined and the gain of 
 new points of view ascertained. His sources con- 
 sist of documents and formularies (pp. 13-64) 
 assembled in a completeness never heretofore 
 achieved; their dependence upon one another is 
 explained, thus drawing a distinct picture of their 
 high significance. This is followed by a brief treatise 
 (pp. 65-74) on the formularies of BENEDICT XII., of 
 WALTER VON STRASSBURG, and such of later times. 
 This literary-historical discussion shows to us the 
 author as a sovereign master of his material, in 
 critical regard as well as in the matter of complete- 
 ness ; having gathered it with great effort from nu- 
 merous European libraries and archives. Upon this 
 firm foundation the second chapter is erected 
 (pp. 75-212) treating of the Organization and Busi- 
 ness Routine of the Penitentiary. One can \\ardly 
 go wrong in placing the beginning of the Peniten- 
 tiary in the time from ALEXANDER III to INNOCENT 
 III, so GOLLER remarks on page 75, and produces 
 for his assertion a great number of reasons. Par- 
 ticularly the power of dispensations, the faculty of 
 absolution, the ecclesiastical penance*) and the res- 
 
 *) According to the author there is another print in 
 the Bibliotheca Berberini, department Stampe, C I 116, 
 but rather unimportant scientifically: Bulla cocnae Do- 
 mini s. d. n. Pape Pauli III . . . cum elucidationibus d. 
 P. RebufH de Montepessulano. Parisiis 1537. 
 
 *) The most recent related work is that of KONIGER, 
 Die Beicht nach CAESARIUS VON HEISTERBACH (Miinchen, 
 LENTNER, 1906). As an industrious compilation it is most 
 welcome; it deserves praise especially on account of its
 
 122 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 ervations were the active inducements for the estab- 
 lishment of this new office. In place of the fixed 
 penances regulated in the penitential canons for in- 
 dividual transgressions, there appeared the arbitrary 
 penance, since the eleventh century, as gradually 
 the redemptions became ever more scarce, so GOL- 
 LER remarks and adds that GOTTLOB in his above- 
 mentioned book on the early Indulgences, attributes, 
 in a one-sided manner, to Indulgences too much sig- 
 nificance in the development of penance. GOTT- 
 LOB'S opinion, that the publicity of the penance and 
 the rigor of the punishments had now (after INNO- 
 CENT III) become untenable. The public penance, 
 though only demanded in relatively few cases, was 
 even in these done away with, is, as GOLLER remarks 
 (p. 79, Annotation i) best disproved by the numer- 
 ous examples of public penance until far into the 
 fifteenth century. The discussion of reservations 
 leads GOLLER to say: No doubt can exist that the 
 long existing custom, proved in numerous exam- 
 ples, particularly since the eleventh century, of 
 sending penitents to the Curia for absolution, made 
 necessary towards the end of the twelfth century, 
 the creating of a special office, quite independent of 
 the frequently on Legates and Bishops bestowed 
 
 references to the theological views of the times discussed. 
 The material however has not been handled so as to 
 bring out the theme with perfect clearness. It appears 
 to me doubtful whether the difference between confessio 
 publica and privata has always been observed. The crush- 
 ing verdict against LAURAIN, De I'intervention des laiques, 
 des diacres, et des abesses dans I' administration de la 
 penitence (Paris, 1897) must 'be greatly tempered. The 
 personality of CAESARIUS has gained by this work ; it ap- 
 pears in an essentially better light than before.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 123 
 
 power to absolve, (p. 81). To this is joined a criti- 
 cal review of the earliest account of the Peniten- 
 tiary, which was fully developed by the middle of 
 the thirteenth century. The officials of this new 
 office were composed of the Grand Penitentiary 1 ), 
 poenitiarii minor es 2 }, the r eg ens poenitentiariae, the 
 
 *) About Grand Penitentiary NICOLAUS episcopus Tus- 
 culanensis the following interesting passage from the An- 
 nales Wayerleiensis Monasterii (Recueil XVIII, p. 202) 
 is according to GOLLER to be noted in the year 1213 : 
 Dominus Nicolaus episcopus Tusculanensis et cardinalis 
 Romanaeque Curiae poenitentiarius domino papa Inno- 
 centio iubente V kal. Octobris veniens legatus in Angliam. 
 
 It now remains to discover his substitute in the office of 
 poenitentiarius. 
 
 2 ) To GOLLER'S list of Penitentiaries who subsequently 
 became Bishops, I offer the following additions : 1318 
 JOHANNES OPRAED. Glasgow; 1321 JOHANNES OPRAED. 
 Skopelo; 1325 ANGELUS OPRAED. Sulcis ; 1343 PETRUS 
 OCARM. Grasse; 1348 LANFRANCUS OMiN. Ancona; 1361 
 JOHANNES OPRAED. Ossory; 1368 ANDREAS OPRAED. 
 Genua; 1372 AUGUSTINUS OSAuc. Seckau; 1375 PETRUS 
 OCARM, Siponto; 1390 ANTONIUS OMiN, Widdin; 1394 
 STEPHANUS OCARM. Durasso ; 1396 JACOBUS OSAuc. An- 
 dros; 1400 STEPHANUS OMiN. Naxivan. 1400 HENRICUS 
 OCARM. Porto Rose; 1405 NICOLAUS OMiN. Assisi; 1422 
 AUDOINUS OPRAED. Acre; 1423 CONSTANTINUS OMiN. 
 Porto Rose. On page 152 NICOLAUS-JERUSALEM is errone- 
 ously mentioned in 1278 instead of 1288. Page 151 last 
 line read Columbanus instead of Cambanus. The Peni- 
 tentiary RAYMUNDUS (referred to on p. 130 annotation i) 
 (Potthast 10292, not 10920) 1237, February 8, occurs al- 
 ready in 1234, June 4 (Auvray cap. 1944) GOLLER draws 
 my attention also to two important decisions of the POPE 
 NICHOLAS IV (Les Registres de NICOLAS IV capp. 7152,- 
 7153,1288 Septembris 20). The same are addressed to the 
 minis tri fratrum minorum regni Anglic et regnie Ybernie. 
 Pointing out that de diversis mundi partibus ad sedem 
 apostolicdm fidelium confluit multitude, propter quod ex- 
 pedire dinoscitur, ut apud earn diversarum linguarum peni- 
 tentiarii habeantur, each of the two ministri are required 
 to send one of their brethren to the Curia for the pur- 
 pose mentioned. That the national Penitentiaries to a cer- 
 tain extent could be, and were, occasionally made use of
 
 124 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 auditor, notary, physician, distributor literarnm, 
 scriptores, the baiuli, correctors and their assistants, 
 the clerk of the seals, and the procurators. On one 
 hundred pages of very learned details (pp. 85-184) 
 a great amount of new material is offered, making 
 it possible for us in connection with the following 
 part 1 ) to comprehend very clearly the business rou- 
 tine. The diplomatic investigations are particularly 
 thorough and valuable. The discussion of all cases 
 and faculties belongs to the most instructive matter 
 that has been offered in recent times on canonical- 
 historical questions. 
 
 On the strength of an account by CROSTAROSA*) 
 I have stated it in the Theologische Revue as pos- 
 sible that JACOBUS DE PECORARIO PLACENTINUS 
 OCisx, e pis co pus Praenestinus was Grand Peniten- 
 tiary. I applied to him the verses of GUILELMUS 
 BRITO, quoted by GOLLER : 
 
 Die Jacobo, pape vice qui delicta reorum 
 Audit, et absolvit confesses rite reatus, 
 Congrua diversis adhibens medicamina morbis. 
 Since then I have made more minute investiga- 
 
 as political agents, appears to me evident from FINKE'S 
 Acta Aragonensia, Tom. II (1908) page 772. To a suppli- 
 cation of JAYMES II, CLEMENT V replies under November 
 4, 1309: Super eo vero, quod etiam supplicarunt, quod 
 aliquem oriundum de terra tua loco olim Petri peniten- 
 ciarii nostri in penitentiarium admitere dignaremur, re- 
 spondimus eis, quod cum frater Dominicus Ordinis Sancte 
 Marie de Monte Carmeli de tuo dominio oriundus iam 
 fuissct in loco huiusmodi subrogatus, non poteramus super 
 hoc satisfacere votis tuis. 
 
 *) Remarks on the business routine and the expedition 
 of letters in the Penitentiary (pp. 185-202). 
 
 *) Dei Titoli della Chiesa Romano. Appunti storico- 
 giuridici. Roma Befani 1893 pag. 78.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 125 
 
 tions about the personality of this CARDINAL JACOB- 
 US and have established the following: 
 
 The Magister JACOBUS Capellanus Summi Pon- 
 tificis et poenitentiarius was on July 31, 1220, sent 
 as Legate 1 ) to Ireland, Scotland and the Isles. 
 In the following year the Pope wrote him (cap. 
 3506), that he famae suae consulens socios lauda- 
 bilis vitae sibi assumat, which perhaps referred to 
 imprudences that had been committed and reported 
 to Rome. This is all the more strange as since the 
 year 1215 he was a Cistercian Monk 2 ). The pre- 
 cise date of his return from his legation cannot be 
 ascertained. As addressee of letters he disappeared 
 from the records before the year 1224. In the year 
 1230 he is elected Abbot of Santi Vincenzo ed 
 Anastasio in Tre Fontane*). In the September 
 consistory of the following year there ensued his 
 election to the Cardinalate, and his appointment as 
 Bishop of Palestrina. As electus Praenestinus 
 there is record of him as late as January 3, 1235'), 
 but he receives in a Bull of March 15 of the same 
 year the title of Episcopus 8 ). 
 
 Of his presence at the Curia there is evidence, 
 after his second legation to Hungary, from Novem- 
 ber 7, 1234, until January 3, 1235 ; then follows an 
 
 *) Pressutti, Regesta Honorii papae HI capp. 2590, 2591, 
 2601, 2604, 2605, 2606, 2870, 3194, 3196, 3506, 4125. 
 
 *) Ciaconius-Oldoinus Tom. II col. 86. 
 
 *) MOMBET, L'Abbaye de Trois-Fontaines, Lyons, 1869; 
 page 31. There is found also the information : Avant 
 de prendre I'habit de FOrdre de Citeaux, il avail ete archi- 
 diacre de I'Eglise de Saint Dotnnin a Plaisance. 
 
 4 ) Potthast, cap. 9812. 
 
 *) Potthast, cap. 9860.
 
 126 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 absence of one year until the beginning of 1236. 
 About the middle of the year 1239 he is sent as 
 Legate to Languedoc, where he fell into the cap- 
 tivity of the Emperor. After his liberation he re- 
 turned to the Curia, and when INNOCENT IV., in 
 June, 1224, fled to France, he left Cardinal JACOBUS 
 as his Vicar 1 ), so CIACONIUS*) informs us. He is 
 reported to have died on June 26, but a few days 
 after this nomination. 
 
 For an activity as poenitentiarius maior there 
 seems upon closer inspection hardly any time left 
 in the life of this Cardinal, who was employed al- 
 most exclusively on important embassies. As also 
 easily a confounding with his earlier function as 
 poenitentiarius minor may be in question, and as the 
 authority for his holding the office as Grand Peni- 
 tentiary is in historicis a notoriously unreliable one, 
 even the possibility of this fact cannot be affirmed. 
 
 But whether, on the other hand, a connection 
 does not still exist between the verses given above 
 and the man who was through the whole of North- 
 western Europe well known on account of his first 
 Nunciature, must be established by further re- 
 search for which I lack the material. 
 
 For GOLLER'S list of Grand Penitentiaries come, 
 as was pointed out to me by the author, into con- 
 
 ') TOM. II, col. 87. 
 
 *) If JACOBUS was accredited as Vicarius Urbis in 
 spiritualibus on the /, October 1238 (Reg. Vat. Tom. 19 
 fol. L. III. cap. CCLVIII, Aurray, Les Registres de GREG- 
 OIRE IX cap. 4549), it does not follow that the appoint- 
 ment of the year 1244 also referred to the spiritualia; pro- 
 vided the information is reliable, one may presume that 
 there was reference to a Vicarius Urbis in temporalibus.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 127 
 
 sideration the first of the following items probably, 
 the second certainly. Without stating whether 
 there is question of the Cardinal Penitentiary, or of 
 an ordinary penitentiary, INNOCENT III., under 
 date of February 24, I2O3 1 ), states: 
 
 Verum idem W. in poenitentiarii nostri presentia 
 constitutus, paupcrtatem nimiam allcgavit, asserens, 
 quod non posset ferosolimitanam provincial* vis- 
 itare. 
 
 On April 17 of the same year 1 ) the Cardinal 
 H(UGO) tituli Sancti Martini presbyter cardinalis 
 received the commission de fratrum nostrorum con- 
 silio with reference to the murderers of the Bishop 
 of Wiirzburg : 
 
 Confessione illorum audita, postquam fecit eos 
 nudos in braccis tortas habentes in collo coram nobis 
 diebus aliquot in frequentia populorum astare, to 
 impose a penance in the Pope's name. 
 
 The business form of management into which 
 the institution in Schism times had drifted, became 
 even more pronounced by the appointment of self- 
 interested and unfitted persons as poenitentiarii 
 minores. Many voices were raised to demand re- 
 dress there. At the Council of Constance a special 
 Commission was instituted for this purpose, the 
 conclusions of which GOLLER makes known. After 
 discussion of further efforts for improvement it is 
 said, on page 212, that EUGENE IV. actually under- 
 took a thorough reform, if not in all then at least 
 in many points. He uniformly regulated the facul- 
 ties of the Grand Penitentiary, placed the College of 
 
 *) Migne. Tom. 215 cap. 2. 
 ') Migne. Tom. 215 cap. 51.
 
 128 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 "Poenitentiarii minores" upon a new basis, and fix- 
 ed their number, duties, privileges, taxes, with re- 
 gard to the requirements of the preceding times. 
 The office of correctors, against whom serious 
 charges had been made, was completely remodeled 
 and reformed. Some ordinances were aimed also 
 at other officials of the College. Thus his pontifi- 
 cate forms an important period in the History of the 
 Penitentiary. 
 
 The third chapter (pp. 213-277) offers monographs 
 for the history of the Penitentiary, the granting of 
 Indulgences, and of the ecclesiastical-penal pro- 
 cedure. 
 
 The first part comprises dissertations on plenary 
 indulgences, based upon the Confessionale up to 
 EUGENE IV., which will create a sensation. The so 
 heatedly contested expression indulgentia a poena 
 et culpa is here thoroughly examined and proved to 
 be theologically perfectly correct. Already NIKO- 
 LAUS PAULUS had, under reference to JOANNES VON 
 PLATZ, directed attention to the extension of the 
 confessor's faculties of absolution concerning reser- 
 vations, and pointed out that the sin is remitted 
 through contrite confession and sacramental abso- 
 lution, and the punishment through indulgence 
 granted by papal authority (p. 215). In this con- 
 nection I would quote the remarks of THURSTON*), 
 who says: 
 
 That the phrase') originated witn the confessional 
 
 ') The Holy Year of Jubilee. An account of the His- 
 tory and Ceremonial Of the Roman Jubilee. London; 
 SANDS & Co., 1900, page 534. 
 
 -} a poena et culpa.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 129 
 
 letters which were wont from a tolerably early pe- 
 riod to be conceded by the Popes to favored appli- 
 cants. These conferred the privilege of choosing 
 a confessor once or at most twice in a lifetime, who 
 would have for that particular occasion, in virtue 
 of that privilege, the special powers of absolving 
 from reserved cases, and also of remitting all the 
 punishment of sin, in other words, of applying to 
 the penitent a plenary indulgence. I think that such 
 an absolution was called an absolution a poena et 
 culpa.. .An ordinary absolution, of course, was from 
 guilt (a culpa) only. This special absolution, in- 
 cluding as it did a plenary Indulgence, was from 
 punishment (a poena) also. 
 
 GOLLER'S deductions made a fit di logica from 
 the plenary indulgences based upon the Confession- 
 ale, may be summed up in the following leading 
 points: i. The grant of this favor can be traced 
 back uninterruptedly to the year 1316. A single in- 
 stance is discovered under CELESTINE V. In the 
 early formularies it is expressly stated that it was 
 granted only per speciale privilegium personis ali- 
 quibus. 2. The hitherto prevailing opinion that the 
 absolutio plenaria was originally only bestowed in 
 articulo mortis and only since the fifteenth century 
 also in vita semel or bis, proves itself incorrect in 
 so far as just in the early period 1 ), under JOHN 
 
 *) As late as April i, 1324, I find a grant semel in vita, 
 semel in morte, with the explanation; etiam ipsa plena 
 corporis sospitate fruente. In the thirteen months, from 
 September 1321 to October 1322, the remissio omnium 
 peccatorum et poenarum semel in morte was granted 
 twelve times, the remissio peccatorum, without the poenae, 
 six times. In the year 1338 there are recorded in the 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 126 (in fine) 69 Indulgences semel in
 
 130 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 XXIL, both kinds already appear. Then, it is true, 
 the granting of the Confessional? except in the 
 danger of death became unusual, still it occurred 
 occasionally in individual cases. With the begin- 
 ning of the fifteenth century the granting of the 
 indult semel (or bis) in vita, became customary. 
 3. The designating of this favor as absolutio (remis- 
 sio) a poena et culpa was known formerly only 
 from chancery regulations and supplications under 
 BONIFACE IX. With reference to this, and numer- 
 ous other advices, BRIEGER believed himself com- 
 pelled to state that Indulgences in the Middle Ages 
 were applied not only to the penance but also to the 
 culpa. On the other hand, JANSEN made an effort 
 to prove that the expression a poena et culpa oc- 
 curred in none of the papal documents of BONIFACE 
 IX. In contrast thereto GOLLER has proved that this 
 term in connection with the Confessionale already 
 occurs several times in the letters of JOHN XXIL 
 and is quite common in papal chancery terms. 4. 
 A comparison of the oldest forms of this class of 
 papal briefs with contemporary forms of absolution, 
 shows that the expression a culpa et poena is theo- 
 logically perfectly correct. The notion that there 
 was an indulgence from sin cannot be too sharply 
 rejected as perfectly erroneous. The bestowal of 
 the absolutio plenaria was done through the Confes- 
 
 morte, of which sixty-seven have the initial Provenit, and 
 each one the initial Illas libenter and Eximie devotlonis; 
 furthermore there are found in the Reg. Aven. Tom. 85 
 fol. 548 ss. in the Rubrice de absolutione anni quarti 568 
 more such cases, so that during the entire year 637 Indul- 
 gences of this kind were granted. On the initial Provenit, 
 compare GOLLER, page 221.
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 131 
 
 sor in confession, who first of all absolved the peni- 
 tent from the sins confessed, and then performed 
 the remissio poenae by a special formula. The ab- 
 solutio a peccatis (culpa) was thus immediately fol- 
 lowed by the retnissio poenae; they remained, never- 
 theless, two distinctively separated and independent 
 acts. 5. In the Chancery book the absolntio ple- 
 naria in articulo mortis is designated as a plena 
 remissio omnium peccatorum. As a matter of fact 
 the indult included the faculty for the Confessor, 
 to absolve in this case from all sins, even those 
 reserved to the Apostolic See. Stress must be laid 
 upon the fact that in the grants which precede the 
 formulary of the Chancery book there is to be read : 
 
 "Omnium peccatorum (de quibus corde contritus 
 et ore confessus extiteris) ac penarum etiam, quibus 
 tune pro peccatis ipsis eris obnoxius" plena remissio. 
 
