FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87  
88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   >>   >|  
cerer, a diviner, or the bearer of false witness. But her hatred of heresy led her later on to set aside this law, when the faith was in question. As early as the twelfth century, Gratian had declared that the testimony of infamous and heretical witnesses might be accepted in trials for heresy.[1] [1] Pars ii, _Causa_ ii, quaest. vii, cap. xxii; _Causa_ vi, quaest. i, cap. xix. The edicts of Frederic II declared that heretics could not testify in the courts, but this disability was removed when they were called upon to testify against other suspects.[1] In the beginning, the Inquisitors were loath to accept such testimony. But in 1261 Alexander IV assured them that it was lawful to do so.[2] Henceforth the testimony of a heretic was considered valid, although it was always left to the discretion of the Inquisition to reject it at will. This principle was finally incorporated into the canon law, and was enforced by constant practice. All legal exceptions were henceforth declared inoperative except that of moral enmity.[3] [1] _Historia diplomatica Frederici II_, vol. iv, pp. 299, 300. [2] Bull _Consuluit_, of January 23, 1261, in Eymeric, _Directorium inquisitorum_, Appendix, p. 40. [3] Eymeric, ibid., 3a pars, quaest. lxvii, pp. 606, 607. Pegna, ibid., pp. 607, 609, declares that great cruelty or even insulting words--e.g., to call a man _cornutus_ or a woman _meretrix_--might come under the head of enmity, and invalidate a man's testimony. Witnesses for the defence rarely presented themselves. Very seldom do we come across any mention of them. This is readily understood, for they would almost inevitably have been suspected as accomplices and abettors of heresy. For the same reason, the accused were practically denied the help of counsel. Innocent III had forbidden advocates and scriveners to lend aid or counsel to heretics and their abettors.[1] This prohibition, which in the mind of the Pope was intended only for defiant and acknowledged heretics, was gradually extended to every suspect who was striving to prove his innocence.[2] [1] Decretals, cap. xi, _De haereticis_, lib.. v, tit. vii. [2] Eymeric, _Directorium inquisitorum_, 3a pars, quaest. xxxix, p. 565; cf. 446. Sometimes, however, the accused was granted counsel, but _juxta juris formam ac stylum et usum officii Inquisitionis_; cf. Vidal, _Le tribunal d'Inquisition_, in the _Annales de Saint Louis des Francais_, vol. ix (1905), p. 299, note. E
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87  
88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
quaest
 

testimony

 
declared
 

counsel

 
Eymeric
 
heretics
 
heresy
 

Inquisition

 

enmity

 

testify


abettors

 

accused

 

Directorium

 

inquisitorum

 

suspected

 

reason

 

accomplices

 

question

 

scriveners

 

prohibition


advocates

 

forbidden

 

denied

 

Innocent

 
practically
 
invalidate
 

Witnesses

 

defence

 

rarely

 

cornutus


meretrix

 
presented
 
readily
 

understood

 

mention

 

seldom

 

inevitably

 

intended

 

officii

 
Inquisitionis

stylum
 
granted
 

formam

 

tribunal

 
Francais
 

Annales

 

Sometimes

 

suspect

 

striving

 
extended