p. 215). If we read
carefully the words of St. Leo (p. 27, note 1), we shall see that the
Emperors are responsible for the words that Lea ascribes to the Pope.
It is hard to understand how he can assert that the imperial Edicts
decreeing the death penalty are due to ecclesiastical influence, when
we notice that nearly all the churchmen of the day protested against
such a penalty.

CHAPTER III
THIRD PERIOD
FROM 1100 TO 1250
THE REVIVAL OF THE MANICHEAN HERESIES IN THE MIDDLE AGES

FROM the sixth to the eleventh century, heretics, with the exception
of certain Manichean sects, were hardly ever persecuted.[1] In the
sixth century, for instance, the Arians lived side by side with the
Catholics, under the protection of the State, in a great many Italian
cities, especially in Ravenna and Pavia.[2]

[1] In 556, Manicheans were put to death in Ravenna, in accordance
with the laws of Justinian.

[2] We may still visit at Ravenna the Arian and Catholic baptisteries
of the sixth century. Cf. Gregorii Magni _Dialogi_, iii, cap. xxii,
_Mon. Germ_., ibid., pp. 534-535.

During the Carlovingian period, we come across a few heretics, but
they gave little trouble.

The _Adoptianism_ of Elipandus, Archbishop of Toledo, and Felix,
Bishop of Urgel, was abandoned by its authors, after it had been
condemned by Pope Adrian I, and several provincial councils.[1]

[1] Einhard: _Annales_, ann. 792, in the _Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. 1, p.
179.

A more important heresy arose in the ninth century. Godescalcus, a
monk of Orbais, in the diocese of Soissons, taught that Jesus Christ
did not die for all men. His errors on predestination were condemned
as heretical by the Council of Mainz (848); and Quierzy (849); and he
himself was sentenced to be flogged and then imprisoned for life in
the monastery of Hautvilliers.[1] But this punishment of flogging was
a purely ecclesiastical penalty. Archbishop Hincmar, in ordering it,
declared that he was acting in accordance with the rule of St.
Benedict, and a canon of the Council of Agde.

[1] "In nostra parochia ... monasteriali costudiae mancipatus est."
Hincmar's letter to Pope Nicholas I, _Hincmari Opera_, ed. Sirmond,
Paris, 1645, vol. ii, p. 262.

The imprisonment to which Godescalcus was subjected was likewise a
monastic punishment. Practically, it did not imply much more than the
confinement strictly required by the rules of his convent. It is
interesting to note that imprisonment for cr