 This qualification was also retained in the form 
 of absolution of the succeeding age ; it is, however, 
 omitted in the formulary of the briefs found al- 
 ready in the middle of the fourteenth century by 
 the hundreds annually. I introduce here, literally, 
 a very interesting petition for the selection of the 
 Confessor who was to have the faculty of absolving 
 also from sins reserved to the Apostolic See, the 
 penitent selecting and naming his own penance : 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. 10 fol. vui vnr - 
 
 Avenione 134? Maii 4 
 
 Supplicat S. V. humilis servus vester Barnabo 
 Gerardi de Parma, quatinus sibi dignemini indul- 
 gere, ut confessor quern duxerit eligendum, iniuncto 
 sibi in penitenciam salutarem, quod contra Turcos 
 ultra mare transfretare et ibidem uno anno residere
 
 132 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 debeat, eum absolvere valeat ista vice dumtaxat, ac 
 ab omnibus peccatis suis eciam in casibus sedi apos- 
 tolice reservatis ei etiam si forte talia fuerint, prop- 
 ter que sit merito sedes apostolica consulenda. 
 
 Fiat R. 
 
 Item quod transeat sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 
 Et dignemini mandare litteras super premissis con- 
 ficiendas per manus domini Raymundi de Valle 
 gratis et indilate expediri. 
 
 Fiat R. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. 1 1 II Non. Maii anno quinto. 
 
 The author's researches about the processus and 
 the sentences are of a very instructive nature and 
 promise, if carried further in the second volume, 
 absolutely positive information about this greatly 
 contested subject. 
 
 The second part of the volume comprises of au- 
 thorities: I. The faculties (concessiones) of the 
 Grand Penitentiaries, from NICHOLAS IV. to 
 EUGENE IV. (pp. 1-47) ; II. Statutes and regulations 
 about the issuing of briefs and the regulation of 
 procedure at the Penitentiary (pp. 48-95) ; III. Rec- 
 ords and Regesta on the History of the Penitentiary 
 (pp. 96-131) ; IV. Propositions and opinions on the 
 reform of the Penitentiary, from the time of the 
 Councils at Constance and Basle (pp. 132-146) ; V. 
 Petitions to the Penitentiary (pp. 147-171); and, 
 VI. Notations about the poenitentiarii minores (pp. 
 172-180). The one hundred and sixteen annota- 
 tions for the entire volume are placed at the end 
 of the same, pages 181-188. 
 
 In characterizing this part of the work it must 
 be said that the selection of the records is a very
 
 The Sacred Penitentiary. 133 
 
 good one ; the reproduction of texts is made with all 
 possible care, often under citation of a number of 
 manuscripts, and the materials cover the entire 
 range of the first, argumentative, part. In partic- 
 ular should be mentioned the thorough knowledge of 
 the various Regesta of the Vatican archives 1 ), 
 which could only be acquired by long years of ex- 
 haustive labor. The V. chapter, on the Petitions of 
 the Penitentiary, offered the editor special difficulties 
 as the manuscript was either slovenly written, or the 
 original from which the copy had been made was 
 already corrupted, so that mistakes and errors mul- 
 tiplied in copying. GOLLER has made more of this 
 material than was prima facie to be expected. 
 
 It is LEA'S fate that while busy reviewing his vol- 
 umes there should claim my attention a work which 
 demonstrates how an unprejudiced inquirer handles 
 such delicate subjects, and what brilliant results 
 he achieves because completely at home, not only 
 in the realm of history, but also in Canon Law and 
 Theology. Had this been the fact with LEA, there 
 would not now crumble away, one by one, the 
 stones of his outwardly so imposing structure, nor 
 
 *) The order of MARTIN V, of September I, 1418 (not 
 of August), mentioned on page 206, according to which 
 nullus huiusmodi officium scriptorie predicte (i. e. littera- 
 rum apostolicarum) cum officio scriptorie penitenciarie 
 literarum (under penalty) valeat retinere. (BAUMGARTEN, 
 Aus Kanzlei und Kammer; HERDER, Freiburg, 1907, page 
 324; Tangl, Kanzleiordnungen p. 135-7) was violated by the 
 Pope the same day. JOHANNES DE KEYS, who besides the 
 Datarie held also both scriptoria, was expressly exempted 
 from this order prescribed under penalty (BAUMGARTEN 1. 
 c- P- 334) and the ViceChancellor and Grand Penitentiary 
 were thereof apprised. (BAUMGARTEN 1. c. page 335.)
 
 134 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 would the voices urging greatest care in accepting 
 his arguments increase from day to day. 
 
 Postscript. In the new periodical Arckhmm 
 Franciscanum Historicum (euro, PP. Collegii D. 
 Bonaventurae Ad Claras Aquas) HERIBERT HOLZ- 
 APFEL, on pages 31-44 of the first issue, once more 
 examines the tradition of the Indulgence of the 
 Portiuncula (see p. 37). In conclusion he sub- 
 mits these theses: i. According to reliable state- 
 ments of contemporaries ST. FRANCIS asked for and 
 received from the Pope a plenary Indulgence for 
 the Church of the Portiuncula. 2. The Indulgence 
 was at the beginning not so well known and sought 
 as in the second half of the thirteenth century. 
 Therewith this discussion which was thought to 
 have been terminated, is re-opened. KIRSCH and 
 PAULUS will have to take position.
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Of the forty-six States now composing the United 
 States, there are very few, only about one-tenth of 
 the number, that have kept themselves free from 
 lynchings. As every one knows, lynching means the 
 putting to death of real or alleged criminals without 
 trial, without legal proceedings of any sort, at the 
 impetuous demand and by the hands of impassioned 
 mobs, among which are sometimes found staid 
 and respected citizens. The victims are put to 
 death in various ways, sometimes by hanging, in 
 which case the body is made the target for rifle 
 practice, also by tarring and feathering and sub- 
 sequent death by bullets, by burning at the stake, 
 and so on. 
 
 Apart from the fact that lynching is a most 
 severe infraction of the Christian laws, this most de- 
 testable procedure violates the article of the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States, which insures a lawful trial 
 to every transgressor of whatever color, race or sta- 
 tion, without regard to the nature of his crime. 
 
 Most frequently are negroes the victims of the 
 lynch law, although in the southern States of the 
 Union the number of whites executed by lynching 
 in the years from 1885 to 1903 amounted to almost 
 thirty per cent. Exact statistics are not available, 
 but it has been ascertained that in the eighteen 
 years from 1885 to 1903 there took place in the 
 United States 2875 murders by lynching, with- 
 out claiming that this number includes all cases. 
 If in these years so close to us such a fright- 
 US
 
 136 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 fully large number of these outrages has occurred, 
 how large indeed must the total number have been 
 for the previous fifty years? Even accepting 
 only the average of recent years as standard, name- 
 ly, 160 cases a year, then for the last fifty years 
 there would result the aggregate of 8000 murders 
 by lynching. This figure is by no means too high ; 
 indeed, one may, without fear of error, add at least 
 twenty-five per cent, to the total and come nearer 
 the truth. Nor do these figures include the many 
 executions which, outside of the law, took place in 
 the middle of the last century, in the then newly dis- 
 covered gold fields of California. For those execu- 
 tions every fair minded man will allow some exten- 
 uation, provided there was well founded suspicion of 
 a serious crime, because there was no public author- 
 ity to administer justice and the people were forced 
 to act for their own protection. Some kind of self 
 help may, therefore, be supposed to have been in- 
 dispensable in California against the lawless and 
 vicious elements that gathered there. To these and 
 similar instances I do not refer in these remarks. 
 
 But conditions such as prevailing in those years 
 in California have not existed since the eighties 
 and consequently 2875 lynch murders within eigh- 
 teen years is a positively monstrous fact. Abhor- 
 rence for it is intensified by the positive fact that 
 not infrequently innocent persons were the victims 
 and suffered a horrible death. If a suppression 
 of these horrors has not been accomplished so far 
 one would at least suppose that the punishing of the 
 participants in these barbarous outrages would have 
 been regarded the nobile officium of public justice,
 
 Conclusion. 137 
 
 One might suppose that the State authorities would 
 not rest until they had surrendered to justice if not 
 all participants then at least the leaders and chief 
 culprits, and should the State Government prove 
 tardy in this respect, it might justly be expected that 
 the Federal authorities at Washington would employ 
 all means at their disposal, and they are many, 
 in order to wipe out this sore spot. 
 
 This every right minded man would expect. And 
 as a matter of fact not only the whole cultured 
 world of Europe but also innumerable citizens of 
 the United States demand this. Yet, has all this 
 pressure of public opinion attained any notable 
 results ? 
 
 The fact is that even now individual participants 
 in lynching are only in the rarest cases apprehended 
 and punished. In the overwhelming majority of 
 these outrages ringleaders as well as the attendant 
 mob go scot free. State power does not often pro- 
 ceed against them, officials who would do this cour- 
 ageously can seldom be found. 
 
 We have then to deal here with a positive refusal 
 of lawful process, with mob law without trial, with 
 cruel and wanton executions, and, usually, with a 
 cowardly shirking of their duty by the authorities. 
 
 In an article on lynching by Cardinal GIBBONS, 
 Archbishop of Baltimore, in the North American 
 Review, of October I, 1905, emphasis is laid on the 
 less obvious fact that often even the guilty victims 
 of lynching gain from their sufferings a certain halo 
 of martyrdom. 
 
 Furthermore just that class of crimes which is 
 most frequently avenged by lynching, namely as-
 
 138 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings 
 
 saults upon white women, is by lynching^ increased 
 rather than diminished, since the negroes, embit- 
 tered by the lynchings of their kind, commit these 
 crimes oftener to revenge themselves than in the 
 gratification of bestial desires. 
 
 The summary lynching in New Orleans of Ital- 
 ians implicated in the murder of the chief of police, 
 prominent citizens taking part in this execution, is 
 still fresh in our memory. 
 
 No matter what extenuating circumstances and 
 arguments may be advanced to explain the contin- 
 uance of lynching in a civilized country, the fact 
 remains, that it is a lawless, revolting and loathsome 
 outrage, and a sad travesty on the administration 
 of justice. And this mockery of justice is rampant, 
 in this the humane and enlightened twentieth cen- 
 tury, in the very country that claims as one of its 
 distinguished citizens HENRY CHARLES LEA, the 
 author of the volumes on the Inquisition that have 
 just occupied our attention. 
 
 A discussion of lynching could claim no place 
 here had not LEA by his beratings of the various 
 phases of the Inquisitorial process suggested the 
 comparison. 
 
 It was the right of the historian LEA') to treat 
 exhaustively of all questions in connection with the 
 
 ') The following extremely interesting intelligence I 
 have culled from The Catholic Fortnightly Review (of 
 January I, 1908) : The Milwaukee Catholic Citizen (XXX- 
 VII, 2) is authority for the statement that MR. HENRY C. 
 LEA, of Philadelphia, author of A History of the Spanish 
 Inquisition, A History of Auricular Confession and In- 
 dulgences in the Latin Church, and other pretentious 
 works, is a grandson of MATHEW CAREY (1760 1839), who 
 published Catholic books in Philadelphia ninety years ago t
 
 Conclusion. 139 
 
 process of the Inquisition, to the full extent his 
 material justly admitted. 
 
 It was the right of LEA to stigmatize wrongs that 
 actually occurred, and that have been proved to have 
 been committed by the Inquisition and its officials, 
 as severely as his objective judgment, or as much 
 as he is possessed of such, demands. 
 
 It was LEA'S right to draw from carefully sifted 
 facts logical conclusions, after having made a suc- 
 cessful effort to fit the individual facts correctly in 
 the great course of events. 
 
 It is not the right of LEA to assert with emphasis, 
 with reference to the Inquisition and its procedure, 
 that such or similar things could never happen in our 
 civilized, more humanely and more leniently think- 
 ing and acting age; that our age is beyond such 
 monstrosities and turns away with great horror from 
 a judicial procedure which is but a distorted carica- 
 ture of justice. 
 
 It is not LEA'S right to accuse, with eager zeal and 
 with all means at his disposal, including objective 
 falsifications, the Inquisition and its officers in gen- 
 eral of most disgraceful official conduct, of most 
 
 and in 1819 wrote Vindiciae Hibernicae, a defence of the 
 Irish Catholics from the false charge of massacreing Pro- 
 testants in 1641. MR. LEA'S works and scientific methods, 
 as our readers are avoare, have provoked sharp criticisms 
 in this country [U. S. of America] from FATHER CASEY, 
 5". /., and DR. BOUQUILLON. Lately FR. LEPICIER has devoted 
 much attention to them in his splendid work on Indul- 
 gences. . . We wish to draw attention to the fact that REV. 
 M. J. O'DoNNELL, in his lately published dissertation on 
 Penance in the Early Church (Dublin 1907) undertakes 
 to refute LEA'S thesis, that the Church as a whole knew 
 nothing of the Sacrament of Penance up to the thirteenth 
 century.
 
 140 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 reckless arbitrariness of the greatest injustice. 1 ) The 
 expressions used by him in this endeavor approach 
 very closely the bounds of what is permissible in 
 cultured circles. 
 
 As if we had really brought things to such a glor- 
 ious state in our enlightened times, we meet in his 
 seven volumes with frequent contemplations re- 
 hearsing his manifold, disdainful reproaches and 
 claiming for us and our times the distinction that 
 something like these things would now be absolutely 
 impossible. All this is downright, though perhaps 
 unpremeditated, hypocrisy. The cultured world of 
 our days has much to show which deserves worse 
 than the reproaches, made justly or unjustly, and 
 with a great effort at moral indignation, against the 
 Inquisition. Proof of this is found, as above related, 
 in LEA'S own country. Even in its most flourishing 
 times there occurred in the Medieval Inquisition 
 
 *) VACANDARD, L' 'Inquisition (see p. 58), page vii. : Plus 
 soucieux de la verite historique et bcaucoup plus richement 
 documcnte un grand bibliophile americain, M. HENRI 
 CHARLES LEA, deja connu par d'autres travaux d'histoire 
 religieuse a publie a New York. . . Son ou-vrage a eu les 
 honneurs d'une traduction francaise. Et la presse euro- 
 peenne lui a fait, en general, un acccuil dcs plus flatteurs. 
 On a pu dire sans cxageration que le livre de LEA est I'his- 
 toire de I' inquisition la plus etendue, la flits profonde et la 
 plus fouillee que nous possedions.' II s'cn faut cependant 
 que ce soit le dernier mot de la science. Et nous ne parlous 
 pas id des modifications de detail que I'ctude dcs sources 
 encore a decoumir peut apporter dans I'cxpose du sujet. 
 Les documents que nous connaissons suffisent pour fixer un 
 jugement sur I'institution elle-meme. Celui que M. LEA a 
 prononce, malgre des signes incontestables de probite iiitel- 
 lectuelle, demeure sujet a caution. L'auteur est loyal si I'on 
 veut; impartial non. On voit trap souvent transparaitre 
 sotis sa plume les prcjuges et les defiances qu'il nourrit a 
 I'cgard de I'Eglise catholique. La critique se trouve parfois 
 gravcment faussee.
 
 Conclusion. 141 
 
 nothing even nearly approaching such abominable 
 scenes as Cardinal GIBBONS rightly deplores in his 
 above quoted article. If then in closest proximity 
 to the author such a complete denial of right and 
 justice, of trial and of judgment, is of such frequent 
 occurrence, how dared he assert with frequent reitera- 
 tion that our enlightened times have for unrighteous 
 incidents such as connected with the Inquisition only 
 the pitiful smile of enlightened superiority? He, who 
 in his own country almost at regular intervals has 
 to record horrible excesses of human brutality, 
 which, because committed tumultuarie et collective, 
 go utterly unpunished, should have been very care- 
 ful about drawing this parallel. LEA'S posing 
 brings forcefully to mind the Pharisee's words : 7 
 thank Thee, Lord, that I am not as the rest of 
 men! 
 
