No more summary verdict on the Inquisition can be given than the concluding words of its chief historian: “It introduced a system of jurisprudence which infected the criminal law of all the lands subjected to its influence, and rendered the administration of penal justice a grim mockery for centuries. It furnished the Holy See with a powerful weapon in aid of political aggrandizement. 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 trifling dissidence was capable of arousing insane fury and of convulsing Europe from end to end. On the other hand, when Atheism became fashionable in high places, its thunders were mute. Energetic 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 reparation were doubt as to the accuracy of the Church’s knowledge and attendance on the Sabbath. 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 impartial history must be that the Inquisition was the monstrous offspring of mistaken zeal, utilized by selfish greed and lust of power to smother thehigher aspirations of humanity and stimulate its baser appetites.�[60]
This is a severe, but perhaps not unjust, verdict. Some allowance, however, must be made for the customs of an intolerant and semi-barbarous epoch. Catholic apologists are justified in claiming that the Inquisition should be judged in relation to the times in which it flourished. But this does not explain how it was that many men, both in the Church and out of it, were so much in advance of the Inquisition as to disapprove of people being put to death for their religious opinions. If Thomas Aquinas advocated the death penalty for heresy, several eminent Fathers of the Church deprecated it, holding persuasion to be the better method. Why was not the milder and more ancient view adopted? It is suicidal to admit that the Church held back from torture and death for centuries on the ground that they were inconsistent with the spirit of Christianity. The assertion clearly implies a recognition of the incompatibility of the spirit of Christianity with calculated cruelty, and if this recognition was confined to a few superior minds so much the worse for the Church which paid no heed to them. There is obvious insincerity in the plea that the Church adopted only with reluctance the fatal policy of persecution. It insisted on that policy, often against the remonstrances of the State. It claimed to be superior to the spirit of the age, yet, on its own admission, yielded to the inferior influence. In reality it did more; it actively and spontaneously made persecution a fine art, and coerced the State to carry out its behests. When the Church excuses its cruelty by pointing to the equal cruelty of the medieval State it omits to mention that the State did not persecute opinion as such. The Christian Church did.
Let it be admitted that the Inquisitors—at least originally—were well-intentioned men, who sought to promote religion as they understood it. The question arises, Did they understand religion rightly? To them religion was a complete and final revelation of a Divine will; the true faith could be one only as God was one; all who sought to disturb that faith, however good their intentions might be, were guilty of a sin worse than temporal rebellion. Have we nothing to learn from their awful error? If we may judge from theCatholic Encyclopædia, the Church of Rome has not learned much. The attitude of the Inquisitors is not in the least surprising when in the twentieth century we find persecution defended as a religious duty. Another of its writers, Father Guiraud, echoes De Maistre’s contention that the Church of Rome alone possesses the truth, and therefore has a right to be intolerant.[61]The spirit of orthodox clericalism unmistakably appears in the tendency common to all these Romanist apologists to gloss over with a few smooth and casuistical phrases the most appalling deeds of cold-blooded cruelty which the world has ever seen. The commonwealth, says Father Guiraud, “can no more recognize the maxim of unlimited and unbridled religious freedom than it can adopt the suicidal principle of irreligion.â€�[62]This implies that there is novia mediabetween the rejection of all religion and a blind acceptance of dogmatic authority, and involves a claim practically identical with that of the Inquisition. If religious persecution is excusable when the spirit of the age permits it, what are we to think of those who justify persecution in an age which deems it a blunder and a crime?
Achilli, Dr. G. G.Dealings with the Inquisition. 1851.
Addis and Arnold.A Catholic Dictionary.
Balmez, Rev. J.European Civilization. 1868.
Buckle, H. T.History of Civilization in England. 3 vols.
De Maistre, J. M.Letters to a Russian Gentleman on the Spanish Inquisition. 1851.
Douais, C., Bishop of Beauvais.L’Inquisition. Paris, 1906.
Draper, J. W.History of the Intellectual Development of Europe.
Langlois, C. V.Histoire de l’Inquisition d’aprés des travaux récents. Paris, 1902.
Lea, H. C.History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages. 3 vols. 1906.
—— History of Sacerdotal Celibacy. 2 vols. 1907.
Lecky, W. E. H.History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe.
Limborch, P. van.History of the Inquisition. 1816.
Milman, Rev. H. H.History of Latin Christianity. 9 vols.
Motley, J. L.The Rise of the Dutch Republic.
Pastor, L.Lives of the Popes. 12 vols. 1891-1912.
Prescott, W. H.History of the Reign of Philip II.
Puigblanch, A.The Inquisition Unmasked. 1816.
Ranke, L. von.History of the Popes. 3 vols. 1908.
Rule, W. H.History of the Inquisition. 2 vols. 1874.
