other errors, notably those of the Cathari ;1 and even originally they were dangerous enough. Again, to quote Döllinger: As to the Waldenses, every historian is aware that their principles concerning oaths and the penal authority of the State were such as to deny them any status in the European world at that time.' Every heresy in the Middle Ages was revolutionary, as tending to destroy order and dissolve the existing connection between Church and State.3 We find no trace of an increased severity on the part of the Inquisition with regard to less dangerous sects; the climax of severity against heretics was attained in the Albigensian persecutions. It is true, however, that a number of Popes employed the Inquisition, for they saw in it a necessary institution suited to the needs of society, approved by experience, and needed in many Christian countries to prevent the dissolution of social order.4

4

1 Stephan. de Borbone, O.S. D. lib de Septem Donis Spir. S.: Postea in Provinciae terra et Lombardiae cum aliis haereticis se admiscentes et errorem eorum bibentes et serentes haeretici sunt judicati infestissimi et periculosissimi, ubique discurrentes, speciem sanctitatis et fidei praeseferentes, veritatem autem ejus non habentes.' The Confession of Faith prescribed by Innocent III. for converted Waldenses shows this also (Denzinger, Enchirid. Defin. 4th ed. p. 159 seq. n. 366 seq.).

2 L.c.

3 Hausmann, Gesch. der Papstl. Reservatfälle, p. 110.

Huber declares (p. 21) that in Rome they would like a Council to decree as a saving truth that it was allowable to use force to coerce consciences, and he appeals to prop. 24 and 25 of the Syllabus of 1864 in support of his assertion. Of these propositions, the first treats of ecclesiastical coercive authority in general, and the second even still more generally. The infliction of censures also belongs to the 'potestas coactiva.' $13.

The Catholic priesthood, who for centuries have recited, on the 29th April, the office of Peter Arbues, have taken no offence at his canonisation, as Professor Huber (p. 22) has done. It would indeed be a bold conclusion to infer the canonisation of the Inquisition, with all its acts, from the canonisation of an inquisitor. The infallibility of the teaching office of the Pope in morals does not involve the belief that in laws concerning the Inquisition the Pope always legislated in the best, most perfect, and most judicious manner possible, and in

the punishments inflicted never outstepped the limits of true moderation. The case of Peter Arbues was subject to as close a scrutiny as any other. The process of his canonisation began in 1490; it was resumed in 1537, after the application to that effect made by Charles V. to Paul III. Philip III. in 1614 applied to Paul V. for the same purpose, and in 1622 to Gregory XV. His beatification was pronounced by Alexander VII., on April 17, 1662.2 After renewed investigations he was canonised by Pius IX. in 1867.

1 M. Canus, de locis Theol. 1. v. c. v.

2 Bull. Rom. ed. Luxemb. t. vi. pp. 195, 196, Const. 139, Fortissimos.

§ 14.

Why should not a Spanish inquisitor have been a holy man? Their bitterest enemies acknowledge the purity of intention and the blameless lives of the Spanish inquisitors. Llorente, the great historian of the Inquisition and its bitter enemy,1 who had access to its private papers, and Buckle, who is certainly in this case above suspicion, attest the 'undeviating and incorruptible integrity' of the inquisitors.2 Townsend, a Protestant clergyman and an Englishman, cannot accuse them; on the contrary, when treating of the Inquisition at Barcelona, he acknowledges that all its members were men of worth, and most of them distinguished for humanity. Why, indeed, should not a judge have been a holy man, who conscientiously acted according to the laws in force in his day, though not according to the 'refined morality' of the nineteenth century, which was unknown to his contemporaries?

Llorente, Histoire critique de l'Inquisition d'Espagne. Cf. Carnicero, La Inquisicion justamente restablecida, Madrid, 1816; Hefele, Cardinal Ximenes, 2d ed. p. 291 seq.

2 Hist. of Civ. in Eng. by H. T. Buckle, vol. i. p. 187, London, 1867. Townsend, Journey through Spain in 1786 and 1787, i. 122, London, 1792, apud Buckle, 1.c. p. 188.