 Of special interest to LEA should be the conclud- 
 ing words of Cardinal GIBBONS' quoted articfe. 
 With just pride the author points to the fact that in 
 the two lower counties of Maryland whites and 
 blacks live together in almost equal proportion of 
 numbers, both professing the Catholic faith in over- 
 whelming majority; a case of maltreatment of a 
 white woman by a negro has never happened there, 
 nor a case of lynching. The result of the fact that 
 negro and white worship there, side by side, in the 
 same church, before the same altar, is said to be 
 that the negro has the greatest esteem for the white, 
 and makes no attempt to remove the existing social 
 differences. I think even LEA will be able to draw 
 without assistance the only possible conclusion. 
 
 By declaring that an examination of LEA'S com-
 
 142 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 pilations of his literary data so far as this can 
 be done and of his argument in very many cases 
 yields such different results, I have not stated any- 
 thing new to the thorough student of LEA'S 
 works and of recent literature 1 ). It is to be 
 extremely regretted that so much personal and 
 delegated labor, so much outlay, should have 
 been spent in an undertaking not erected upon 
 the indispensable basis of a clear conception and of 
 correct valuation of medieval, ecclesiastical, State 
 and social order, and their close interconnection. 
 This, in principle, so important defect is the chief 
 
 *) ZOCKLER expresses himself in Jahresberichte der 
 Geschichtsivissenschaft (1898, IV, 107 (143) apropos of 
 Auricular Confession and Indulgences as follows: With 
 still greater volubility (than PIJPER) is the same theme 
 dealt with by the North American CH. H. LEA, in his 
 History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the 
 Latin Church, of which its three ponderous volumes fol- 
 lowed one another in quick succession within the space of 
 a twelvemonth. The author's knowledge of literature is 
 considerable, nevertheless he does not exhaust the re- 
 lated material, for instance Vol. I of PIJPER'S work ap- 
 pears to have been unknown to him, as he never refers 
 to it anywhere. Among the defects of the work belongs 
 also the quite partial restriction of the Author to the 
 practice of Confession and absolution in the West. This 
 is especially evident in a disturbing manner at the begin- 
 ning of the III. volume ; one misses here a reference to 
 the history in the early Church (Eastern as well as 
 Western) of the Roman medieval term indulgentia. The 
 very superficial manner of quoting and frequent inexact 
 use he makes of his quotations have not without good 
 reason been censured. Nevertheless there may be gleaned 
 many suggestions from the abundant and well designed 
 contents of the work which is made of easy access by 
 good indices. I would here also briefly refer to the num- 
 erous censures of LEA'S unreliability, of his credulity in 
 regard to exalted private utterances of the popular mind, 
 of his misunderstandings, etc., regarding Auricular Con- 
 fession, published in the Historische Zeitschrift, vol. 78 
 (N. F. 42), p. 94.
 
 Conclusion. 143 
 
 source for the numberless mistakes and misrepre- 
 sentations from which all of LEA'S works suffer in 
 a hopeless degree. It is to be regretted that these 
 books, written with such great devotion and ob- 
 vious industry, will thus more quickly depreciate 
 than otherwise would have been the case. 
 
 I take leave of MR. LEA, his labors, his adherents, 
 and his critics. I do so not without saluting Mr. 
 LEA with the sharp sword which was found needful 
 in the contest, and not without expressing my esteem 
 and admiration for his industry, his endurance and 
 undisputed results. That in the interest of historical 
 research I was frequently compelled to oppose him 
 energetically, no one deplores more than I ; had 
 it been possible, I should have been only too glad to 
 avoid it. That the aged scholar who has in a 
 unique manner attained success 1 ), both in the com- 
 mercial and in the purely scientific sphere, may enjoy 
 his vigorous age for a long number of years, is the 
 sincerest wish of the writer of this review. 
 
 *) As specially worthy of note and of praise I would 
 mention that LEA'S glance embraces with equal interest 
 the conditions of early Christianity and of those of the Mid- 
 dle Ages, without ignoring the events of modern times. 
 This comprehensive method of observation becomes, with 
 our inclination to specializing, from day to day scarcer, 
 because more difficult. In this respect LEA'S work belongs 
 to the style of the good old times, which did not offer 
 excerpts, but general surveys which were of real, practical 
 value.
 
 DOCUMENTS. 
 
 i. 
 
 In the following document Pope BONIFACE VIII. 
 charges the Inquisitors to refrain from proceedings 
 against the rectores fraternitatis et clerum urbis. 
 Should it become necessary to take measures against 
 any of them, the Vicar General is commissioned 
 with this duty for all times, who, however, must 
 follow the procedure of the Inquisition. This priv- 
 ilege, with certain restrictions, shall be extended to 
 the blood relations of the Rectors and members of 
 the clergy, unto the third degree. 
 
 Reg. Vat. Toiih 50 fol. CCCLXXXVIIr. cap. 
 ~XLVIIII (252). 
 
 Anagniae 1303 Julii 7. 
 
 Dilectis filiis inquisitoribus heretice pravitatis 
 
 auctoritate apostolica in Romana provincia in* 
 
 stitutis et instituendis imposterum. 
 
 Ex rationabilibus causis moti volumus et dis'tricte 
 
 vobis precipiendo mandamus, quatinus contra di- 
 
 lectos filios rectores Romane fraternitatis et clerum 
 
 Urbis, cuiusvis fuerint dignitatis, ordinis, conditionis 
 
 aut status, inquisitionis officium pravitatis heretice 
 
 exercere nullatenus presumatis, et si secus feceritis, 
 
 illud decernimus irritum et inane ac nullius existere 
 
 firmitatis. Huiusmodi autem inquisitionis officium 
 
 contra ipsos rectores et clerum vel ipsorum aliquem 
 
 per venerabilem fratrem nostrum Johannem epis- 
 
 copum Auximan. nostrum in Urbe vicarium et eius 
 
 in vicaria huiusmodi successores eadem auctoritate, 
 
 si opus fuerit. et. quod absit casus acciderit, exer- 
 
 144
 
 Documents. 145 
 
 ceri volumus fideliter et ferventer, et ilium modum 
 in procedendo servari, quern inquisitores pravitatis 
 predicte sclent, possunt et debent 1 ) per iura com- 
 munia vel per speciales concessiones et ordinationes 
 sedis apostolice observare, proviso quod ad diffiniti- 
 vam sententiam super crimine, confiscatione, publi- 
 catione bonorum vel statu persone cuiusvis ex rec- 
 toribus vel clero predictis, contra quern erit diffini- 
 tiva sententia proferenda, absque apostolice sedis 
 speciali licentia non precedatis, et si secus feceritis, 
 illud decernimus irritum et inane. 
 
 Ceterum, ut gratia facta rectoribus et clero pre- 
 dictis aliqualiter etiam extendatur ad personas ipsis 
 vel eorum alicui usque ad tertium consanguinitatis 
 gradum coniunctas, volumus, mandamus atque con- 
 cedimus, ut per vicarium ipsum et successores eius 
 in vicaria predicta et per vos seu vestrum alterum et 
 successores vestros in huiusmodi inquisitionis of- 
 ficio contra tales personas etiam de facto eodem in- 
 quiri valeat communiter vel divisim ; et si divisim 
 processum fuerit, teneamini invicem vestros com- 
 municare processus, ut per hoc possit melius veritas 
 inveniri. Ad sententiam autem diffinitivam super 
 crimine, confiscatione vel publicatione bonorum vel 
 statu persone, contra quam erit diffinitiva sententia 
 proferenda per vicarium sine vobis vel vestrum 
 altero et per vos sine vicario, nullatenus procedatur, 
 et si secus factum fuerit, illud decernimus irritum et 
 
 ') The following words, to atque concedimus, are taken 
 from the (in the records) preceding document of the 
 Vicar General of Rome ; in their place is, in our docu- 
 ment, the following reference : etc. "ut in proximo superiori 
 verbis competenter mutatis; atque concedimus."
 
 146 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 inane. In cuius prolatione sententie, si inter vica- 
 rium ipsum et vos vel vestrum alterum non fuerit 
 forte concordia, per utrosque negotium sufficienter 
 instructum ad sedem remittatur eandem. Nichilo- 
 minus autem vos vel alter vestrum, secundum quod 
 vobis est a sede prefata commissum, procedatis fidel- 
 iter et ferventer contra Jacobum et Petrum de Col- 
 umpna olim Sancte Romane Ecclesie cardinales, 
 Stephanum et Jacobum dictum Sciarra, Johannem 
 et Oddonem natos quondam Johannis de Columpna 
 fratris dicti Jacobi et patris Petri prefati scismaticos 
 et contra fautores, conductores et receptatores 
 eorum et eos, qui dederint vel dabunt eis auxilium, 
 consilium vel favorem. 
 
 Dat. Anagnie non. Julii anno nono. 
 2. 
 
 Detailed Camera accounts, from the years 1321 
 and 1322, concerning expenses connected with the 
 services of the Inquisitor LAURENTIUS DE MONDAYNO, 
 who preached the Cross against Recanati, Osimo and 
 other places, as also against FREDERICK OF MONTE- 
 FELTRE. In Tuscany and the Maritima there preached 
 GUIDO DE PASANO decretorum doctor, and in Sicily 
 and Apulia f rater GUIDO DE LAVICTORIA and Magister 
 GUADAMBIUS DE ALAMANDULA. The expenses of an 
 armed escort for Inquisitor LAURENTIUS suggests that 
 his activity was not without peril. There is mention 
 further of expenses for various prelates who were 
 sent into some Church provinces in the interest of 
 preaching the Cross. The two Franciscans, THO- 
 
 MASSUTIUS DE MACERATA and PALMERIUS DE SANO 
 
 TO HELPIDIO, were, on March 7, 1322, sent to Ger-
 
 Documents. 147 
 
 many for four months, with the Cross Bulls, under 
 escort of Ser GRATIANUS DE LUCCA and the German 
 PAULUS GOLDESTEN. Each received twelve gold 
 florins monthly for the period of the journey, there- 
 fore a total of 192 gold florins. On the 3Oth of 
 March, however, the cursores FATIOLUS and COR- 
 RADUS DE CAMERINO were dispatched after them. 
 qui sequerentur predictos fratres et sotios per 
 diversa itinera ubicunque per Alamaniam cum lit- 
 teris domini marchionis, ut non presentment dictas 
 litteras Crucis per Alamaniam, cum sit aliud ordina- 
 tum per dominum nostrum summum pontificem. 
 
 The Cursores received 24 gold florins; evidently 
 they did not reach the others in time. Since, how- 
 ever the two Franciscans and Ser GRATIANUS 
 (PAULUS GOLDESTEN apparently had remained in 
 Germany) staid away one month and eight days 
 over the allotted time they received, after their re- 
 turn on the 30th of August, additionally forty-five 
 gold florins. Moreover, Friar THOMASSUTIUS re- 
 ceived seven gold florins for a horse that had suc- 
 cumbed on the way propter nimium laborem. The 
 remarks about collection boxes in churches and 
 their official opening by a special envoy deserve our 
 interest. The frequent mention about paying the 
 many notaries who copied papal letters and other 
 documents, afford a picture of almost feverish activ- 
 ity. Finally, we have a reference to a decapitated 
 German traitor, HUGO DE BRAXDESTAN, from whose 
 possessions the above mentioned frater THOMASSU- 
 TIUS was, by the treasurer, assigned two gold flor- 
 ins on March 7, 1322.
 
 148 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Introitus et Exitus Camerae Tom. 50 fol. 28. 
 On left margin Cruciata 
 Right margin Extractum est 
 
 1321 Februarii 13 Septembris 30. 
 [Anno] Millesimo CCCXXI. 
 
 Pecunia data et soluta per supradictum dominum 
 Hugonem thesaurarium in subsidium et pro favore 
 predicationis Sancte Crucis contra hereticos. 
 
 Die XIII a mensis Februarii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit magistro Johanni Frederic! 
 de Macerata notario fratris Laurencii inquisi- 
 toris pro expensis equitum et peditum, qui 
 steterunt in Monteculi ad defensionem persone dicti 
 inquisitoris, quando fatiebat processus contra Ra- 
 canatenses et Auximanos de favore hereticorum, 
 presentibus Johanne Juliani de Macerata et Jacobo 
 Gentilis de Penna testibus, X lib. Raven 
 
 Die XXVI mensis Februarii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit Manenti Pilliantre de 
 Monteculi notario pro quibusdam instrumentis et 
 scripturis pro offitio inquisitionis de heresi contra 
 rebelles. 
 
 XXXII sol. Rav. 
 
 Die XXVI mensis Februarii solvit ser Fine de 
 Aretio notario pro scripturis quorumdam proces- 
 suum inquisitoris et privilegiorum inquisitoribus 
 concessis per summos pontifices ad confuxionem 
 (sic) rebellium XXX sol. Rav. 
 
 Dicta die dictus dominus Hugo thesaurarius dedit 
 
 magistro Johanni notario inquisitoris pro cartis 
 
 scribendis in honorem fidei contra hereticos et in- 
 
 quisitos de heresi XXX sol. Rav. 
 
 Summa XIIII or libr. XII sol.
 
 Documents. 149 
 
 Die X a mensis Aprilis dictus dominus thesaura- 
 rius dedit et solvit magistro Johanni notario domini 
 inquisitoris pro expensis iudicum et advocatorum et 
 hominum armatorum equitum et peditum, qui as- 
 sisterunt fratri Laurentio de Mondayno inquisitor!, 
 quando stetit in. Monteculi ad ferendam sententiam 
 contra comitem Fredericum de heresi et contra alios 
 fautores hereticorum. VIII flor. auri 
 
 Die dicta dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et 
 solvit Paulo de Sancta Victoria, Bastiano Buti, Con- 
 tutio Mathey, Alexandrutio, Johanni Benedicti et 
 Johanni Guillermi notariis pro scripturis multorum 
 processuum et sententiarum inquisitoris factorum et 
 factarum in publicam formam contra condempnatos 
 de heresi de Auximo et Racanato et comitem Fred- 
 ericum et fautores ipsorum, que transmisse fuerunt 
 ad Romanam curiam* XII libr. Rav. 
 
 Die XV mensis Aprilis dictus dominus thesau- 
 rarius dedit et solvit Lippo de Racanato mercatori 
 pro cartis pecudinis, bambicinis, in quibus scripti 
 fuerunt processus et sententie inquisitoris contra 
 Auximanos et Racanatenses et comitem Fredericum 
 et fautores ipsorum et contra communia Monticuli 
 et Sancti Severini, qui appellaverunt ad Curiam 
 Romanam et multi alii processus et papales littere 
 contra Fanenses et alios decem libr. X libr. 
 
 Die XX mensis Aprilis dictus dominus thesaura- 
 riu& dedit et solvit fratri Laurentio de Mondayno 
 inquisitori heretice pravitatis pro quibusdam expen- 
 sis factis per ipsum in persecutione condempnatorum 
 de heresi de Auximo et Racanato in eundo et ven- 
 iendo per mare et per terrain de Arimino, Macera- 
 tarn per Marchiam IX libr. VI sol. VI den.
 
 150 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Summa VIII flor. XXXI libr. VI sol. VI den. 
 
 Die dicta dictus dominus Hugo thesaurarius dedit 
 et solvit duobus famulis, qui steterunt cum dicto 
 domino inquisitore ad defensionem sue persone per 
 duos menses scilicet Martii et Aprilis, ad rationem 
 III libr. et X sol. in mense pro quolibet, 
 
 XV libr. Rav. 
 
 Die VI mensis Septembris dictus dominus thesau- 
 rarius dedit notario inquisitoris heretice pravitatis 
 pro scribendo processus contra infideles et pro can- 
 ddis XL sol. Rav. 
 
 Die ultima mensis Septembris dictus dominus 
 thesaurarius dedit fratri Laurentio de Mondayno 
 inquisitori pro subsidio expensarum ad confuxionem 
 (sic) inimicorum fidei christiane X flor. auri. 
 
 Summa X flor. 
 XVII libr. 
 
 Summa summa [rum] Cruciate anni MII! C XXI 
 decem octo flor. sexagintaduas libr. decem octo sol. 
 VI [den]. 
 
 1322 Februarii u Septembris 15 
 Anno Domini Millesimo CCCXXII do . 
 
 Die XI mensis Februarii dictus dominus Hugo 
 thesaurarius dedit et solvit ser Paganello de Lucha 
 notario et offitiali domini marchionis, qui ivit Romam 
 et in Campaniam ad episcopos atque prelates cum 
 litteris papalibus super predicatione Crucis contra 
 hereticos et patarenos de Racanato et Auximo pro 
 expensis suis et satietatis sue pro. Ill mensibus et 
 duobus diebus. XXXI flor. auri. 
 
 Die XII a dicti mensis dictus dominus thesaurarius 
 dedit et solvit domino Francisco archipresbitero
 
 Documents. 151 
 
 Montis Vetularum pro se et uno sotio equite, qui 
 ivit Venetias ad patriarcham Aquilanensem, pro uno 
 mense et XV diebus, ad rationem X florenorum in 
 mense pro quolibet, XXX flor. auri. 
 
 Dicta die dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et 
 solvit venerabili viro domino Guidoni de Pasano 
 decretorum doctori pro se, uno notario et quinque 
 hominibus armigeris, qui iverunt cum ipso in Tus- 
 siam et Maritimam cum dictis litteris papalibus ad 
 predicandum Crucem et transmittendum gentem 
 contra supradictos hereticos pro duobus mensibus 
 
 LX flor. auri. 
 
 Die VII mensis Martii dictus dominus thesaura- 
 rius dedit et solvit f ratri Thomassutio de Macerata 
 et fratri Palmerio de Sancto Helpidio de ordine 
 Minorum, ser Gratiano de Lucha et Paulo Goldes- 
 ten Theotonico, qui iverunt in Alamaniam cum su- 
 pradictis litteris papalibus ad predicandum crucem 
 pro IIII or mensibus, pro ipsorum expensis, ad ra- 
 tionem XII flor. in mense pro quolibet, 
 
 CLXXXXII flor. 
 
