The Inquisition Part 8

"While their wors.h.i.+p was tolerated," writes an historian, "they gave their new brother a black garment; but in times of persecution they did not wear it, for fear of betraying themselves to the officials of the Inquisition. In the thirteenth century, in southern France, they were known by the linen or flaxen belt, which the men wore over their s.h.i.+rts, and the women wore _cordulam cinctam ad carnem nudam subtus mamillas_. They resembled the cord or scapular that the Catholic tertiaries wore to represent the habit of the monastic order to which they belonged. They were therefore called _haeretici vest.i.ti_, which became a common term for 'the Perfected.'"

[1] Jean Guiraud, _Le consolamentum ou initiation cathare_, loc.

cit., p. 134.

The last ceremony was the kiss of peace, which "the Perfected" gave their new brother, by kissing him twice (on the mouth), _bis in ore ex transverso_. He in turn kissed the one nearest him, who pa.s.sed on the _pax_ to all present. If the recipient was a woman, the minister gave her the _pax_ by touching her shoulder with the book of the gospels, and his elbow with hers. She transmitted this symbolic kiss in the same manner to the one next to her, if he was a man. After a last fraternal embrace, they all congratulated the new brother, and the a.s.sembly dispersed.

The promises made by this new member of "the Perfected" were not all equally hard to keep. As far as positive duties were concerned, there were but three: the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer, the breaking of bread, and the _Apparellamentum_.

Only "the Perfected" were allowed to recite the Lord's Prayer. The Cathari explained the esoteric character of this prayer by that pa.s.sage in the Apocalypse which speaks of the one hundred and forty-four thousand elect who follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth, and who sing a hymn which only virgins can sing.[1] This hymn was the Pater Noster. Married people, therefore, and consequently "the Believers," could not repeat it without profanation. But "the Perfected" were obliged to say it every day, especially before meals.[2]

[1] Apoc. xiv. 1-4.

[2] The Perfected had to live with a _socius_ who blessed his food, while he in turn had to bless the food of his companion. If he separated from his _socius_, he had to do without food and drink for three days. This frequently happened when they were arrested and cast into prison.

They blessed the bread without making the sign of the cross.

This "breaking of bread" replaced the Eucharist. They thought in this way to reproduce the Lord's Supper, while they repudiated all the ceremonies of the Catholic Ma.s.s. "The Believers" partook of this blessed bread when they sat at the table with "the Perfected," and they were wont to carry some of it home to eat from time to time.

Some attributed to it a wonderful sanctifying power, and believed that if at their death none of "the Perfected" were present to administer the _consolamentum_, this "bread of the holy prayer" would itself ensure their salvation. They were therefore very anxious to keep some of it on hand; and we read of "the Believers" of Languedoc having some sent them from Lombardy, when they were no longer able to communicate with their persecuted brethren.

It was usually distributed to all present during the _Apparellamentum_. This was the solemn monthly reunion of all the Cathari, "the Believers" and "the Perfected." All present confessed their sins, no matter how slight, although only a general confession was required. As a rule the Deacon addressed the a.s.sembly, which closed with the _Parcia_ and the kiss of peace: _osculantes sese invicem ex transverso_.

There was nothing very hard in this; on the contrary, it was the consoling side of their life. But their rigorous laws of fasting and abstinence const.i.tuted a most severe form of mortification.

"The Perfected" kept three Lents a year; the first from St. Brice's day (November 13) till Christmas; the second from Quinquagesima Sunday till Easter; the third from Pentecost to the feast of Saints Peter and Paul. They called the first and last weeks of these Lents the strict weeks (_septimana stricta_), because during them they fasted on bread and water every day, whereas the rest of the time they fasted only three days out of the seven. Besides these special penitential seasons, they observed the same rigorous fast three days a week all during the year, unless they were sick or were traveling.[1]

[1] Bernard Gui, _Practica inquisitionis_, p. 239.

These heretics were known everywhere by their fasting and abstinence.

"They are good men," it was said, "who live holy lives, fasting three days a week and never eating meat."[1]

[1] Douais, _Les ma.n.u.scrits du chateau de Merville_, in the _Annales du Midi_, 1890, p. 185.

They never ate, meat, in fact, and this law of abstinence extended, as we have seen, to eggs, cheese, and everything which was the result of animal propagation. They were allowed, however, to eat cold-blooded animals like fish, because of the strange idea they had of their method of propagation.

