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