 Item die ultima mensis Augusti dictus dominus 
 thesaurarius dedit et solvit dictis fratribus et ser 
 Gratiano pro uno mense et VIII diebus, quibus ste- 
 terunt in dicta ambaxiata ultra dictos nil 011 menses, 
 ad dictam rationem. XLV flor. auri. 
 
 Item die dicta dedit et solvit dicto fratri Thomas- 
 sutio pro emenda unius rongini, quern perdidit in 
 dicto itinere propter nimium laborem 
 
 yn flor. auri. 
 Summa IIP XXXIIII" flor, 
 
 Die penultima mensis Marcii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit Fatiolo et Corrado de
 
 152 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Camerino cursoribus, qui sequerentur predictos 
 fratres et sotios per diversa itinera ubicumque per 
 Alamaniam cum literris domini marchionis, ut non 
 presentarent dictas litteras Crucis per Alamaniam, 
 cum sit aliud ordinatum per dominum nostrum sum- 
 mum pontificem, vigintiquatuor florenos auri 
 
 XXIIII or flor. auri. 
 
 Die dicta dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et 
 solvit fratri Guidoni de Lavictoria et magistro 
 Guadambio de Alamandula, qui iverunt in regnuni 
 Sicilie et Apuleam cum dictis litteris papalibus super 
 dicta predicatione Crucis pro IIII r mensibus ad 
 rationem X florenorum in mense pro quolibet, oc- 
 tuaginta flor. auri LXXX flor. 
 
 Dicta die dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et 
 solvit magistro Hermanno de Mevania notario dom- 
 ini marchionis, qui ivit cum similibus litteris ad 
 dominos episcopos Perusinum et Tudertinum, tres 
 flor. auri III flor. auri. 
 
 Die IX mensis Aprilis dictus dominus thesaura 
 rius dedit et solvit Nicolao de Fabriano cursori, qui 
 ivit Pisas ad dominum episcopum Ariminensem cum 
 litteris domini marchionis super facto Crucis, 
 
 III flor. auri, 
 
 Die XVI Junii dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit 
 Donato Billiocti de Florentia XV flor. auri, quos 
 dederat in Florentia domino Guidono de Pasano, 
 qui stabat in Tuscia ad predicandum Crucem, cum 
 defecerit sibi pecunia, quindecim flor. auri 
 
 XV flor. auri. 
 Summa CXXV flor. 
 
 Die dicta dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et sol- 
 vit domino Francisco archiepiscopo Montis Vetu-
 
 Documents. 153 
 
 larum, qui ivit Bononiam ad comitem Romandiole 
 cum litteris Crucis et pro decima sexennali de Ro- 
 mandiola, quindecim florenos auri XV flor. 
 
 Die dicta dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et 
 solvit quinque equitibus et tribus peditibus, qui iver- 
 unt cum domino Guidone de Pasano, quando fuit in 
 Tussia ad predicandum Crucem contra Racanaten- 
 ses et Auximanos, pro residuo et complemento om- 
 nium dierum, quibus steterunt cum dicto domino 
 Guidone ad predicta, vigintiocto flor. auri, (de dicta 
 die recesserunt predicti) XXVIII flor. 
 
 Die XIII mensis Septembris dictus dominus 
 Hugo thesaurarius dedit et solvit fratri Guidoni 
 de Lavictoria et magistro Jacobo de Ymola notario, 
 qui iverunt in regnum 1 ) ad aperiendum trunchos 
 sive cippos factos in ecclesiis mandate domini nostri 
 summi pontificis et ad notificandum etiam, quomodo 
 heretici occupaverunt Auximum, quindecim flor. 
 
 XV flor. auri. 
 
 Die XV mensis Septembris dictus dominus Hugo 
 thesaurarius dedit et solvit domino Guidoni de 
 Pasano pro expensis et quinque suorum sotiorum 
 equitum, qui iverunt in Tussiam ad aperiendum 
 trunchos et notificandum prelatis, quod heretici re- 
 ceptant se in Auximo, ut procurent gentes venire, 
 quindecim flor. auri XV flor. auri. 
 
 Summa LXXIII flor. 
 
 Item die prima mensis Februarii dictus dominus 
 
 ') From May 15, 1322, until March 15, 1324, there were 
 received a total of eight hundred and fifty-six gold florins, 
 twelve soldi de indulgentia et venia concessa in regno 
 Cecilie et citra Farum contra rebelles hereticos Marchie 
 Anconitanc. Introitus et Exitus Cameras Tom, 62 fol. por.
 
 154 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 thesaurarius dedit magistro Bastiano Buti de Ma- 
 cerata notario, qui transcripsit privilegia papalia 
 super predicatione Crucis 1 ), tres fiorenos auri, 
 quorum privilegiorum copie fuerunt misse ad multa 
 loca, tres flor. Ill flor. 
 
 Die dicta dedit Homodeo Porci notario de Ma- 
 cerata pro copiis 1 ), quas fecit de dictis privileges, 
 que misse fuerunt extra Marchiam, tres florenos 
 
 III flor. auri. 
 
 Dicta die dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit et 
 solvit magistro Stephano de Monticulo notario pro 
 scripturis 1 ) factis per ipsum dicta de causa tres 
 florenos auri III flor. 
 
 Die XII a mensis Februarii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit Duranti de Mondayno et 
 sotio suo, qui stabant ad defensionem persone fratris 
 Laurentii inquisitoris, dum procedebat contra he- 
 reticos et eorum fautores pro duobus mensibus, scili- 
 cet pro mense Januarii preterite et mense Februarii 
 presente, ad rationem duorum florenorum in mense, 
 pro quolibet octo florenos auri, VIII flor. auri. 
 
 Die XIIII dicti mensis dedit magistro Stephano 
 de Monticulo notario 1 ), qui copiavit litteras predica- 
 tionis Crucis contra Racanatenses et Auximanos et 
 Fredericum de Monte Feretro et commissiones epis- 
 coporum pro cippis et trunchis fiendis in ecclesiis 
 tres florenos III flor. auri. 
 
 Die dicta dedit magistro Paulo de Sancta Victoria 
 notario pro multis litteris patentibus scriptis in car- 
 tis de corio et aliis litteris secretis 1 ) missis per dom- 
 inum marchionem ad rectores Ducatus, Patrimonii, 
 
 On the margin the word nota.
 
 Documents. 155 
 
 Campanie et Vicariatus Urbis super facto Crucis 
 duos flor. auri II flor. auri. 
 
 Summa XXII flor. 
 
 Die XX mensis Februarii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit Johanni Juliani et Homo- 
 deo Porcis notario de Macerata pro copiis et tran- 
 sumptis factis per ipsos de privileges papalibus 
 habitis super predicatione Crucis quatuor florenos 
 auri IIII or flor. 
 
 fDie dicta dedit Lippo de Racanato mercatori 
 pro cartis pecudinis *) , in quibus facte fuerunt scrip- 
 ture super predicatione Crucis, VI libr. 
 
 Die secunda Martii dedit Johanni Juliani de 
 Macerata notario pro scripturis factis per ipsum 
 in servitio Ecclesie pro copiando privilegia Crucis 
 duos florenos auri II flor. 
 
 Die dicta dedit magistro Johanni notario inquisi- 
 toris pro cartis 8 ) emptis per ipsum, in quibus scrip- 
 sit processus factos contra hereticos et ipsorum fau- 
 tores, quadraginta sol. XL sol. 
 
 Die secunda mensis Martii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit notariis, qui fecerunt copias 
 
 Alexandrutio 
 
 de Macerata 
 Raynaldutio 
 
 de dicto loco 
 Oliverio Toldini 
 Paulo de Sancta Victoria 
 Johanni Benedicti et 
 Bastiano Buti 
 
 privilegiorum Crucis 
 contra hereticos, missas 
 per Marchiam ad dominos 
 episcopos et prelates*) 
 de dicta provintia, ut 
 deberent populis nun- 
 tiare, duodecim flor, auri 
 XII flor. 
 
 J ) On the margin carta. 
 *) On the margin carta. 
 ') On the margin nota.
 
 156 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Die dicta 1 ) dictus dominus thesaurarius dedit 
 Lippo de Racanato mercatori pro cartis 5 ), in quibus 
 fuerunt scripte dicte copie, III libr. 
 
 Die VII mensis Martii dictus dominus Hugo the- 
 saurarius dedit e solvit fratri Thomassutio de bonis 
 Hugonis de Brandestan Theotonico, cui fuit capud 
 (sic) amputatum propter proditionem, duos flore- 
 nos auri II flor. 
 
 Die penultima mensis Martii dictus dominus the- 
 saurarius dedit et solvit Arnaldo Trincaleonis cur- 
 sori, qui ivit Pisas cum litteris Crucis, tres florenos 
 
 III flor. 
 
 Die V mensis Maii dictus dominus thesaurarius 
 dedit et solvit Guillermo Vassalli domicello domini 
 marchionis, qui ivit ad portum Firmanum cum 
 pluribus suis sotiis equitibus ad prosequendum he- 
 reticos pro expensis quatuor flor. auri, 
 
 IIII OT flor. 
 Summa XXVII flor. et XI libr. 
 
 Summa summarum Cruciate in MIII c XXII do sex- 
 centos duodecim flor. et undecim libr. 
 Summatum est et abstractum. 
 
 Generalis summa summarum Cruciate annorum 
 suprascriptorum sexcensos triginta flor. et septua- 
 gintatres libr. decemocto sol. sex den. 
 
 Vera est. 
 
 De quibus fuerunt solute notariis pro scripturis 
 et labore XXVII libr. XII sol. et XL flor. 
 
 The treasurer is at the beginning of the volume 
 given the following title: 
 
 *) On the margin : credo, quod istud sit computatum 
 supra eadem pagina in tali 
 *) On the margin carta.
 
 Documents. 157 
 
 Hugo Bonis Cenomanen. et Vulteranen. ecclesi- 
 arum canonicus, Marchie Anconitane, Masse Tra- 
 barie, Terrarum Sancte Agathe, civitatis Urbin. et 
 comitatus olim ipsius t'hesaurarius per Sanctam 
 Romanam Ecclesiam generalis. 
 
 3- 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. orders the Bishop of St. 
 Brieuc,GuiDO DE MONTFORT, to again admit the priest 
 GUILELMUS Nicov to sacerdotal service, the suspen- 
 sion of six months imposed upon him having expired. 
 GUILELMUS, at the command of a priest, who had 
 formerly been his teacher, had, when a deacon, 
 heard the latter's confession and had later received 
 Holy Orders without first seeking absolution. 
 Reg. Aven. Tom. 48 fol. 2$8r cap. CCCCLXXVIL 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. up cap. 477. 
 On left margin 6". 
 
 On top to the right ^ 
 
 Avenione 1335 Junii 8 
 
 Venerabili fratri . . episcopo Briocen. salutem. 
 Petitio dilecti filii Guillermi Nicov presbiteri tue 
 diocesis nobis exhibita continebat, quod ipse dudum 
 tune in annis iuvenilibus constitutus ac diaconus 
 existens, de mandate cuiusdam presbiteri tune cele- 
 brare volentis, qui antea ipsius Guillermi magister 
 fuerat, confessionem ipsius presbiteri tanquam sim- 
 plex et iuris ignarus audivit et eidem presbitero 
 beneficium absolutionis impendit, non credens ex 
 hoc excedere in aliquo vel peccare ; et quod ipse post- 
 modum, dispensatione aliqua super hoc non obtenta, 
 ordinem presbiteratus, alias tamen rite, recepit et in 
 ipso, et ut prius in aliis suis ordinibus, ministravit
 
 158 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 et alias immiscuit se divinis. Quare idem Guillermus 
 nobis humiliter supplicavit, ut providere sibi in hac 
 parte de oportune dispensationis beneficio miseri- 
 corditer dignaremur. Nos igitur simplicitati dicti 
 Guillermi presbiteri in hac parte clementer ignoscere 
 intendentes, eius supplicationibus inclinati, fraterni- 
 tati tue, de qua in hiis et aliis fiduciam gerimus in 
 Domino specialem, per apostolica scripta committi- 
 mus et mandamus, quatinus, si est ita, cum dicto 
 Guillermo presbitero, ut in predictis sic susceptis 
 ordinibus ministrare possit, auctoritate nostra dis- 
 penses, ipsum 'tamen per semestre tempus ab exe- 
 cutione ordinum suspendendo ac imponendo eidem 
 penitentiam salutarem et alia que de iure fuerint 
 iniungenda. 
 
 Datum Avinion. VI idus Junii anno de (sic) 
 primo. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, (1334-1342). Lettres com- 
 munes analysees d'apres les Registres dits d'Avig- 
 non et du Vatican. Paris Fontemoing 1903 ss. cap. 
 2115. 
 
 4- 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. commissions the Archbishop 
 of Rouen, PETRUS ROGER, to absolve his diocesan 
 priest, GUILELMUS LEROY, after imposing befitting 
 penance. The latter, when only a deacon, had 
 heard the confession of a priest (at the latter's be- 
 hest), absolved him, and imposed penance. This 
 priest had expressly assured the deacon : quo d pec- 
 catum totum supra se retinere volebat. As a miti- 
 gating circumstance it is mentioned that the priest 
 was obliged to say Mass and another priest was not 
 about.
 
 Documents. 159 
 
 The petitioner was for six months to be sus- 
 pended ab cxecutione suorum ordinmn, then to be 
 reinstated in the full exercise of his office. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 120 cap. DCCLXXVI. 
 
 Avenione 1335 Junii 9. 
 Venerabili fratri. . archiepiscopo Rothoma- 
 gen. salutem et cetera. 
 
 Petitio dilecti filii Guillermi Leroy presbiteri tue 
 diocesis nobis exhibita continebat, quod ipse olim in 
 diaconatus ordine constitutus, quemdam presbi- 
 terum de mandate, consensu et voluntate ipsius, as- 
 serentis, quod idem Guillermus ipsum absolvere 
 poterat et penitentiam sibi iniungere pro commissis, 
 et dicentis, quod peccatum totum supra se retinere 
 volebat, tamquam simplex et iuris ignarus non 
 credens peccare in aliquo, et quia etiam in villa, 
 ubi tune existebant, non erat presbiter aliquis, qui 
 ipsum presbiterum absolvere posset, et ipsum opor- 
 tebat neccessario (sic) celebrare, presbiterum ab- 
 solvit eundem et pro modo culpe penitentiam sibi 
 iniunsit (sic). Quare prefatus Guillermus nobis 
 humiliter supplicavit, ut providere sibi super hiis de 
 oportuno remedio misericorditer dignaremur Nos 
 igitur ipsius Guillermi supplicationibus inclinati, 
 fraternitati tue, de qua plenum in Domino fiduciam 
 obtinemus, per apostolica scripta mandamus, qua- 
 tinus, si est ita, ipso Guillermo, prius per medium 
 annum ab executione suorum ordinum suspense, 
 cum eo, ut premissis nequaquam obstantibus, in sus- 
 ceptis ordinibus valeat ministrare, auctoritate nostra 
 dispenses, iniuncta sibi super hoc penitentia salutari. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. VI idus Junii anno primo. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 2121.
 
 160 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 5- 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. directs the Grand Peniten- 
 tiary, Cardinal GAUCELMUS, Bishop of Albano, to 
 absolve the priest ADAM SELE DE ALDEPORTE, of the 
 diocese of Lichfield, after imposing befitting pen- 
 ance. As deacon the latter had baptized two boys, 
 one of whom was dying; had also interred a de- 
 ceased person, and administered the Sacrament of 
 Extreme Unction to a woman at the request of a 
 priest who told him that he could do so by reason 
 of his ordo. Without thought of these happenings 
 ADAM subsequently received ordination and per- 
 formed priestly functions. His offence having now 
 been made clear to him, he implored the Holy See 
 for absolution, which was granted him on the con- 
 dition that, until further orders, he could in future 
 only ministrate in minoribus, subdiaconatu et dia- 
 conatu, and had to enter one of the recognized 
 orders. Despite much endeavor he was unable to 
 comply with the latter condition, on account of ad- 
 vanced age, and he turned once more to the Curia 
 for release from this obligation. For various rea- 
 sons this was granted, and he was reinstated in the 
 priestly office. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 120 cap. DCCCXXIII. 
 
 Avenione 1335 Octobris 18 
 Venerabili fratri. .Gaucelmo episcopo 
 Albanen. salutem et cetera. 
 Ignoscit Sancta Mater Ecclesia. 
 
 Lecte siquidem nobis dilecti filii Ade Sele de 
 Aldeporte presbiteri Licefelden. diocesis in nostra 
 presentia constituti petitionis series continebat, quod 
 ipse dudum existens diaconus duos pueros battica-
 
 Documents. 161 
 
 cavit, quorum unus in mortis articulo existebat, et 
 unum etiam mortuum sepelivit, ac uni mulieri ex- 
 tremam unctionem ministravit de precepto cuiusdam 
 presbiteri sibi dicentis, quod ei ex officio licebat hoc 
 efficere ac debebat. Et postmodum, nee formans 
 ex inde sibi conscientiam promotus ad sacerdotium 
 sacra missarum misteria celebravit et alias immis- 
 cuit se divinis et tamquam simplex et iuris ignarus, 
 non tamen in contemptum clavium, in sacerdotali 
 ordine ministravit. Tandem vero apertis negligen- 
 tie oculis per prudentes melius informatus, cum 
 sedem apostolicam super premissis consulere cura- 
 visset, sedes ipsa super eis cum ipso in forma solita 
 dispensavit, videlicet quod in minoribus, subdiacon- 
 atus et diaconatus ministrare posset ordinibus, in- 
 terdicta sibi executione sacerdotalis ordinis antedic- 
 ti, quousque a sede ipsa uberiorem mereretur gra- 
 tiam obtinere, nisi aliquam religionem intraret de 
 ordinibus approbatis. Et licet predictus presbiter 
 temptasset ac institisset omnibus viis et modis, qui- 
 bus potuit, per unum annum et amplius, ut aliquam 
 de dictis religionibus intrare valeret, tamen propter 
 nimiam senectutem, qua premitur, non invenit, qui 
 eum vellet in aliquam religionum recipere predic- 
 tarum. Verumtamen per huiusmodi tempus non 
 ministravit in sacerdotali ordine prelibato. Quare 
 nobis idem presbiter humiliter supplicavit, ut, cum 
 omnino delictum huiusmodi occultum existat, nee 
 sit de illo scandalum aliquale, nos consideratis an- 
 gustiis suis per tempus, quo non ministravit in 
 eodem sacerdotali ordine, gravibusque ipsius labor- 
 ibus, quos pro expeditione predictorum pertulit, 
 mine et alias ad Romanam Curiam personaliter
 
 1 62 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 veniendo, providere in hac parte sibi de oportune 
 dispensationis gratia misericorditer dignaremur etc. 
 fraternitati tue etc. mandamus, quatinus in eiusdem 
 presbiteri consolationis affectum etc. super irregu- 
 laritate etc. et super executione sacerdotalis ordinis 
 memorati dispenses auctoritate apostolica miseran- 
 ter, iniuncta ei propterea penitentia congrua, prout 
 conspexeris expedire. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. XV kal. Novembris anno prime. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 2132. 
 