One of the results, or rather one of the causes of their abstinence from meat, was the absolute respect they had for animal life in general. We have seen that they admitted metempsychosis. According to their belief, the body of an ox or an a.s.s might be the dwelling place of a human soul. To kill these animals, therefore, was a crime equivalent to murder. "For that reason," says Bernard Gui, "they never kill an animal or a bird; for they believe that in animals and birds dwell the souls of men, who died without having been received into their sect by the imposition of hands."[1] This was also one of the signs by which they could be known as heretics. We read of them being condemned at Goslar and elsewhere for having refused to kill and eat a chicken.

[1] _Practica inquisitionis_, p. 240.

Their most extraordinary mortification was the law of chast.i.ty, as they understood and practiced it. They had a great horror of Christian marriage, and endeavored to defend their views by the Scriptures. Had not Christ said: "Whosoever shall look on a woman to l.u.s.t after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart;"[1] i.e., was he not guilty of a crime? "The children of this world marry," He says again, "and are given in marriage; but they that shall be accounted worthy of that world and of the resurrection from the dead, shall neither be married, nor take wives."[2] "It is good," says St. Paul, "for a man not to touch a woman."[3]

[1] Matt. v. 28.

[2] Luke xx. 34, 35.

[3] I Corinth. vii. 1, 7.

The Cathari interpreted these texts literally, and when their opponents cited other texts of Scripture which plainly taught the sacred character of Christian marriage, they at once interpreted them in a spiritual or symbolic sense. The only legitimate marriage in their eyes was the union of the Bishop with the Church, or the union of the soul with the Holy Spirit by the ceremony of the _consolamentum_.

They condemned absolutely all marital relations. That was the sin of Adam and Eve. Pierre Garsias taught at Toulouse that the forbidden fruit of the Garden of Eden was simply carnal pleasure.

One of the purposes of marriage is the begetting of children. But the propagation of the human species is plainly the work of the Evil Spirit. A woman with child is a woman possessed of the devil. "Pray G.o.d," said one of "the Perfected" to the wife of a Toulouse lumber merchant, "pray G.o.d that He deliver you from the devil within you."

The greatest evil that could befall a woman was to die _enceinte_; for being in the state of impurity and in the power of Satan, she could not be saved. We read of the Cathari saying this to Peirona de la Caustra: _quod si decederet praegnans non posset salvari_.

Marriage, because it made such a condition possible, was absolutely condemned. Bernard Gui thus resumes the teaching of the Cathari on this point: "They condemn marriage absolutely; they maintain that it is a perpetual state of sin; they deny that a good G.o.d can inst.i.tute it. They declare the marital relation as great a sin as incest with one's mother, daughter, or sister." And this is by no means a calumnious charge. The language which Bernard Gui attributes to these heretics was used by them on every possible occasion. They were unable to find words strong enough to express their contempt for marriage. "Marriage," they said, "is nothing but licentiousness; marriage is merely prost.i.tution." In their extreme hatred, they even went so far as to prefer open licentiousness to it, saying: "Cohabitation with one's wife is a worse crime than adultery." One might be inclined to think that this was merely an extravagant outburst; but, on the contrary, they tried to defend this view by reason. Licentiousness, they argued, was a temporary thing, to which a man gave himself up only in secret; he might in time become ashamed of it, repent and renounce it entirely. The married state, on the contrary, caused no shame whatever; men never thought of renouncing it, because they did not dream of the wickedness it entailed: _quia magis publice et sine verecundia peccatum fiebat_.

No one, therefore, was admitted to the _consolamentum_ unless he had renounced all marital relations. In this case, the woman "gave her husband to G.o.d, and to the good men." It often happened, too, that women, moved by the preaching of "the Perfected," condemned their unconverted husbands to an enforced celibacy. This was one of the results of the neo-Manichean teachings.

Moreover, they carried their principles so far as to consider it a crime even to touch a woman.

They forbade a man to sit next to a woman except in case of necessity. "If a woman touches you," said Pierre Autier, "you must fast three days on bread and water; and if you touch a woman, you must fast nine days on the same diet." At the ceremony of the _consolamentum_, the Bishop who imposed hands on the future sister took great care not to touch her, even with the end of his finger; to avoid doing so, he always covered the postulant with a veil.

But in times of persecution, this over-scrupulous caution was calculated to attract public attention. "The Perfected" (men and women) lived together, pretending that they were married, so that they would not be known as heretics. It was their constant care, however, to avoid the slightest contact. This caused them at times great inconvenience. While traveling, they shared the same bed, the better to avoid suspicion. But they slept with their clothes on, and thus managed to follow out the letter of the law: _tamen induti quod unus alium in nuda carne non tangebat_.