Tanon, L.Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France. Paris, 1893.
Vacandard, E.The Inquisition. 1908.
The Catholic Encyclopædia.
Encyclopædia Britannica.
Jewish Encyclopædia.
WATTS AND CO., PRINTERS,JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET,LONDON, E. C.
FOOTNOTES:[1]Addis and Arnold,Catholic Dictionary, p. 776.[2]H. C. Lea,History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, vol. iii, p. 630.[3]Lea, p. 639.[4]Ibid, p. 642.[5]Ibid, p. 644.[6]Ibid, p. 648.[7]Lea, p. 643.[8]Lea, p. 645.[9]H. C. Lea,History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. ii, p. 347.[10]Ibid., p. 319.[11]L. Tanon,Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France(1893), pp. 290, 306.[12]Lea,Inquisition of Middle Ages, vol. ii, p. 344.[13]Ibid., p. 330.[14]Milman,History of Latin Christianity, vol. ix, p. 36.[15]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 644.[16]Ibid., vol. ii, p. 346.[17]Lea,Inquisition in Middle Ages, vol. i, p. 70.[18]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 85.[19]Lea,Inquisition of Middle Ages, vol. i, p. 225.[20]The organization of the Medieval Inquisition was practically the same as, though less efficient than, that of the Spanish institution, which is explained in the author’sSpanish Inquisition.[21]Lea,op. cit.,vol. i, p. 228.[22]At a later date the Dominicans became known asDomini canes, or “dogs of the Lord.�[23]Hastings,Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics; art. “Inquisition.�[24]Addis and Arnold,A Catholic Dictionary; art. “Inquisition.�[25]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 430.[26]History of Latin Christianity, vol. v, p. 316.[27]Addis and Arnold,Catholic Dictionary, p. 459.[28]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 240.[29]Ranke,Lives of the Popes, vol. i, p. 144.[30]Motley,Rise of the Dutch Republic, part ii, ch. i.[31]Motley, part ii, ch. iii.[32]Ibid, part ii, ch. v.[33]Motley, part ii, ch. viii.[34]Motley, part ii, ch. v.[35]Motley, part ii, ch. x.[36]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 204.[37]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 318.[38]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 472.[39]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 530.[40]Lea, p. 534.[41]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 544.[42]Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism, vol. i, p. 3.[43]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 625.[44]Balmez,European Civilisation(London, 1855), p. 186.[45]Buckle,History of Civilisation, vol. i, p. 187.[46]Buckle, p. 189.[47]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 228.[48]Balmez,European Civilisation, p. 185.[49]Balmez, p. 181.[50]Pastor,Lives of the Popes, vol. iv, pp. 403-405.[51]Ibid, p. 402.[52]Inquisition, vol. i, p. 385.[53]C. Langlois,L’Inquisition, p. 65.[54]L. Tanon,Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France, p. 377.[55]Douais,L’Inquisition, p. 265 et seq.[56]Ibid, p. 273.[57]SeeThe Popes and their Church, by J. McCabe, page 211.[58]SeeDealings with the Inquisition, by Dr. G. G. Achilli (London, 1851).[59]Ibid, p. 392.[60]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 650.[61]Catholic Encyclopædia; art. “Toleration.�[62]Ibid.
FOOTNOTES:
[1]Addis and Arnold,Catholic Dictionary, p. 776.
[1]Addis and Arnold,Catholic Dictionary, p. 776.
[2]H. C. Lea,History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, vol. iii, p. 630.
[2]H. C. Lea,History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, vol. iii, p. 630.
[3]Lea, p. 639.
[3]Lea, p. 639.
[4]Ibid, p. 642.
[4]Ibid, p. 642.
[5]Ibid, p. 644.
[5]Ibid, p. 644.
[6]Ibid, p. 648.
[6]Ibid, p. 648.
[7]Lea, p. 643.
[7]Lea, p. 643.
[8]Lea, p. 645.
[8]Lea, p. 645.
[9]H. C. Lea,History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. ii, p. 347.
[9]H. C. Lea,History of Sacerdotal Celibacy, vol. ii, p. 347.
[10]Ibid., p. 319.
[10]Ibid., p. 319.
[11]L. Tanon,Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France(1893), pp. 290, 306.
[11]L. Tanon,Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France(1893), pp. 290, 306.
[12]Lea,Inquisition of Middle Ages, vol. ii, p. 344.
[12]Lea,Inquisition of Middle Ages, vol. ii, p. 344.
[13]Ibid., p. 330.
[13]Ibid., p. 330.
[14]Milman,History of Latin Christianity, vol. ix, p. 36.
[14]Milman,History of Latin Christianity, vol. ix, p. 36.
[15]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 644.
[15]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 644.
[16]Ibid., vol. ii, p. 346.