 Bliss, Papal Letters Tom. II pag. 528. 
 6. 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. charges the Bishop of Ca- 
 hors, BERTRAXDUS DE CARDAILLAC, to absolve the 
 monk HUGO DE SCUDREUS, after imposing proper 
 penance. The latter had, as deacon which he still 
 is, without evil intent, heard the confession of a 
 priest who wanted to say Mass and absolved him 
 in quantum potuit. Responding to his petition the 
 Bishop was to suspend him for six months from 
 his ordo, but to permit him afterwards to receive 
 Holy Orders. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 120 cap. DCCCXXXVI. 
 
 Avenione 1335 Octobris 18. 
 Yenerabili f ratri . . episcopo Caturcen. salu- 
 tem et cetera. 
 
 Petitio pro parte dilecti filii Hugonis de Soudreus 
 monachi raonasterii Moysiacen. Cluniacen. ordinis 
 tue diocesis nobis exhibita continebat, quod ipse 
 olim tune sicut et adhuc in diaconatus ordine consti- 
 tutus non ex malitia, sed tanquam simplex et iuris 
 ignarns in aliquo errare non credens, cuiusdam 
 presbiteri. missam in quadam ecclesia celebrare vo-
 
 Documents. 163 
 
 lentis, per eum super hoc requisites, confessionem 
 audivit sibique, in quantum potuit, beneficium ab- 
 solutionis impendit. Quare pro parte dicti Hu- 
 gonis nobis extitit humiliter supplicatum, ut provi- 
 dere sibi super hoc de oportune dispensationis bene- 
 ficio misericorditer dignaremur. Nos itaque volen- 
 tes etc. mandamus, quatinus, si est ita, cum eodem 
 Hugone, per te prius per sex menses ipso ab or- 
 dinum susceptorum executione suspense, cum eo 
 super irregularitate etc. et quod elapsis dictis sex 
 mensibus possit in presbiterum licite promoveri etc. 
 dispenses, iniungens ei penitentiam salutarem etc. 
 
 Datum Avinion. XV kal. Novembris anno primo. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 2134. 
 7.8. 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. commissions the Bishop of 
 St. Lizier, RAIMUNDUS MONTAIGU, to absolve the 
 two diocesan priests, BARTHOLOMEW DE VIRIDARIO 
 and JOHANNES BARTA, after imposing suitable pen- 
 ance. Each, as deacon, had heard a priest's confes- 
 sion, and absolved as far as in his power. After- 
 ward they had been ordained to the priesthood, and 
 had exercised their office. After the Bishop shall 
 have suspended them for six months from their 
 ordo, they are to be re-admitted to the exercise of 
 the same. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. up cap. DCCCCLIII. 
 
 Avenione 1335 Octobris 18. 
 Venerabili fratri. . episcopo Conseranen. salu- 
 tem. 
 
 Exhibita nobis dilecti filii Bartholomei de Viri- 
 dario presbiteri tue diocesis petitio continebat, quod 
 olim ipse tune in diaconatus dumtaxat ordine consti-
 
 164 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 tutus, per simplicitatem et iuris ignorantiam cuius- 
 dam presbiteri confessionem audivit et eundem pres- 
 biterum a peccatis sibi confessis, in quantum potuit, 
 absolvit, sibi pro eis penitentiam iniungendo; ac de 
 inde se fecit, alias tamen rite, ad presbiteratus or- 
 dines promoveri et in eisdem ordinibus ministravit 
 et alias immiscuit se divinis, dispensatione aliqua 
 super hoc non obtenta. Quare, cum idem Bartholo- 
 meus presbiter, sicut asserit, super hiis habeat con- 
 scientiam remordentem, nobis humiliter supplicavit, 
 ut providere sibi super hiis de benignitate apostolica 
 dignaremur. Nos itaque etc. quatinus, si est ita, 
 eodem Bartholomeo, primo ab executione huius- 
 modi ordinem per dimidium annum auctoritate nos- 
 tra per te suspenso, ipsum a predictis excessibus 
 auctoritate predicta iuxta ecclesie formam absol- 
 vas et cum eo super irregularitate inde contracta 
 eadem auctoritate dispenses, iniuncta sibi penitentia 
 salutari et aliis que de iure fuerint iniungenda. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. XV kal. Novembris anno primo. 
 Ibidem cap. DCCCCLIIII. 
 
 Avenione 1335 Octobris 18 
 
 Eidem episcopo salutem. 
 
 Exhibita nobis dilecti. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. XV kal. Novembris anno primo. 
 
 De eodem in persona Johannis Barta presbiteri 
 Conseranen. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, capp. 2135, 2136. 
 
 9- 
 
 BENEDICT XII. commissions the Bishop of Mende, 
 ALBERTUS LORDETI, to suspend from service for 
 three months the acolyte PETRUS PELLIPARII, after 
 which he was to have permission to advance to the
 
 Documents. 165 
 
 higher orders. PETRUS had heard a priest's con- 
 fession without supposing that he was doing some- 
 thing wrong. Later he had himself absolved in 
 Rome by one of the Penitentiaries. 
 Reg. Aven, Tom. 50 fol. 374^ 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 122 cap. 525. 
 
 On top to the right Gratis 
 
 Avenione 1336 Februarii 10 
 Venerabili fratri episcopo Mimaten, salutem 
 
 et cetera 1 ). 
 
 Petitio dilecti filii Petri-Pelliparii acoliti tue 
 diocesis nobis exhibita continebat, quod olim ipse 
 existens, ut credit, acolitus tamquam simplex et 
 iuris ignarus, non credens peccare, cuiusdam sacer- 
 dotis celebrare volentis generalem confessionem 
 audivit et cum absolvit, eidem penitenciam iniun- 
 gendo; et postmodum per alterius prudentiam in- 
 tellecto quod male egerat, et quod ad ulteriores or- 
 dines absque dispensatione apostolica ascendere non 
 valebat, sedem apostolicam adiens 8 ) per unum de 
 penitenciariis nostris ab excessu huiusmodi extitit 
 absolutus. Quare dictus Petrus nobis humiliter 
 supplicavit, ut cum eo, quod premissis nequaquam 
 obstantibus ad omnes superiores ordines promoveri 
 et in eis licite ministrare valeat, dispensare miseri- 
 corditer dignaremur. Nos igitur eius supplicationi- 
 bus inclinati fraternitati tue, de qua plenam in 
 Domino fiduciam obtinemus, per apostolica scripta 
 mandamus, quatinus, si est ita, prefato Petro per 
 tres menses a suorum ordinum executione suspense, 
 
 *) Apostolicam benedictionem is crossed out and cetera 
 has been substituted. 
 *) Corrected upon the margin.
 
 i66 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 super premissis auctoritate nostra dispenses miseri- 
 corditer cum eodem. 
 
 Datum Avinion. IIII id. Februarii anno secundo. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 3596. 
 10. 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. orders his Grand Peniten- 
 tiary, GAUCELMUS, Bishop of Albano, to absolve 
 the priest RADULPHUS GAUREL, of the diocese of 
 St. Malo, after a suspension of six months and im- 
 position of suitable penance. RADULPHUS later was 
 to be allowed to obtain a benefice. The latter had, 
 while a deacon, at the solicitation of a priest and 
 because there was no other priest there, heard the 
 confession of this priest and absolved him, having 
 been told that he could do so. He had subsequently 
 received Holy Orders, without first having been 
 absolved. 
 
 Reg. Aven. Tom. 50 fol. jSov. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 122 cap. 540. 
 Over the document Gratis 
 
 Avenione 1336 Maii 8 
 Venerabili f ratri Gaucelmo episcopo Albanen. 
 penitentiarie nostre curam gerenti salutem et 
 cetera. 
 
 Exhibita nobis dilecti filii Radulphi Gaurel pres- 
 biteri Maclovien diocesis apud sedem apostolicam 
 constituti petitio continebat, quod ipse olim tune in 
 diaconatus dum taxat ordine constitutus, tanquam 
 simplex et iuris ignarus, cuiusdam presbiteri missam 
 celeb rare volentis, nee habentis cui peccata sua con- 
 fiteri posset, ad requisitionem ipsius presbiteri dicto 
 Radulpho dicentis, quod hoc facere poterat et ei 
 licebat, confessionem audivit, in hoc peccare non
 
 Documents. 167 
 
 credens, et quod ipse dubitat, licet non recordetur 
 plene, ipsum presbiterum a peccatis sibi confessis 
 absolvisse de facto ; quodque ipse Radulphus deinde, 
 alias rite, ad presbiteratus ordinem promoveri (sic) 
 et in eisdem sic susceptis ordinibus ministravit, dis- 
 pensatione super hoc aliqua non obtenta. Quare 
 idem Radulphus nobis humiliter supplicavit, ut pro- 
 videre ei super hoc de oportuno remedio de benign- 
 itate apostolica misericorditer dignaremur. Nos 
 itaque huiusmodi supplicationibus inclinati fraterni- 
 tati tue per apostolica scripta committimus et man- 
 damus, quatinus eodem Radulpho, prius ab execu- 
 tione huiusmodi ordinum per dimidium annum auc- 
 toritate nostra per te suspense, cum eo super pre- 
 missis, et quod ipse possit beneficium ecclesiasti- 
 cum obtinere, eadem auctoritate dispenses, iniunctis 
 sibi penitentia salutari et aliis que de iure fuerint 
 iniungenda. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. VIII id. Maii anno secundo. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 3607. 
 ii. 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. commands the Archbishop 
 of Genoa, JACOBUS DE SANCTA VICTORIA, to investi- 
 gate the petition of a (united) Armenian, and to 
 allow it if the circumstances therein described could 
 be verified. PETRUS ARMENUS DE MAIORI AR- 
 MENIA ORIUNDUS had from his youth preached the 
 true faith in his country, under difficulty and de- 
 privations, and had been ordained priest accord- 
 ing to the Armenian rite. Coming to the Curia 
 two years ago he had been re-baptized conditionally, 
 believing that in his country he had possibly not 
 been veracitur baptisatus. He petitions to be given
 
 168 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Confirmation and Holy Orders, under observation 
 of all precepts. The Archbishop of Genoa is en- 
 trusted with the matter because PETRUS has taken 
 up his residence there. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 125 cap. CCCXLIII. 
 
 Avenione 1338 Junii 8 
 Venerabili fratri . . archiepiscopo Januen. sa- 
 lutem etc. 
 
 Accedens ad apostolicam sedem Petrus Armenus 
 de Maiori Armenia oriundus lator presentium nobis 
 exposuit, quod ipse dudum secundum ritum Ar- 
 menorum extitit in presbiterum ordinatus et quod 
 a iuventute sua per triginta annos et amplius inter 
 fideles Armenos et inter alios scismaticos veritatem 
 fidei et Ecclesie predicavit et multas contumelias ab 
 emulis christianorum patienter recepit et a duobus 
 annis citra de dicta Maiori Armenia recessit et ad 
 Romanam Curiam non sine magnis laboribus et 
 periculis se duxit personaliter conferendum. Et 
 quia dubitabat, an in partibus suis fuisset in forma 
 Ecclesie veraciter baptizatus, in dicta Curia secun- 
 dum ritum et formam eiusdem Ecclesie condition- 
 aliter recepit baptismatis sacramentum, videlicet: 
 Si non es baptizatus, ego te baptise in nomine Patris 
 et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Quare nobis humiliter 
 supplicavit, ut sibi, quod sacramentum confirma- 
 tionis recipere et quod etiam possit ab aliquo catho- 
 lico antistite gratiam et communionem apostolice 
 sedis habente ad omnes minores et etiam sacros 
 ordines secundum formam Ecclesie statutis a iure 
 temporibus promoveri, licentiam concedere dignare- 
 mur. 
 
 Nps igitur eius supplicationibus inclinati, f raterni-
 
 Documents. 169 
 
 tati tue per apostolica scripta committimus et man- 
 damus, quatinus eidem Petro Armeno, qui in ci- 
 vitate Januen. perpetuam se elegisse asserit man- 
 sionem, dummodo sit catholicus et in communione 
 Sancte Romane Ecclesie perseveret, postulata con- 
 cedas, prout saluti anime sue videris expedire. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. VI idus Junii anno quarto. 
 Reg. Aven. Tom. 52 fol. nr. only the Regest is 
 found; the document itself is missing. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 6297. 
 
 About matter and form of the Armenian baptism 
 is to be compared the great memorial in Reg. Vat. 
 Tom. 62 fol. Cr., executed at that time, and which 
 is copied only in part and not quite correctly in the 
 Annals of Raynaldus ad annum 1341 66-68. 
 
 12. 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. directs the Vicar General of 
 Rome, JOHN, Bishop of Anagni, to arrest a certain 
 ATHANASIUS, who, calling himself Bishop of Feret- 
 schik, was roving in the vicinity of Rome. He is 
 then to report and await the Pope's instructions. 
 It had been established through witnesses, that 
 ATHANASIUS, who made use of forged papal Bulls, 
 oppressed the Catholic Armenians, and attempted 
 to win them over to his heretical teachings ; for this 
 reason he was to be rendered harmless. 
 Reg. Aven. Tom. 85 fol. I2ir. cap. LVI. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 126 fol. i$v. cap. LVI. 
 At the top to the right De Curia 
 
 Avenione 1338 Novembris 4 
 
 Venerabili fratri Johanni episcopo Anagnin. 
 
 nostro in spiritualibus in Urbe vicario salutem. 
 
 Pridem ad audientiam nostram deducto, quod
 
 170 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Athanasius, se fatiens Verien. episcopum nominari 
 in Romanis partibus moram trahens, nonnullos er- 
 rores contra fidera catholicam dogmatizabat, ac qui- 
 busdam falsis litteris et privilegiis apostolicis, falso 
 sub quorumdam Romanorum pontificum nomine 
 fabricatis, uti seu verius abuti temere presumebat ; 
 et quod Armenos catholicos, tenentes quod tenet, et 
 credentes quod credit San eta Romana Ecclesia mater 
 cunctorum fidelium et magistra, diversis persecu- 
 tionibus affligebat, baptizatos quoque secundum for- 
 mam eiusdem Ecclesie abhominabatur, et asserebat 
 seu vocabat renegatos, eosque per personarum cap- 
 tionem, incarcerationem aliaque flagella variasque 
 persecutiones retrahere nitebatur a devotione et fide 
 eiusdem Ecclesie et ad pristinos errores et perfidiam, 
 quibus idem Athanasius imbutus esse creditur, re- 
 sumendos, dampnabiliter revocare. Nos de hiis m- 
 formari volentes, super premissis nonnullos viros 
 catholicos [apud sedem] apostolicam constitutes ex- 
 aminari fecimus diligenter ; et quia per depositiones 
 eorum comperimus, prefatum Athanasium premissis 
 culpis fore respersum, ne, quod absit, idem Athan- 
 asius simplitium corda depravet eosque pertrahat 
 ad infidelitatis errores, fraternitati tue per apostolica 
 scripta committimus et mandamus, quatinus receptis 
 presentibus eundem Athanasium auctoritate nostra 
 capias seu capi fatias et carceri mancipari et in eo 
 sub cauta diligentia custodiri, donee nos super hiis 
 per tuas litteras informati, id quod per te in hac 
 parte ulterius agendum fuerit, tibi per nostras lit- 
 teras rescribamus. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. II non. Novembris anno quarto. 
 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 6430. 
 
 Eubel, Hierarchia, Tom. I pag. 553.
 
 Documents. ' 171 
 
 13- 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. commissions the Bishop of 
 Padua, HILDEBRANDINUS CONTI, to apprehend the 
 alleged Archbishop of Jerusalem and Nazareth, 
 PETRUS ARMENUS, who has rendered himself guilty 
 of the same things mentioned in No. 12 about 
 ATHANASIUS. He is to send in his report and 
 await the Pope's instructions. 
 Reg. Aven. Tom. 85 foL I2ir. cap. LVIII 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 126 fol. xyv. cap. LVIII. 
 At the top to the right De Curia 
 
 Avenione 1338 Novembris 4 
 Venerabili fratri . . episcopo Paduan. salutem. 
 
 Pridem ad audientiam nostram deducto, quod 
 Petrus, qui se nominat archiepiscopum Jerusalem 
 et Nazareth in Paduan. partibus moram trahens et 
 cetera tit in secunda superiori usque: perfidiam, 
 quibus idem Petrus imbutus et cetera usque: com- 
 perimus, prefatum Petrum premissis culpis fore 
 respersum, ne, quod absit, idem Petrus simplitium 
 corda et cetera [usque:] receptis presentibus eun- 
 dem Petrum auctoritate nostra et cetera usque in 
 fin em. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. II non. Novembris anno quarto. 
 14. 
 