Many Catholics were fully persuaded that this pretended love of purity was merely a cloak to hide the grossest immorality. But while we may admit that many of "the Perfected" did actually violate their promise of absolute chast.i.ty, we must acknowledge that, as a general rule, they did resist temptation, and preferred death to what they considered impurity.

Many who feared that they might give way in a moment of weakness to the temptations of a corrupt nature, sought relief in suicide, which was called the _endura_. There were two forms for the sick heretic, suffocation and fasting. The candidate for death was asked whether he desired to be a martyr or a confessor. If he chose to be a martyr, they placed a handkerchief or a pillow over his mouth, until he died of suffocation. If he preferred to be a confessor, he remained without food or drink, until he died of starvation.

The Cathari believed that "the Believers," who asked for the _consolamentum_ during sickness, would not keep the laws of their new faith, if they happened to get well. Therefore, to safeguard them against apostasy, they were strongly urged to make their salvation certain by the _endura_. A ma.n.u.script of the Register of the Inquisition of Carca.s.sonne, for instance, tells us of a Catharan minister who compelled a sick woman to undergo the _endura_, after he had conferred upon her the Holy Spirit. He forbade any one "to give her the least nourishment"... and as a matter of fact no food or drink was given her that night or the following day, lest perchance she might be deprived of the benefit of the _consolamentum_.

One of "the Perfected," named Raymond Belhot, congratulated a mother whose daughter he had just "consoled," and ordered her not to give the sick girl anything to eat or drink until he returned, even though she requested it. "If she asks me for it," said the mother, "I will not have the heart to refuse her." "You must refuse her," said "the good man," "or else cause great injury to her soul." From that moment the girl neither ate nor drank; in fact she did not ask for any nourishment. She died the next Sat.u.r.day.

About the middle of the thirteenth century, when the Cathari began to give the consolamentum to infants, they were often cruel enough to make them undergo the _endura_. "One would think," says an historian of the time, "that the world had gone back to those hateful days when unnatural mothers sacrificed their children to Moloch."

It sometimes happened that the parents of "the consoled" withstood more or less openly the cruelty of "the Perfected."

When this happened, some of "the Perfected" remained in the house of the sick person, to see that their murderous prescriptions were obeyed to the letter. Or if this was impossible, they had "the consoled" taken to the house of some friend, where they could readily carry out their policy of starvation.

But as a general rule the "heretics" submitted to the _endura_ of their own free will. Raymond Isaure tells us of a certain Guillaume Sabatier who began the _endura_ in a retired villa, immediately after his initiation; he starved himself to death in seven weeks. A woman named Gentilis died of the _endura_ in six or seven days. A woman of Coustaussa, who had separated from her husband, went to Saverdum to receive the _consolamentum_. She at once began the _endura_ at Ax, and died after an absolute fast of about twelve weeks. A certain woman named Montaliva submitted to the _endura_; during it "she ate nothing whatever, but drank some water; she died in six weeks."[1]

This case gives us some idea of this terrible practice; we see that they were sometimes allowed to drink water, which explains the extraordinary duration of some of these suicidal fasts.

[1] Ms. 609, of the library of Toulouse, fol. 28.

Some of the Cathari committed suicide in other ways. A woman of Toulouse named Guillemette first began to subject herself to the _endura_ by frequent blood letting; then she tried to weaken herself more by taking long baths; finally she drank poison, and as death did not come quickly enough, she swallowed pounded gla.s.s to perforate her intestines.[1] Another woman opened her veins in the bath.2

[1] Ms. 609, of Toulouse, fol. 33.

[2] Ibid., fol. 70.

Such methods of suicide were exceptional, although the _endura_ itself was common, at least among the Cathari of Languedoc. "Every one," says a trustworthy historian, "who reads the acts of the tribunals of the Inquisition of Toulouse and Carca.s.sonne must admit that the _endura_, voluntary or forced, put to death more victims than the stake or the Inquisition."

Catharism, therefore, was a serious menace to the Church, to the State, and to society.

Without being precisely a Christian heresy, its customs, its hierarchy, and above all its rites of initiation--which we have purposely explained in detail--gave it all the appearance of one. It was really an imitation and a caricature of Christianity. Some of its practices were borrowed from the primitive Christians, as some historians have proved.[1] That in itself would justify the Church in treating its followers as heretics.

[1] Jean Guirard, _Le consolamentum ou initiation cathare_, in _Questions d'histoire_, p. 145 seq.

Besides, the Church merely acted in self-defense. The Cathari tried their best to destroy her by attacking her doctrines, her hierarchy, and her apostolic character. If their false teachings had prevailed, disturbing as they did the minds of the people, the Church would have perished.