$ 15.

The reformers of the sixteenth century were animated by principles identical with those which issued in the Inquisition. In 1531, Bucer said publicly in the pulpit at Strasburg of

2

Michael Servetus, that he deserved an ignominious death for his work against the Trinity. In fact, rather more than twenty years later (on the 27th October 1553) Calvin had him burnt at Geneva over a slow fire. Calvin justified the deed in a special work, and his theory and practice were approved not merely by Theodore Beza, the theologian of most repute in Switzerland, but also by Melanchthon, in a letter of the 14th October 1554, and in a special treatise.3 The Calvinists in Switzerland and elsewhere firmly maintained the right of government to punish heretics with death. The preacher Jacob Gruet was in 1547 tortured and beheaded by Calvin's order. Valentine Gentilis, who was beheaded at Berne on the 10th September 1566, in his theses for a theological disputation had decreed capital punishment for those who were heretical according to his doctrine.5 Funk as an Ossiandrist, Sylvan as a Socinian, Grell as a Calvinist, Hennig Brabant in the factions of the municipal governments, all fell victims to the dominant religious party. In the imperial city of Nuremberg many religious persecutions took place; and others, it is well known, were instituted against Cryptocalvinism in Saxony. Martin

Luther, indeed, several times expressed himself against severe measures, but also in many ways approved of proceedings against heretics-for instance, of punishing Anabaptists with fire and sword—and he demanded the banishment of public sinners; he persecuted fiercely his former friend Karlstadt for deviations in doctrine, and appealed to the civil government against the Zwinglians. 10 He held all measures to be lawful for the extirpation of the Papacy and its adherents, 11 and quietly allowed his partisans, according to the advice of the lawyers, to undertake to defend their religion by force of arms, and even revolt against emperor and empire.12 It is true he disapproved the deposition of King Christian II. of Denmark, effected by the nation in 1523 on account of many grievances, amongst others the attempt to introduce a new and false religion; but he did this in his own interest, for the King of Denmark was his partisan. The Danish people were far at that time from a change of religion. Christian's successor, Frederick I., was

obliged, on the 23d March 1523, to bind himself by oath not to permit any preachers of Luther's school, but to treat them as heretics 13 the new king did not venture to confess that he was himself a Lutheran; only after the religious conference held in 1529 at Copenhagen preparatory measures were taken for the introduction of the new doctrine, which was introduced by force in 1537 by Christian III. Melanchthon, with increasing years, increased in severity towards members of other religious creeds,15 especially towards strict Lutherans and the Schwenkfeldians, who had already been persecuted. Lutheranism was in general, especially in Germany, introduced by princely authority-for instance, into the duchy of Saxony after the death of Duke George, into Naumburg, and into Silesia.16 Benedict Carpzov shows us the practice of the Saxon courts of justice, which punished blasphemy against God and Christ with death, and heresies with exile. 17 As late as 1636, John Adelgreiff was beheaded and burnt in Königsberg; and in 1687, Gunther, for leaning towards Socinianism, was beheaded in Lübeck upon the judgment of the jurists of Kiel and of the Theological Faculty of Wittenberg.18 In England, Henry VIII., both before and after his schism, allowed the execution of heretics; Cranmer defended it on Scriptural grounds; 19 and in the reign of Elizabeth, the celebrated jurist Edward Coke argued in favour of severe penalties for heresy, as a crime against the Majesty of God and a pestilential leprosy of the soul.20 The cruelties perpetrated under Elizabeth against Catholics far exceed all the punishments of the Spanish Inquisition.21 Ranke speaks of the High Commission as a species of Protestant Inquisition. The greatest tyranny was exercised towards Nonconformists. 23 In Sweden, where Gustavus Wasa introduced the new doctrines by force, extreme cruelty was employed towards adherents of the ancient faith.24 In the Netherlands, William Amesius (died 1634) urged the persecution of heretics;25 and Coster, in his apology against the Gomarists, mentions as a fact that Calvinists held it lawful to inflict the punishment of death upon Catholics, and exe.cuted it upon not a few.20 Döllinger was right, that nothing is historically more untrue than the assertion that the Reforma

tion was a movement in favour of liberty of conscience; it was quite the contrary.' Protestants demanded this liberty for themselves, but when they were the stronger party they never granted it to others. 28