 Pope BENEDICT XII. directs the Bishop of Flo- 
 rence, PHILIPPUS, to imprison one EZECHIEL, who 
 represents himself as the Vicar of PETRUS ARMENUS, 
 the so-called Archbishop of Jerusalem and Nazareth, 
 and guilty of the same offences as the latter. The 
 Bishop shall report and then await the Pope's in- 
 structions.
 
 172 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Reg. Aven. Tom. 85 cap. LVll fol. I2ir. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 126 fol. iyu. cap.LVII. 
 At the top to the right De Curia 
 
 Avenione 1338 Novembris 4 
 Venerabili fratri . . episcopo Florentin. salu- 
 tem. 
 
 Pridem ad audientiam nostram deducto, quod 
 Ezechiel, qui se dicit vicarium Petri Armeni as- 
 serentis, se fore archiepiscopum Jerosolimitan. et 
 Nazareth, in Florentin. partibus moram trahens etc. 
 ut in proxima superiori usque ad : perfidiam, quibus 
 idem Ezechiel imbutus etc. usque : comperimus, pre- 
 fatum Ezechielem premissis culpis fore respersum, 
 ne, quod absit, idem Ezechiel simplitium corda de- 
 pravet etc. usque: receptis presentibus eundem 
 Ezechielem auctoritate nostra etc. usque in finem. 
 Dat. Avinion. II non. Novembris anno quarto. 
 Vidal, Benoit XII, cap. 6431. 
 
 15- 
 
 Final account of the former Inquisitor in Tos- 
 cana, FRAXCISCUS MACHARELLI OMiN : showing 
 that the chamber was entitled to 258 gold florins, 
 which are now remitted. 
 Introitus et Exitus Camerae Tom. 170, fol. 2or. 
 
 1338 Novembris 19 
 
 Die XIX Novembris cum religiosus vir frater 
 Franciscus Macharelli ordinis fratrum Minorum 
 olim inquisitor in provincia beati Francisci per 
 finem computorum suorum per ipsum camere apos- 
 tolice redditorum de administratis et receptis per 
 ipsum in officio inquisitionis prefate remansisset 
 dicte camere obligatus in II LVIII flor. anri, idem 
 Franciscus dictos II LVIII flor. per manus Mace-
 
 Documents. 173 
 
 relli de Assisio , Bartholi Philippi et Marchonis 
 Daviz campsorum de Florentia camere assignavit 
 et solvit IPLVIII flor. 
 
 16. 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI., at the petition of the Tou- 
 louse Inquisitor, PETRUS GUIDONIS, orders that the 
 Provincial prior of the Dominicans in France, in 
 his right to nominate the Toulouse Inquisitor, shall 
 in future nominate the person named by the pro- 
 vincial prior of Toulouse; the prior of Toulouse 
 may also himself be nominated. He proceeds to 
 grant to the petitioner the nomination of two no- 
 taries to the Inquisition, as proposed by the peti- 
 tioner. 
 
 y Y 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. i fol. j v 
 
 On the left margin to both petitions extra 
 
 Apud Villam Novam 1342 Septembris 7 
 Supplicat Sanctitatem Vestram devotus filius 
 vester frater Petrus Guidonis inquisitor Tholosanus, 
 quatinus ad instar felicis recordationis domini Jo- 
 hannis pape XXII dignemini precipiendo mandare 
 priori provinciali ordinis Predicatorum in Francia 
 qui nunc est vel erit pro tempore, cui ex indulto 
 apostolico incumbit, sex fratres eiusdem ordinis in- 
 quisitores in regno Francie deputare, quatinus de 
 cetero, quociens expedient inquisitorem ponere in 
 Tholosa, aliquem de fratribus nominatis per priorem 
 provincialem eiusdem ordinis Tholosanum qui erit 
 pro tempore, iuxta tenorem indulti memorati domini 
 Johannis teneatur in Tholosa atque regno Francie 
 inquisitorem deputare; et quod addatur in rescripto 
 per Sanctitatem Vestram reformando ac innovando:
 
 174 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 seu de persona ipsius prioris provincialis Tholosani, 
 si tibi magis utilis ac ydoneus pro officio fidei videa- 
 tur. 
 
 Addatur in indulto apostolico, quod eciam pro- 
 vincialis ipse Tholosanus possit assumi. Fiat R. 
 
 Item supplicat Sanctitatem Vestram, quatinus 
 cum officium inquisitionis non valeat exequi sine 
 auctoritate notariorum, quod dignemini gerenti vices 
 vestri vicecancellarii imponere et mandare, ut duos 
 clericos aptos ad hoc et ydoneos per eundem inquisi- 
 torem sibi presentatos habeat ad huiusmodi tabel- 
 lionatus officium auctoritate vestra deputare. 
 
 Fiat R. 
 
 Et quod transeant sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 
 Dat. apud Villamnovam Avinion. dyocesis VII 
 idus Septembris anno primo. 
 17- 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI. directs that the frater JOHAN- 
 NES ARMENUS DE MAIORI ARMENIA, may further 
 exercise his priestly office, non obstante rebaptisa- 
 tione sub conditione facta. Frater JOHANNES had, 
 under BENEDICT XIL, been conditionally re-baptized, 
 because the commissary charged with investigating 
 the matter had believed wrongly that the baptismal 
 form used was invalid. The Friar having heard 
 from the lips of the late Pope that the form actually 
 had been valid, he had proceeded without further 
 ceremony to exercise his priestly functions. Now 
 he had scruples about it and for this reason pre- 
 sented his petition to CLEMENT VI. 
 
 YY 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. I fol-^fXIXr 
 
 On the left margin extra 
 
 Avenione 1342 Octobris 2
 
 Documents. 175 
 
 Significat S. V. devotus et humilis vaster orator 
 frater Johannes Armenus de Maiori Armenia, 
 quod tempore felicis recordationis domini B[^n- 
 cdicti] pape XII predecessoris vestri in partibus 
 Tuscie in suo loco et conventu existens, a sociis 
 fratris Nerces archiepiscopi Magnazguerden, audi- 
 vit, quod dictus dominus papa mandaverat, quod 
 omnes fratres Armeni deberent rebaptizari, alioquin 
 tamquam heretici caperentur. Qua de causa dic- 
 tus frater Johannes tamquam Sancte Ecclesie Ro- 
 mane et Sanctitatis domini nostri pape fidelis servus 
 obediens films ad Romanam Curiam accessit, et cum 
 fuisset ad presentiam domini abbatis condam de 
 Pina ductus, ac per eundem dominum abbatem in- 
 terrogatus, qua forma fuerit primitus baptizatus, 
 ipse respondit sic: Johannes servus Christi veniens 
 ad cathecummitatem (sic) ad baptismum baptizetur 
 in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti etc. 
 Tune dictus dominus abbas dixit, quod ilia verba 
 essent forma Grecorum et etiam Romani talem 
 formam non admictebant. Et dictus dominus ab- 
 bas dictum fratrem Johannem sub conditione bap- 
 tizavit. Postmodum vero dictus frater Johannes 
 ab ore dicti domini pape audivit, quod dicit, quod 
 dicta forma valebat ad verum baptismum; idcirco 
 idem frater Johannes nullo sacro ordine resumpto 
 ad peregrinationem ivit et in nonnullis locis missas 
 celebravit. Deinde penitentia ductus ac conscien- 
 tia morso (sic) ad pedes Vestre Beatitudinis venit. 
 Ouare supplicat humiliter et devote S. V., quatinus 
 intuitu pietatis et amore Yhesu Christi dignemini 
 de salutari remedio misericorditer providere.
 
 176 Henry Charles Leas Historical Writings. 
 
 Fiat et ministret in susceptis rite ordinatus, non 
 obstante dicta rebaptizatione sub condictione facta. 
 R. 
 
 Et quod transeat sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. VI non. Octobris anno primo. 
 
 The baptismal form above referred to is not men- 
 tioned in the memorial concerning the Armenian 
 fallacies (Reg. Vat. Tom. 62 fol Cr. in Raynal- 
 dus ad annum 1341), because perfectly valid. 
 18. 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI., on the motion of ROSTAGNUS, 
 the General Procurator of the Dominicans at the 
 Curia, appoints ARNAUDUS MANDAVTNI, the prior of 
 the Dominican Convent of Angouleme, to be In- 
 quisitor of Poitiers and the province of Tours, in 
 place of the deceased Master of Theology, JOHAN- 
 NES AINFREDI OPRAED. He may exercise all the 
 powers of his predecessor to the same extent. The 
 Pope expressly recognizes: quod ex commissione 
 huiusmodi nullum ex hoc ordini vel illis ad quos 
 special ex indultis privilegiis providere, praeiudi- 
 cium generetur. To the grant is added the condi- 
 tion that the candidate ad relationem cardinalis 
 GERARDI GUARDIA OPRAED, tituli Sanctae Sabinae et 
 aliorum de ordine ad hoc fuerit sufficiens reputatus. 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. 2 fol. LXIIr. 
 
 Apud Villam Novam 1343 Februarii 27 
 
 Supplicat Sanctitatem Vestram devotus et hu- 
 milis orator vester frater Rostagnus procurator 
 generalis ordinis fratrum Predicatorum in Curia, 
 quod cum post obitum fratris Johannis Ainfredi 
 magistri in theologia et inquisitoris quondam Pic- 
 tavie et provincie Turonen. non sit provisum de in-
 
 Documents. 177 
 
 quisitore, qui in illis partibus debeat inquisitionis of- 
 ficium exercere, quatinus dignemini de dicto officio 
 providere fratri Arnandi Mandavini priori eiusdem 
 ordinis in conventu Engolismen., ut predictus f ra- 
 ter Arnandus possit auctoritate Sanctitatis Vestre 
 antedictum officium in locis, terris et provinciis 
 exercere, in quibus dictus quondam frater Johannes 
 Ainfredi et sui predecessores ipsum inquisitionis 
 officium exercebant aut poterant vel consueverant 
 exercere secundum privilegia indulta a sede apos- 
 tolica inquisitoribus eiusdem ordinis in terris et 
 provinciis antedictis ; adhicientes si S. V. placuerit, 
 quod ex commissione huiusmodi nullum ex hoc pre- 
 iudicium ordini vel illis, ad quos spectat, ex indul- 
 tis privileges providere, preiudicium generetur, 
 cum non obstantibus et clausulis oportunis. 
 
 Fiat cum ad relationem cardinalis Sancte Sabine 
 et aliorum de ordine ad hoc fuerit sufficiens repu- 
 tatus. R. 
 
 Et quod transeat sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 
 Dat. apud Villamnovam Avinion. diocesis II kal. 
 Martii anno primo. 
 
 19. 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI. had heard from the Inquisi- 
 tor of Carcassonne, AYMO DE CALVOMONTE, that the 
 adjoining houses of two condemned heretics, RAY- 
 
 MUNDUS GuiLLERMI MATE and GuiLELMUS MAR- 
 TINI FRENERII, had been razed to the ground, et 
 perpetus sterquilinio deputate fuerant. There had 
 then, for many years, offal and garbage been de- 
 posited, so that not only the immediate neighbor- 
 hood but almost the entire city, particularly in sum- 
 mer time, was filled with an unbearable stench,
 
 178 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 which bred sickness. Prominent citizens of the 
 town had frequently importuned the Inquisitor to 
 allow them to surround the place with a wooden 
 fence, not a wall, eight or nine feet high, ita tamen 
 quod dicta platea desuper aperta et per totum in- 
 habitabilis remaneret. As the inquisitor could on 
 his own authority not permit this, he begged papal 
 permission, which was granted. Now he desires to 
 receive briefs nc aliquis dictam platcam pracsumat 
 aliter, quam supra dictum sit, dander c, aut in ca 
 quoquomodo aliquid aedificare sine sedis apostol- 
 icae licentiae spccialc, of which the Pope approves. 
 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. 5 fol. *f n r//// ,_, 
 
 Apud Villam Novam 1343 Augusti 22 
 Pater Sanctissime, Nuper exposito Vestre Beati- 
 tudini per fratrem Aymonem de Calvomonte in- 
 quisitorem Carcassonen., quod in burgo Carcasson. 
 quedam platea in una de melioribus partibus dicti 
 burgi consistebat ab una carreria publica usque ad 
 aliam per transversum pertingens, in qua fuerant 
 ab olim due domus contigue, una videlicet quon- 
 dam Raymundi Guillermi Mate, et altera quon- 
 dam Guillermi Martini Frenerii de Carcassona, 
 dudum per inquisitorem Carcassonen., qui tune erat, 
 de crimine heresis per eos nequiter perpetrate sen- 
 tentialiter dampnatorum, que in detestationem dicti 
 criminis dirutioni exposite et perpetuo sterquilinio 
 fuerant deputate; et quod in eadem platea tot sor- 
 des et immunditie, que inibi continue proiciebantur 
 et ponebantur, adeo cumulabanttir ibidem, quod 
 propter fetorem vel infectionem dicti loci non solum
 
 Documents. 179 
 
 per viciniam undique dicte platee contiguam, ymmo 
 etiam in magna parte dicti burgi aer, presertim 
 estivo tempore, adeo corruptus et fetidus reddeba- 
 tur, quod inde nonnullis frequenter egrotantibus 
 habitationes domorum vicinarum domos suas etiam 
 pretiosas, solempnes et magnas, quas ibidem inhabi- 
 tant relinquere et quasi desertas dimictere, nisi de 
 remedio provideretur necessario, oporteret; et quod 
 propterea nonnullis personis notabilibus dicti burgi 
 cum instantia devote supplicantibus dicto inquisitori 
 sepius et frequenter, ut eis daret licentiam claudendi 
 dictam plateam undique non de muro, sed de palis 
 ligneis usque ad altitudinem octo vel novem pal- 
 morum super terram, ita tamen, quod dicta platea 
 flesuper aperta et per totum inhabitabilis in detesta- 
 tionem dicti criminis perpetuo remaneret. Idem in- 
 quisitor hoc facere numquam voluerat Vestra Beati- 
 tudine inconsulta, ipsoque inquisitore Vestram Sanc- 
 titatem consulente, quid sibi super hoc videretur et 
 placeret, Eadem Vestra Sanctitas respondit, quod 
 idem inquisitor, si sibi videretur expediens, audacter 
 dictam licentiam largiretur. Dignetur igitur eadem 
 S. V. concedere et mandare super hoc fieri litteras 
 oportunas, in hibendo, ne aliquis dictam plateam 
 presumat aliter, quam supra dictum sit, claudere, 
 aut in ea. quoquomodo aliquid edificare sine sedis 
 apostolice licentia speciali. 
 
 Fiat R. 
 
 Et quod transeat sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 
 Dat. apud Villamnovam Avinion. diocesis XI kal. 
 Septembris anno secundo. 
 20. 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI. had received a petition from
 
 180 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Prior and convents of the Carthusians with the fol- 
 lowing details: Many priors and monks of the 
 Order had, as deacons and subdeacons, before and 
 after their profession, in cases of necessity and 
 otherwise heard confessions, and, prout poterant, 
 absolved. Many of them believed that upon their 
 entry into the Order by virtue of the privilege of 
 ALEXANDER IV., which granted to priors extended 
 powers of absolution and dispensation, they had 
 been absolved from their offence. Others, before 
 entering, had been possessed of beneficia, etiam 
 curata, drawn the revenues, and had been ordained 
 priests, others even became priors. Now as all 
 these could not journey to the Curia, the Pope was 
 implored to grant power of absolution to the priors 
 for monks, and to the vicars for priors, for the 
 offences stated, and quod si qui priores in casibus 
 tanqnantur praedictis, possint in eorum prioratibus 
 remanere et ministrare. Fiat hac vice, replied the 
 Pope,suspensis ad tempus proutviderint expedire,ex- 
 ccptis irregularitatibus ex homicidio vel mutilatione 
 contracts. The grant was to be made through the 
 Grand Penitentiary GAUCELMUS, Bishop of Albano. 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. 3 foL CXIIv. 
 On left margin extra 
 
 Avenione 1344 Januarii 8 
 
 Significant Sanctitati Vestre prior et conventus 
 Cartusie, quod ad eorum pervenit noticiam, quod 
 multi de ordinibus tam priores, quam monachi, in 
 diversis partibus constituti ante et post religionis 
 ingressum in diaconatus vel subdiaconatus ordinibus 
 soluramodo existentes, confessiones plurium tam in 
 necessitatis quam etiam forsan in non necessitatis
 
 Documents. 181 
 
 articulo audiverunt, eosque prout poterant absolver- 
 unt per simplicitatem et ignoranciam iuris; confisi 
 eorum aliqui post religionis ingressum se esse abso- 
 lutos privilegio felicis recordationis domini Alex- 
 andri pape predecessoris vestri, per quod concessit 
 dicto ordini, quod singuli priores in conventibus sibi 
 commissis fratribus constitutis ibidem absolvere et 
 dispensations indigentibus a quibuscumque excom- 
 municationis sententiis irregularitatibus possint ab- 
 solutionis et dispensationis beneficium impertiri, nisi 
 adeo gravis et enormis esset excessus, quod merito 
 essent ad sedem apostolicam destinandi. Quidam 
 etiam expredictis ante ingressum beneficia ecclesias- 
 tica, etiam curata, receperunt fructus percipientes 
 eorum, et se fecerunt ad sacerdocium promoveri 
 divina ofHcia celebrantes, et quidam eorum promoti 
 sunt ad officia prioratuum conventualium et priores 
 alios promoverunt. Unde supplicant idem prior et 
 conventus pro se et aliis fratribus et prioribus or- 
 dinis prelibati, ut, cum difficile sit eis pro casibus 
 supradictis apostolicam sedem adire, quatinus com- 
 mictere dignemini prioribus singulis, quod fratres 
 sibi commissos, vicariis vero, quod omnes et singu- 
 los predictos priores absolvere valeant et dispensare 
 cum eis, im posita eis penitencia salutari a casibus 
 supradictus et quibuscumque sententiis excommuni- 
 cationis, suspensionis et interdicti, quas incurrere 
 potuerunt, licet non recolant, decimas non solvendo 
 vel alias in casibus contentis in iure. conciliis vel 
 synodis, de gratia speciali dispensantes ; quod si qui 
 priores in casibus tangantur predictis, possint in 
 eorum prioratibus remanere et ministrare, non ob- 
 stantibus constitutionibus quibuscumque.
 
