Part 110 (1/2)
[Footnote 2423: _Ibid._, pp. 381, 382.]
[Footnote 2424: De Beaurepaire, _Notes sur les juges_, pp. 114, 117.]
Jeanne replied as before.[2425] On the morrow, Thursday, the 3rd of May, the day of the Invention of the Holy Cross, the Archangel Gabriel appeared to her. She was not sure whether she had seen him before. But this time she had no doubt. Her Voices told her that it was he, and she was greatly comforted.
[Footnote 2425: _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 383, 399.]
That same day she asked her Voices whether she should submit to the Church and obey the exhortation of the clerics.
Her Voices replied: ”If thou desirest help from Our Lord, then submit to him all thy doings.”
Jeanne wanted to know from her Voices whether she would be burned.
Her Voices told her to wait upon the Lord and he would help her.[2426]
This mystic aid strengthened Jeanne's heart.
[Footnote 2426: _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 400, 401.]
Among heretics and those possessed, such obstinacy as hers was not unparalleled. Ecclesiastical judges were well acquainted with the stiff-neckedness of women who had been deceived by the Devil. In order to force them to tell the truth, when admonitions and exhortations failed, recourse was had to torture. And even such a measure did not always succeed. Many of these wicked females (_mulierculae_) endured the cruellest suffering with a constancy pa.s.sing the ordinary strength of human nature. The doctors would not believe such constancy to be natural; they attributed it to the machinations of the Evil One. The devil was capable of protecting his servants even when they had fallen into the hands of judges of the Church; he granted them strength to bear the torture in silence. This strength was called the gift of taciturnity.[2427]
[Footnote 2427: Nicolas Eymeric, _Directorium inquisitorium...._ Rome, 1586, in fol. p. 24, col. 1. Ludovicus a Paramo, _De origine et progressu officii sanctae inquisitionis_, MDXCIIX, in fol., lib. III, questio 5, p. 709.]
On Wednesday, the 9th of May, Jeanne was taken to the great tower of the castle, into the torture-chamber. There my Lord of Beauvais, in the presence of the Vice Inquisitor and nine doctors and masters, read her the articles, to which she had hitherto refused to reply; and he threatened her that if she did not confess the whole truth she would be put to the torture.[2428]
[Footnote 2428: _Trial_, vol. i, p. 399.]
The instruments were prepared; the two executioners, Mauger Leparmentier, a married clerk, and his companion, were in readiness close by her, awaiting the Bishop's orders.
Six days before Jeanne had received great comfort from her Voices. Now she replied resolutely: ”Verily, if you were to tear my limbs asunder and drive my soul out of my body, naught else would I tell you, and if I did say anything unto you, I would always maintain afterwards that you had dragged it from me by force.”[2429]
[Footnote 2429: _Ibid._, pp. 399, 400.]
My Lord of Beauvais decided to defer the torture, fearing that it would do no good to so hardened a subject.[2430] On the following Sat.u.r.day, he deliberated in his house, with the Vice-Inquisitor and thirteen doctors and masters; opinion was divided. Maitre Raoul Roussel advised that Jeanne should not be tortured lest ground for complaint should be given against a trial so carefully conducted. It would seem that he antic.i.p.ated the Devil's granting Jeanne the gift of taciturnity, whereby in diabolical silence she would be able to brave the tortures of the Holy Inquisition. On the other hand Maitre Aubert Morel, licentiate in canon law, counsellor to the Official of Rouen, Canon of the Cathedral, and Maitre Thomas de Courcelles, deemed it expedient to apply torture. Maitre Nicolas Loiseleur, master of arts, Canon of Rouen, whose share in the proceedings had been to act Saint Catherine and the Lorraine shoemaker, had no very decided opinion on the subject, still it seemed to him by no means unprofitable that Jeanne for her soul's welfare should be tortured. The majority of doctors and masters agreed that for the present there was no need to subject her to this trial. Some gave no reasons, others alleged that it behoved them yet once again to warn her charitably. Maitre Guillaume Erard, doctor in theology, held that sufficient material for the p.r.o.nouncing of a sentence existed already.[2431] Thus among those, who spared Jeanne the torture, were to be found the least merciful; for the spirit of ecclesiastical tribunals was such that to refuse to torture an accused was in certain cases to refuse him mercy.
[Footnote 2430: _Ibid._, pp. 401, 402.]
[Footnote 2431: _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 402, 404.]
To the trial of Marguerite la Porete, the judges summoned no experts.[2432] Touching the charges held as proven, they submitted a written report to the University of Paris. The University gave its opinion on everything but the truth of the charges. This reservation was merely formal, and the decision of the University had the force of a sentence. In Jeanne's trial this precedent was cited. On the 21st of April, Maitre Jean Beaupere, Maitre Jacques de Touraine and Maitre Nicolas Midi left Rouen, and, at the risk of being attacked on the road by men-at-arms, journeyed to Paris in order to present the twelve articles to their colleagues of the University.
[Footnote 2432: _Recueil des historiens de la France_, vol. xx, p. 601; vol. xxi, p. 34. _Histoire litteraire de la France_, vol. xxvii, p.
70.]
On the 28th of April, the University, meeting in its general a.s.sembly at Saint-Bernard, charged the Holy Faculty of Theology and the Venerable Faculty of Decrees with the examination of the twelve articles.[2433]
[Footnote 2433: _Trial_, vol. i, pp. 407, 413, 420. M. Fournier, _La faculte de decret de l'Universite de Paris_, p. 353. Le P. Denifle and Chatelain, _Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis_, vol. iv, pp. 510 _et seq._]
On the 14th of May, the deliberations of the two Faculties were submitted to all the Faculties in solemn a.s.sembly, who ratified them and made them their own. The University then sent them to King Henry, beseeching his Royal Majesty to execute justice promptly, in order that the people, so greatly scandalised by this woman, be brought back to good doctrine and holy faith.[2434] It is worthy of notice that in a trial, in which the Pope, represented by the Vice-Inquisitor, was one judge, and the King, represented by the Bishop, another, the Eldest Daughter of Kings[2435] should have communicated directly with the King of France, the guardian of her privileges.