1 Fidelis expositio errorum M. Serveti et brevis eorum refutatio, ubi docetur jure gladii coercendos esse haereticos, 1554, Calvini Opusc. p. 686 seq. Gibbon says: 'I am more deeply scandalised at the single execution of Servetus than at the hecatombs which have blazed in the auto da fés of Spain and Portugal. A Catholic inquisitor yields the same obedience which he requires, but Calvin proscribed in Servetus the guilt of his rebellion.' Hist. of the Decline and Fall, chap. liv. note.

2 Beza, Tract. de haereticis a magistratu civili puniendis, 1554. Cf. Jean Barbeyrac, Préface au livre de Pufendorf, § 11; Schröckh, Kirch. Gesch. seit der Reform, vol. v. p. 189.

3 Epistol. Calvini, n. 187. Consilia et Judicia theol. ed. Pezelius, ii. 204. Schröckh, 1.c. p. 517.

Confess. Helvet. ii. art. 26; i. c. xxx.; Belg. a. 36; Scot. a. 29. Hefele, Conc. vii. p. 215 seq. Guericke, Lehrb. d. Kirch. Gesch. iii. p. 434, 9th ed.

Guericke, l.c. p. 435, nt. 2. Cf. Benedict Aretius, Hist. de Supplicio Valent. Gentilis.

Menzel, Neuere Gesch. der Dentschen, iv. pp. 333, 404; v. pp. 217, 229-237. On the eve of the execution of Hennig Brabant, Pastor Wagner preached in St. Katharine's in Brunswick on the stoning of Achan; he pointed out the proper attitude of Christian governments with regard to such criminals, and that pious Christians should assist at such executions. 7 Besnard, Repertorium, 1842, p. 301. Menzel, iv. pp. 450-464; v. pp. 185-195, 205 seq.

Luther, Epistol. a Joh. Aurifabro collect. t. ii. p. 381, Eisleb. 1665, 4. Schröckh, 1.c. v. pp. 187, 188.

Luther, Werke, v. 286 seq. ; xx. 364, Altenb. ed.; xiii. 440-442, Hall. ed. 10 Menzel, 1.c. i. 273, 480. Riffel, K.G. der neuesten Zeit. vol. i. pp.

332, 403. Phillips, K.R. iii. § 139.

11 Sleidan, 1. i. c. xxv. Cf. M. Gerbert, op. cit. 1. iii. c. viii. n. 2.

12 Cf. Warnung an meine lieben Deutschen' (Admonition to my beloved Germans) against the decree of the Diet of 1530, Luther's Werke, xvi. pp. 1090-2062, Walch's ed.; Menzel, 1.c. pp. 422, 423; Rintel, 1.c. pp. 49-51; Bossuet, Hist. des Variations, P. iii. 1. i.; Gerbert, l.c. n. 3. 13 Mohler's K.G. by Gams, iii. p. 192. Dahlmann's Dänische Gesch.

iii. pp. 356, 357.

14 Pantopiddan, ii. p. 806.

15 Döllinger, Die Reform. gives the proofs, i. p. 388 seq. Cf. p. 237 seq. 16 Menzel, 1.c. vol. ii. pp. 1, 145-150, 275-281.

17 B. Carpzovii Practica criminalis, P. i. q. 44, de Crimine Haereseos;

q. 45, de Blasphemiae Poena.

18 Arnold, Ketzerhistorie, ii. 643. Döllinger, Kirche und Kirchen, p. 81, nt. 2; Eng. trans. i. p. 37 seq.