 1 82 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Fiat hac vice, suspensis ad tempus prout viderint 
 expedire ; exceptis irregularitatibus ex homicidio vel 
 mutilatione contractis. R. 
 
 Et supplicant, fieri per litteras domini . . Albanen. 
 
 Fiat R. 
 
 The date of the petition is missing, the one follow- 
 ing is signed : 
 
 Dat. Avinion. VI idus lanuarii anno secundo, 
 which date will probably also apply to the above 
 supplication. 
 
 21. 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI. nominated the Cardinal GUIL- 
 ELMUS DE CURTE OCisx. vulgariter nuncupatns 
 Albus, as commissioner and judge against the Flo- 
 rentines, who would not mind the Interdict and 
 refused to give to Cardinal PETRUS COMETH, Bishop 
 of Sabina, assistance in his claim against the bank- 
 ing house of the Accaiuoli. The Commissioner was 
 given full power, in which it is worthy of note that 
 he could summon the Florentines quotiens opus erit 
 per edictum inanis maioris ecclcsiac A-renioncnsis 
 affigendum, as no one would venture to bear the 
 summonses to Florence proptcr ciz'hun Florcntin- 
 orum saevitiam. 
 
 Reg. Supplic. Tom. n fol. CXVIIv. 
 On margin Extra de institia 
 
 Avenione 1346 Augusti 4 
 
 Beatissime pater, Licet religiosus vir frater Pe- 
 trus de Aquila ordinis Minorum magister in sacra 
 pagina inquisitor heretice pravitatis in provincia 
 Tuscie per Sanctitatem Vestram executor specialiter 
 deputatus ad exequendum sententias in Romana
 
 Documents. 183 
 
 Curia latas pro reverendo patre domino episcopo 
 Sabinensi et contra socios societatis Acciaiolorum 
 de Florencia cum potestate invocandi auxilium 
 brachii secularis et per censuram ecclesiasticam 
 compellendi et etiam subiciendi civitatem Floren- 
 tinam eiusque districtum ecclesiastico interdicto, ip- 
 sam civitatem eiusque districtum propter civitatis 
 et regencium inobedienciam ecclesiastico supposue- 
 rit interdicto et extunc dicta civitas fuerit et sit in- 
 terdicta. Tamen episcopus Florentin. et nonnulli 
 abbates et prelati regulares et seculares ac religiosi 
 et clerici predicte civitatis Florentine dictum inter- 
 dictum temere violando divina officia non verentur in 
 contemptum clavium et sedis apostolice non sine 
 gravi Dei offensa et iuris died cardinalis preiudicio, 
 publice in eorum ecclesiis prophanare et facere pro- 
 phanari. Quapropter dignetur Sanctitas Vestra 
 alicui de reverendis patribus dominis cardinalibus 
 commictere et mandare, quatinus contra predictos 
 sic graviter excedentes procedat et inventos culpa- 
 biles puniat iuxta canonicas xanctiones (sic), et 
 nichilominus iuris remediis eos coga ad servandum 
 ecclesiasticum interdictum ; et quod possit procedere 
 summarie, simpliciter et de piano sine strepitu iudi- 
 cii et figura, non obstantibus feriis et cum potestate 
 citandi eosdem semel et pluries extra Curiam et ad 
 partes, quociens opus erit, etiam per editum (sic) 
 ianuis maioris ecclesie Avinion. affigendum, cum 
 propter civitim seviciam citaciones predicte ad 
 partes illas comode fieri non sperentur; etiam si 
 huiusmodi cause non sint de sui natura vel alias ad 
 Romanam Curiam devolute et in ea tractande et
 
 184 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 finiende, constitutione, que incipit: Cum in multis, 
 et qualibet alia in contrarium edita non obstantibus. 
 
 Fiat ut petitur. R. 
 
 Per cardinalem Album. R. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. II non. Augusti anno quinto. 
 22. 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI. grants to the Inquisitorial 
 Notary, JOHANNES DE SPINALO TULLEN, diocceseos, 
 at the petition of the Inquisitor AYMO DE CALVO- 
 MONTE OPRAED, a canonship with prebendary, the 
 revenues of which he should draw for three years, 
 without residence, if during that time he was in the 
 service of the Inquisition. 
 
 Reg. Supplicat. Tom. 8 fol. ** XVIUr 
 
 Avenione 1346 lanuarii 4 
 Sanctissime Pater, nuper concessistis gratiam 
 lohanni de Spinalo presbitero Tullen. diocesis dilec- 
 to et fideli servitori ac notario devoti et humilis 
 servitoris vestri fratris Aymonis de Calvomonte 
 ordinis Predicatorum inquisitoris Carcassonen. de 
 canonicatu et prebenda ac officio scolastrie ecclesie 
 Sancti Deodati ad Romanam Ecclesiam nullo medio 
 pertinentis dicte Tullen. diocesis etc. et quorum 
 annui redditus quinquaginta libr. Turon. parvorum 
 secundum taxam decime valorem annuum non ex- 
 cedunt, non obstante, quod dictus lohannes par- 
 rochialem ecclesiam de Foyssiaco Senonen, diocesis 
 noscitur obtinere. Cum autem postmodum sit re- 
 pertum, quod vos XHIIa die Aprilis pontificatus 
 vestri anno secundo beneficia magistri Alardi can- 
 onici Tullen, collationi vestre reservastis, quo tern- 
 pore dictus Alardus, qui communiter interdum
 
 Documents. 185 
 
 Alardus, et interdum Ecardus in illis partibus vo- 
 cabatur, etiam dicte ecclesie Sancti Deodati canon- 
 icus prebendatus et decanus existebat etc. supplicat 
 idem inquisitor eidem S. V. quatinus Eadem Sanc- 
 titas dignetur concedere et mandare fieri litteras 
 sub data predicte gratie etc. 
 
 Fiat R. 
 
 Et sub ilia data si sint idem canonicatus et pre- 
 benda, qui tune sibi dati fuerunt R. 
 
 Item supplicat idem inquisitor quatinus eidem 
 lohanni indulgere dignemini gratiose, ut quamdiu 
 dicto inquisitori vel alio inquisitori in dicto officio 
 inquisicionis fideliter servierit et devote in dicta 
 parrochiali ecclesia ac canonicatibus et prebendis 
 quarumcunque ecclesiarum etc. vel imposterum ob- 
 tinebit, non teneatur personaliter residere etc. ac si 
 resideret personaliter in eisdem etc. 
 
 Fiat ad triennium R. 
 
 Et quod transeant sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. II non. lanuarii anno quarto. 
 
 23- 
 
 Pope CLEMENT VI. appoints frater MICHAEL 
 DOMINI LAPI DE FLORENTIA to be inquisitor of 
 Florence for two years. The Minister General of 
 Franciscans, who made the proposition, adds there- 
 to nisi interim ratione excessus vel delectus in of- 
 ficio sedi apostolicae vel ministro generali ordinis 
 sui videretur amovendus. 
 
 jry 
 Reg. Supplicat. Tom. 10 foly n VJr 
 
 Avenione 1347 Aprilis 27 
 Supplicat Sanctitatem Vestram humilis creatura
 
 1 86 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 vestra frater Fortanerius ordinis Minorum minister 
 generalis, quatinus fratrem Michaelem domini Lapi 
 de Florencia inquisitorem placeat instituere Floren- 
 tie ad duos annos continues, nisi, quod absit. in- 
 terim racione excessus vel defectus in officio sedi 
 apostolice vel ministro generali ordinis sui videretur 
 amovendus. 
 Fiat R. 
 
 Item quod transeat sine alia lectione. Fiat R. 
 Dat. Avinion. V kal. Maii anno quinto. 
 
 24. 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. appoints RAYMUNDUS, the 
 Abbot of St. NICOLAUS in Litore at Venice, to the 
 nunciature in upper Italy and on the coast of Dal- 
 matia, quod exigat ab inquisitoribiis tertiam partem 
 bonorum confiscatorum et duas paries condemna- 
 tionum. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 242 foL XV Iv. 
 
 Inquisitorum duarum partium exactio. Quod iste 
 nuncius exigat ab inquisitoribus heretice pra- 
 vitatis terciam partem bonorum confiscatorum 
 et duas panes condcmpnaciomim. 
 
 Avenione 1353 Februarii 2 
 Innocentius etc. dilecto filio Raymundo abbati 
 monasterii Sancti Nicolai in litore de Veneciis OSB. 
 Castellan, diocesis apostolice sedis nuncio salutem 
 et apostolicam benedictionem. 
 Cum bonorum confiscatorum. 
 Dat. Avinion. IIII non. Februarii pontificatus 
 nostri anno primo. 
 
 25- 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. directs FRANCIS DE MESSANA 
 OPRAED, inquisitor in the kingdom of Naples, to
 
 Documents. 187 
 
 take energetic measures against the heretics who 
 had fled to Calabria, in order that the evil may not 
 further spread. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 237 fol. CXVIr. 
 
 Avenione 1355 J un " 6 
 
 Dilecto filio Francisco de Messana ordinis Pre- 
 dicatorum, inquisitori heretice pravitatis in 
 regno Sicilie auctoritate apostolica deputato 
 salutem etc. 
 
 Innotuit nobis, quod quorundam hereticorum in- 
 sana et maxima multitude de diversis nationibus et 
 partibus congregata, metu pene temporalis, quam 
 eternis ignibus anteponit, ad quandam extremam 
 Sicilie regni partem, que provincia Calabrie nuncu- 
 patur, aufugit, sperans . inibi eo nequicie sue venena 
 se latius effusuram, eoque nocituram peramplius, 
 quo, ut confidit, inhabitantium terram illam pura 
 simplicitas a tenebrarum filiis, qui attestante veri- 
 tate prudentiores sunt in generatione sui filiis lucis, 
 incaute facilius capietur. Quorum dampnabili et 
 dampnando proposito eo est cautius et solicitius 
 occurendum, quo ex ipsorum pestifero semine, si. 
 quod avertat Dominus, illud inibi spargi contingeret. 
 seges pernitiosior pulularet. Ideoque discretioni 
 tue per apostolica scripta districte precipiendo man- 
 damus, quatinus ad partes illas te personaliter con- 
 feras, et zelo Dei Eiusque fidei fervore succensus, 
 exequens officii tui partes adversus errores ipsius 
 prophane multitudinis sic exurgas viriliter sicque 
 illos fake catholice veritatis studiose resecare pro- 
 cures, quod, eis omnino confutatis atque succisis, 
 ipsius vere fidei verum lumen errorum nebulas et 
 tenebras fugans eniteat clarius etc. Ut autem in
 
 1 88 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 premissis eo efficacius proficere valeas, quo majori 
 fueris auxilio communitus, discretion! tue invocandi 
 ad hoc, si opus fuerit, venerabilium fratrum nostro- 
 rum archiepiscoporum et episcoporum ac dilectorum 
 filiorum electorum, abbatum et clericorum ac per- 
 sonarum ecclesiasticarum, necnon comitum, baro- 
 num, nobilium, universitatum et communitatum 
 dicte provincie auxilium, consilium et favorem ple- 
 nam concedimus tenore presentium potestatem. 
 Dat. Avinion. VIII idus Junii anno tercio. 
 
 26. 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. commends the Bishop of 
 Castello (Venice), NICOLAUS MOROSINI, for having 
 so efficiently supported the Inquisitor, MICHAEL OF 
 PISA. He exhorts him to continue in his faithful- 
 ness. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 238 fol. LVIIr. 
 
 Avenione 1356 Maii i 
 Venerabili fratri . . episcopo Castellan, salutem 
 
 etc. 
 
 Dilecti filii inquisitoris heretice pravitatis in ipsis 
 partibus auctoritate apostolica deputati grata nobis 
 insinuatione comperimus, quod tu sibi in executione 
 favorabili commissi ei officii salutaribus consiliis et 
 efficacibus auxiliis adversus quosdam contra illud 
 molientibus aliqua astitisti. Super quo fraterni- 
 tatem tuam uberibus gratiarum accionibus prose- 
 quentes illam attente precamur, quatinus sic eidem 
 inquisitori continues favores et auxilia consueta, 
 quod ipse ad laudem Dei et honorem ipsius fidei 
 commissum sibi officium huiusmodi utiliter exequa- 
 tur. 
 
 Datum Avinion. kal. Maii anno quarto.
 
 Documents. 189 
 
 27. 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. commands the inquisitor, 
 MICHAEL OF PISA, to compel the notables and the 
 public officials of Venice and of Treviso to desist, 
 under all circumstances, from hindering the work of 
 the Inquisition. 
 Reg. Fat. Tom. 238 fol. CLXXXIIr. 
 
 Avenione 1356 Septembris 16 
 Dilecto filio Michaeli Pisani ordinis fratrum 
 Minorum inquisitori heretice pravitatis 
 Venetiis Castellane diocesis et in Marchia 
 Tervisina auctoritate apostolica deputato 
 salutem etc. 
 
 Molesta quorundam insinuatio ad nostrum per- 
 duxit auditum, quod in locis et partibus, in quibus 
 es inquisitor pravitatis heretice auctoritate apos- 
 tolica deputatus, sunt nonnulli nobiles et alie singu- 
 lares persone necnon universitates et communia 
 civitatum, castrorum, villarum et aliorum locorum, 
 que tuis in officio inquisitionis pravitatis ipsius pre- 
 decessoribus et precessoribus et tibi etiam obstiter- 
 unt in executione ipsius officii in grave fidei chris- 
 tiane dispendium, Dei contumeliam et apostolice 
 sedis opprobrium et contemptum. Cupientes igitur 
 huic morbo necessariam adhibere medelam, discre- 
 tion! tue per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatinus 
 nobiles et personas ac universitates et communia 
 predicta omnia et singula, quod ab omni impedi- 
 mento prestando tibi in ipsius executione officii seu 
 circa illam omnino desistant, per censuram ecclesias- 
 ticam et penas alias a iure statutas auctoritate nostra 
 appellatione cessante compellas. Non obstante, si 
 nobilibus personis, universitatibus et communitati-
 
 IQO Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 bus ipsis aut quibusvis aliis communiter vel divisim 
 a sede apostolica sit indultum, quod interdici sus- 
 pend! vel excommunicari non possint per litteras 
 apostolicas non facientes plenam et expressam ac de 
 verbo ad verbum de indulto huiusmodi mentionem. 
 Datum Avinion. XV'I kal. Octobris anno quarto. 
 
 28. 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. severely censures MICHAEL 
 OF PISA, the Inquisitor of Venice and Treviso, be- 
 cause, on account of the support given to heretics by 
 notables and authorities, he had delayed to the 
 present time to proceed against them. He directs 
 him to make up for this tardiness with all his power 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 238 fol CLXXXIv. 
 
 Avenione 1356 Septembris 16 
 Dilecto filio Michaeli Pisani ordinis fratrum 
 Minorum inquisitori heretice pravitatis Ven- 
 etiis Castellane diocesis et in Marchia Ter- 
 visina auctoritate apostolica deputato salu- 
 tem etc. 
 
 Ad audientiam nostram pervenit, quod Venetiis 
 Castellane diocesis et in Marchia Tervisina, ubi es 
 inquisitor pravitatis heretice auctoritate apostolica 
 deputatus, sunt nonnulli pravitatis huiusmodi labe 
 respersi, contra quos hucusque officii tui pro eo 
 exercere debitum distulisti, quod quorundam poten- 
 tum indebitis favoribus adiuvantur. Cum autem 
 non sit deferendum homini contra Deum, discretioni 
 tue, cuius nobis desidia nocitura multum molesta 
 redditur vehementer, per apostolica scripta districte 
 precipiendo mandamus, quatinus tam contra hereti- 
 cos ipsos, quam contra fautores et receptatores 
 eorum omnes et singulos cuiuscumque ordinis, con-
 
 Documents. 191 
 
 ditionis, preminentie, dignitatis aut status extiterint, 
 sic Deum solum, cuius causam ages, habendo pre 
 oculis, huiusmodi officii tui debitum exequaris, quod 
 nulla possis negligentie nota redargui, quinimo apud 
 Deum eterne glorie mercedem uberem et nostre 
 plenitudinem gratie uberius consequi merearis. 
 
 Datum Avinion. XVI kal. Octobris anno quarto. 
 29. 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. charges PETER, Archbishop 
 of Benevent and Nuncio in the kingdom of Naples, 
 to proceed with all means against former and present 
 Inquisitors who have withheld from the Apostolic 
 Chamber its share in confiscations and penances, 
 and to render minute report. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 239 fol. XXV Ir. 
 
 Avenione 1359 Februarii 16 
 
 Venerabili fratri Petro archiepiscopo Bene- 
 
 ventan. apostolice sedis nuntio salutem etc. 
 