[16]Ibid., vol. ii, p. 346.
[17]Lea,Inquisition in Middle Ages, vol. i, p. 70.
[17]Lea,Inquisition in Middle Ages, vol. i, p. 70.
[18]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 85.
[18]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 85.
[19]Lea,Inquisition of Middle Ages, vol. i, p. 225.
[19]Lea,Inquisition of Middle Ages, vol. i, p. 225.
[20]The organization of the Medieval Inquisition was practically the same as, though less efficient than, that of the Spanish institution, which is explained in the author’sSpanish Inquisition.
[20]The organization of the Medieval Inquisition was practically the same as, though less efficient than, that of the Spanish institution, which is explained in the author’sSpanish Inquisition.
[21]Lea,op. cit.,vol. i, p. 228.
[21]Lea,op. cit.,vol. i, p. 228.
[22]At a later date the Dominicans became known asDomini canes, or “dogs of the Lord.�
[22]At a later date the Dominicans became known asDomini canes, or “dogs of the Lord.�
[23]Hastings,Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics; art. “Inquisition.�
[23]Hastings,Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics; art. “Inquisition.�
[24]Addis and Arnold,A Catholic Dictionary; art. “Inquisition.�
[24]Addis and Arnold,A Catholic Dictionary; art. “Inquisition.�
[25]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 430.
[25]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 430.
[26]History of Latin Christianity, vol. v, p. 316.
[26]History of Latin Christianity, vol. v, p. 316.
[27]Addis and Arnold,Catholic Dictionary, p. 459.
[27]Addis and Arnold,Catholic Dictionary, p. 459.
[28]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 240.
[28]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 240.
[29]Ranke,Lives of the Popes, vol. i, p. 144.
[29]Ranke,Lives of the Popes, vol. i, p. 144.
[30]Motley,Rise of the Dutch Republic, part ii, ch. i.
[30]Motley,Rise of the Dutch Republic, part ii, ch. i.
[31]Motley, part ii, ch. iii.
[31]Motley, part ii, ch. iii.
[32]Ibid, part ii, ch. v.
[32]Ibid, part ii, ch. v.
[33]Motley, part ii, ch. viii.
[33]Motley, part ii, ch. viii.
[34]Motley, part ii, ch. v.
[34]Motley, part ii, ch. v.
[35]Motley, part ii, ch. x.
[35]Motley, part ii, ch. x.
[36]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 204.
[36]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 204.
[37]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 318.
[37]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 318.
[38]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 472.
[38]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 472.
[39]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 530.
[39]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 530.
[40]Lea, p. 534.
[40]Lea, p. 534.
[41]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 544.
[41]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 544.
[42]Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism, vol. i, p. 3.
[42]Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism, vol. i, p. 3.
[43]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 625.
[43]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 625.
[44]Balmez,European Civilisation(London, 1855), p. 186.
[44]Balmez,European Civilisation(London, 1855), p. 186.
[45]Buckle,History of Civilisation, vol. i, p. 187.
[45]Buckle,History of Civilisation, vol. i, p. 187.
[46]Buckle, p. 189.
[46]Buckle, p. 189.
[47]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 228.
[47]Lea,Inquisition, vol. i, p. 228.
[48]Balmez,European Civilisation, p. 185.
[48]Balmez,European Civilisation, p. 185.
[49]Balmez, p. 181.
[49]Balmez, p. 181.
[50]Pastor,Lives of the Popes, vol. iv, pp. 403-405.
[50]Pastor,Lives of the Popes, vol. iv, pp. 403-405.
[51]Ibid, p. 402.
[51]Ibid, p. 402.
[52]Inquisition, vol. i, p. 385.
[52]Inquisition, vol. i, p. 385.
[53]C. Langlois,L’Inquisition, p. 65.
[53]C. Langlois,L’Inquisition, p. 65.
[54]L. Tanon,Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France, p. 377.
[54]L. Tanon,Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France, p. 377.
[55]Douais,L’Inquisition, p. 265 et seq.
[55]Douais,L’Inquisition, p. 265 et seq.
[56]Ibid, p. 273.
[56]Ibid, p. 273.
[57]SeeThe Popes and their Church, by J. McCabe, page 211.
[57]SeeThe Popes and their Church, by J. McCabe, page 211.
[58]SeeDealings with the Inquisition, by Dr. G. G. Achilli (London, 1851).
[58]SeeDealings with the Inquisition, by Dr. G. G. Achilli (London, 1851).
[59]Ibid, p. 392.
[59]Ibid, p. 392.
[60]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 650.
[60]Lea,Inquisition, vol. iii, p. 650.
[61]Catholic Encyclopædia; art. “Toleration.�
[61]Catholic Encyclopædia; art. “Toleration.�
[62]Ibid.
[62]Ibid.