 Molesta nobis habet quorumdam relacio, quod 
 nonnulli inquisitores heretice pravitatis, qui fuerunt 
 pro tempore, et hii etiam, qui nunc sunt in regno 
 Sicilie seu Terra citra Farum, nunciis apostolicis, 
 qui fuerunt in eisdem regno seu Terra et tibi etiam 
 de bonis receptis per eos ratione criminis heresis 
 confiscatis racionem reddere ac porcionem, que de 
 bonis ipsis debetur apostolice camere, assignare in- 
 debite recusarunt et recusant in preiudicium camere 
 memorate. Super quo de oportuno volentes reme- 
 dio etc. exigere ac recipere non postponas. Con- 
 tradictores etc. Non obstantibus etc. Ceterum, quia, 
 sicut displicenter audivimus, quidam ex inquisitori- 
 bus ipsis commissum eis inquisicionis officium pro 
 animarum salute institutum salubriter ad questum
 
 192 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 dampnabiliter persepe convertunt, et nonnumquam 
 pretereuntes noxios et innoxios aggravantes, tarn 
 expugnandis heresibus, quam viciis, prodolor, in- 
 serendis intendunt, ex quo tumultus frequenter in 
 populis et scandala oriuntur, in mandatis adicimus, 
 ut per te vel alium seu alios, eciam de hiis omnibus 
 summarie, simpliciter et de piano ac sine strepitu 
 et figura iudicii te informans, quicquid per informa- 
 tionem huiusmodi te reperire contingent et que- 
 cumque in premissis omnibus egeris, significare no- 
 bis tuis litteris non omittas, ut referente te cognos- 
 camus et disponamus consulcius medelam huic mor- 
 bo congruam adhibendam. 
 
 Datum Avinion. XIIII kal. Marcii anno quinto. 
 
 30. 
 
 Pope INNOCENT VI. directs his chaplain, AR- 
 NALDUS DE MOLERIIS, Canon of Tours, to proceed 
 with rigor against all former and present Inquisitors 
 of Upper Italy, who have withheld from the Apos- 
 tolic Chamber its share in properties quac rationc 
 criminus haeresis confiscata sunt, and who commit- 
 ted various other transgressions, and to submit an 
 exact account of the same to the Curia. 
 Reg. Vat. Tom. 239 fol. CLXIIIr. 
 
 Avenione 1359 Julii 23. 
 Dilecto filio Arnaldo de Moleriis canonico 
 
 Turonen. utriusque Juris doctori capellano 
 
 nostro salutem et cetera. 
 
 Perduxit ad nos frequens multorum fidedigna re- 
 latio, quod inquisitores heretice pravitatis in parti- 
 bus Lambardie (sic) et Tuscie ac Riparia Jannen. 
 et Marchia Tervisin. auctoritate apostolica deputati 
 de bonis, que ratione criminis heresis confiscata
 
 Documents. 193 
 
 sunt, portionem camere nostre debitam assignare 
 contempserunt hactenus et contempnunt, quodque 
 nonnulli eorum commissi eis officii limites exceden- 
 tes, gravant frequenter innoxios et noxios impune 
 plerumque relinquunt. Cum autem te ad partes 
 Jllas pro quibusdam nostris et Ecclesie Romane per 
 nos tibi commissis negociis destinemus, nos indemp- 
 nitati prefate camere providere ac dictorum inqui- 
 sitorum licenciam et incuriarn cohibere volentes, dis- 
 cretioni tue per apostolica scripta mandamus, qua- 
 tinus de hiis omnibus summarie, simpliciter et de 
 piano ac sine strepitu et figura iudicii te informans, 
 quicquid de huiusmodi porcione bonorum confisca- 
 torum huiusmodi eidem camere, ut prefertur, debita 
 inveneris per inquisitores eosdem camere prefate 
 deberi, ab inquisitoribus ipsis, etiam si sint ab in- 
 quisitionis officio revocati, petere, exigere ac reci- 
 pere cum integritate procures. Contradictores etc. 
 Non obstantibus etc. Seu si aliquibus etc. Nos enim 
 tibi absolvendi, quitandi et liberandi plene ac libere 
 illos, a quibus porcionem seu residua porcionis 
 huiusmodi recipere te continget, de hiis duntaxat, 
 que receperis ab eisdem, volentesque tarn de hiis, 
 que, ut prefertur, receperis, quam de hiis, que de ex- 
 cessibus inquisitorum invenies predictorum, nos et 
 cameram ipsam per scripturas autenticas certos red- 
 das. 
 Datum Avinion. X kal. Augusti anno quinto. 
 
 31- 
 
 Pope URBAN V. commissions the Cardinal RAI- 
 MUNDUS DE CANILHACO, of the Order of Augustin- 
 ian Hermits, to discharge summarie the following 
 matter: In the Val Pute of the Archbishopric
 
 194 Henry diaries Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 Embrun, difficult of access and very poor, heretics 
 have settled down, who only from time to time 
 are disturbed by Inquisitors, who are unable to re- 
 main there permanently to root out the evil. The 
 rectors of parishes draw manualia which are in- 
 sufficient for their sustenance, so that they are 
 obliged to work for their support. They do not 
 draw the tithes as they belong to the Augustinian 
 Prior of Vulci and to others. Of these tithes it is 
 proposed that enough be retained to support in fu- 
 ture personae idoneae et literatae, to whom the 
 parishes shall be assigned, so that they may be en- 
 abled to proceed successfully against the heretics. 
 Also, on account of the favoring of the heretics by 
 quidam potcntes, processes may take place extra 
 loca, and a Cardinal should be commissioned with 
 the punishment of the potentes. 
 Reg. Vat. Supplic. 43 fol. CCLXXIIIr. 
 On left margin, twice, De iustitia 
 
 Avenione 1366 Augusti 5. 
 
 Beatissime pater, In valle que dicitur Pute dio- 
 cesis Ebredunensis et in quibusdam aliis locis cir- 
 cumvicinis viguerunt longis temporibus zizania 
 heretice pravitatis, et licet tarn per ordinarios quam 
 per inquisitores aliquotiens facti fuerint correctiones 
 et puniciones plurium hereticorum in dictis locis, 
 tamen non evulsis radicibus semper pullulant redi- 
 viva, quod ex eo potissimum videtur procedere, quia 
 propter locorum predictorum totaliter agrestium 
 sterilitatem, incommoditatem et paupertatem, nulli 
 sunt ibi viri litterati, nee aliunde accedunt, et pau- 
 peres curati parrochialium ecclesiarum propter ten- 
 uitatem ipsarum coguntur potius laborare et vivere
 
 > Documents. 195 
 
 de laboribus manuum suarum, quam vacare ad ad- 
 discendum vel docendum scripturas et alia salubria 
 et necessaria pro suis parrochianis. Dyocesani vero 
 vel inquisitores in transitu perfunctorio parum pos- 
 sunt proficere et tamen diucius ibi manere non pos- 
 sent, cumque decime dictarum ecclesiarum parroch- 
 ialium non per earum rectores, set per diversos 
 earum patronos ecclesiasticos percipiantur, et pre- 
 sertim per prepositum Vulciensem Taurinensis dio- 
 cesis ordinis S. Augustini in octo vel decem pa- 
 rochiis et per quosdam alios in aliis, ita quod quasi 
 in tota dicta valle Pute et locis circumvicinis rec- 
 tores seu vicarii curam animarum exercentes solum 
 habent oblaciones manuales, et vix inde vivere pos- 
 sunt, propter quod nullus litteratus homo vult re- 
 cipere ecclesias seu curas illas, supplicatur S. V., 
 quatinus commictere dignemini et mandare alicui 
 vel aliquibus, de quibus E. S. videbitur, quatinus 
 de predictis decimis talem porcionem ecclesiis, a 
 quarum parrochiis vel parrochianis recipiuntur, 
 auctoritate apostolica faciant assignari, quod de 
 cetero ad earum regimen possint persone ydonee et 
 litterate secundum locorum ipsorum exigentiam et 
 parrochianorum necessitate inveniri et ordinari, nee 
 alii in eisdem ecclesiis quomodolibet instituantur. 
 Non obstantibus consuetudinibus, ordinacionibus, 
 concessionibus, privilegiis prescriptionibus vel sta- 
 tutis contrariis quibuscumque iuramento vel con- 
 firmacione sedis apostolice, aut quacumque alia 
 firmitate vallatis, et cum aliis clausulis oportunis. 
 
 Audiat vocata parte cardinalis de Canilhaco. 
 
 Item cum quidam potentes non permictant in locis 
 predictis contra dictos hereticos debite procedi per
 
 196 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 ordinaries vel inquisitores, nee ipsos trahi extra loca 
 predicta, sed per modos et vias exquisitas impediunt 
 processus et execuciones fieri contra eos, dignetur 
 eadem S. V. commictere alicui vel aliquibus de 
 dominis cardinalibus, quod possint contra dictos po- 
 tentes et quoscumque fautores ipsorum procedere 
 prout eis videbitur. 
 
 Placet de predicto cardinali. 
 
 Item quod in premissis omnibus et singulis pro- 
 cedatur summarie et de piano et sine strepitu et 
 figura judicii ac etiam sine libello vel quocumque 
 processu iudiciali, set solum proposita veritate facti 
 per modum articulorum et recepta in formatione, de 
 qua videbitur commissario per E. S. deputando, et 
 cum potestate citandi semel et pluries extra curiam 
 et ad partes. Et cum aliis clausulis oportunis. 
 
 Fiat B. 
 
 Dat. Avinion. tercio non. Augusti anno quarto. 
 32- 
 
 The Inquisitor of Carcassonne, GUILELMUS MILI- 
 TIS, receives from the Apostolic Chamber forty gold 
 florins, the costs of a journey and maintenance. 
 Introitus et Exitus Camerae Tom. 321 fol. 6?v. 
 
 1366 Decembris 16. 
 
 Extraordinaria. Die eadem soluti fuerunt de 
 dicto mandato fratri Guillermo Militis magistro in 
 theologia inquisitor! heretice pravitatis in partibus 
 Carcasson. pro expensis per ipsum factis eundo 
 Carcassonam et deinde ad Avinionem redeundo 
 super certis informationibus ibidem factis in facto 
 dicte heretice (sic), ratione cuius III fuerunt nuper 
 hie in curia condempnati heretici, X floren. Et 
 pro aliis expensis suis, quas hie fecit de dicto man-
 
 Documents. 197 
 
 dato pro eodem facto per quinque septimanas con- 
 
 tinuas XXX floren. Summa soluta pro premissis 
 
 est, ipso domino inquisitor! manualiter recipiente, 
 
 XL floren. ad graylet. 
 
 33- 
 
 The Apostolic Chamber pays to Magister JACOBUS 
 DE AVENIONE the sum of forty-five chamber flor- 
 ins, for copying work relating to the process of the 
 condemned heretic PETRUS GARILHI, burned at the 
 stake in Avignon, and of his likewise condemned 
 fellow culprits. 
 Introitus et E.ritus Camerae Tom. 321 fol. ?6r. 
 
 1376 Januarii 6. 
 
 Extraordinaria. Die eadem soluti fuerunt de 
 mandate domini camerarii domini nostri pape 
 magistro Jacobo Core notario de Avinione pro II C 
 foliis processus facti per eum contra Petrum Gar- 
 ilhi condam hereticum condempnatum de heresi et 
 combustum in Avinione et quosdam suos complices 
 ac hereticos condempnatos, item et pro labore ipsius 
 CXXXIIII dierum quibus idem magister Jacobus 
 etiam inquisitiones factas contra predictos hereticos 
 in Romana Curia vacavit, et pro abreviatione dicti 
 processus et ordinatione II sententiarum latarum 
 ac aliis laboribus per eum factis etiam predicta, 
 ipso manualiter recipiente 
 
 XLV floren. cam. 
 34- 
 
 Pope Pius II. allows to JOHANNES OF BURGUNDY, 
 Bishop of Cambrai. to appoint pro hac vice dum- 
 ta.rat MICHAEL DE MARICOLIS OPRAED, as Inquisi- 
 tor for his diocese. This is done to take from de- 
 linquents the excuse that the Inquisitor of Rheims 
 be not competent, since city and diocese of Cambrai,
 
 198 Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. 
 
 although located in the Church province of Rheims, 
 were subject to the German empire, and as part of 
 the diocese belonged to the Dominican province of 
 France and the other part to that of Germany there 
 ensued constantly disputes as to competency, preju- 
 dicial to matters of faith. 
 Reg. Lat. Tom. 594 fol. CXLIIIIv. 
 
 On left margin P, right A. de Cortesiis 
 Romae apud Sanctum Petrum 1463 Octobris n. 
 Pius etc. venerabili fratri Johanni episcopo 
 Cameracensi salutem. Ad ea ex. 
 Cum itaque, sicut exhibita nobis nuper pro parte 
 tua peticio continebat, licet civitas et diocesis 
 Cameracenses infra provinciam Remensem esse 
 censeantur, et sub imperio et non in regno Francie 
 constitute shit, et eciam secundum distinctionem 
 provinciarum ac consuetudinem fratrum ordinis 
 Predicatorum una pars tue diocesis in provincia 
 Francie et alia pars in imperio computentur, nichil- 
 ominus interdum evenit, quod, dum inquisitor here- 
 tice pravitatis provincie Francie auctoritate apos- 
 tolica deputatus contra aliquem de dictis civitate 
 et diocesi, qui eciam secundum huiusmodi consuetu- 
 dinem fratum Predicatorum sub iurisdictione in- 
 quisitorum provincie Francie comprehendi debetur, 
 in causis concernentibus fidem procedere attempt- 
 ant, contra quem procedendum foret, asserens se 
 non subditum regni Francie sed sub imperio ex- 
 istere, iudicium inquisitoris huiusmodi evadit et 
 illudit et eciam, si inquisitor Alamanie sub imperio 
 deputatus inquisicionem contra talem attemptet, 
 idem inquirendus sub colore, quod se de provincia 
 Francie secundum consuetudinem fratrum Predi-
 
 Documents. 191. 
 
 catorum huiusmodi esse dicit, similiter eius iudicium 
 evadit. Unde cum dubium sit, quis inquisitorum 
 eorundem contra personas tuarum civitatis et dio- 
 cesis predictarum inquirere debeat, nobis humiliter 
 supplicasti, ut ad huiusmodi submovendum dubium 
 tibi deputandi inquisitorem heretice pravitatis in 
 civitate et diocesi antedictis facultatem concedere 
 dignaremur. 
 
 Nos, ne cause fidei per dilatorias excepciones 
 impediri valeant, sed ut in ipsis celerius procedatur, 
 proinde cupientes fraternitati tue deputandi, con- 
 stituendi et ordinandi auctoritate nostra hac vice 
 duntaxat, dilectum filium Michaelem de Maricolis 
 dicti ordinis fratrum Predicatorum et theologie 
 professorem in tuis civitate et diocesi inquisitorem 
 heretice pravitatis, ac districtius inhibendi generali, 
 provincialibus et prioribus dicti ordinis eorumque 
 vicariis et aliis quibuscunque, quorum interest, ne 
 prefatum Michaelem ab officio inquisicionis huius- 
 modi removere aut revocare, seu suspendere, vel in 
 exercicio eiusdem officii impedire quoquo modo 
 presumant, decernendi quoque irritum et inane, si 
 secus super hiis a quoquam quavis auctoritate 
 scienter vel ignoranter contigerit attemptari. Non 
 obstantibus statutis et consuetudinibus dicti ordinis, 
 iuramento, confirmatione apostolica vel quavis 
 firmitate alia roboratis ceterisque contrariis quibus- 
 cunque, plenam et liberam auctoritate apostolica 
 tenore presencium concedimus facultatem. 
 
 Datum Rome apud Sanctumpetrum anno Incar- 
 nationis Dominice millesimo quadringentesimo 
 sexagesimo tercio, quinto idus Octobris anno sexto. 
 
 P. XXVI. de Varris.
 
 2oo Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings. * 
 
 35- 
 
 In 1550 the bona haereticorum were divided in 
 Rome into three parts, of which two were assigned 
 to descendants, and the third to the Apostolic Cham- 
 ber for the support of Inquisitors and their officials. 
 Arm. XI caps. VI. cap. 29. 
 
 Circa annum 1550. 
 In a petition for the inquisitio Urbis we read : 
 
 Quod bona hereticorum dividantur in tres partes, 
 quarum due dentur filiis, tertia vero applicetur 
 camere Sanctitatis Vestre pro substentatione in- 
 quisitorum et aliorum ad idem officium pertinen- 
 tium.
 
 Tbe only up-to-date work on the Roman Court. Revised 
 according to the changes made by recent Papal decrees. 
 
 PROCEDURE 
 
 AT THE 
 
 ROMAN CURIA 
 
 By the VERY REV. NICHOLAS HILLING, D.D. 
 
 Professor at the University of Bonn. 
 
 New and Revised Edition 
 
 Cloth, Gilt Top, Net, $1 .75. 
 
 WHAT THIS BOOK CONTAINS: 
 
 History and Development of the 
 Ecclesiastical Government. 
 
 Present Constitution of the Papal 
 Curia. 
 
 Enumeration of Papal Officials 
 and the Scope of their Offices. 
 
 The Departments of the Curia. 
 Consistory, Congregations, Com- 
 missions, Secretariates, Cancel- 
 laria, Dataria, Sacra Poenitentiaria , 
 Rota, Camera, Signafura Jastttiat., 
 etc. 
 
 The Competency of Each of these 
 Departments. 
 
 The Procedures at the Various 
 
 Congregations, etc. 
 Decisions and their Technical 
 
 Terms. 
 The Practical Intercourse with 
 
 the Curia. 
 
 The Civil Procedure at the Curia. 
 The Penal Procedure at the Curia. 
 Appeals to the Curia. 
 Summary Procedure at Episcopal 
 
 Courts. 
 Important Decrees and Rescripts 
 
 WHAT THE REVIEWERS SAT: 
 
 "A useful handbook on the various Roman congregations and on the 
 forms of procedure observed in them. It gives one a new insight into the 
 practical workings of that world-wide system of ecclesiastical legislation 
 which centers about the Roman See." The Independent. 
 
 "A clear account of all the Officials at the Papal Court in Rome. The 
 first part of the book will be found extremely useful by all who have to deal 
 with Catholic affairs. It gives the history of the various officials, from 
 cardinals down, explains their duties, describes the several congregations 
 and their functions, so that the great central organization of the church may 
 be understood. The book will be helpful to every one interested in European 
 politics." The Nero York San. 
 
 PUBLISHER, 
 9 Barclay St., New York
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 24139 
 
 ry
 
 000024646 2