Page:A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages-Volume I .pdf/246

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

IV. the first named of the imperial duties enumerated are the extension of the faith and the extirpation of heretics; and the neglect of the Emperor Wenceslas to suppress Wickliffitism was regarded as a satisfactory reason for his deposition. In fact, according to the high churchmen, the only reason of the transfer of the empire from the Greeks to the Germans was that the Church might have an efficient agent. The principles applied to Raymond of Toulouse were embodied in the canon law, and every prince and noble was made to understand that his lands would be exposed to the spoiler if, after due notice, he hesitated in trampling out heresy. Minor officials were subjected to the same discipline. According to the Council of Toulouse in 1229, ady bailli not diligent in persecuting heresy forfeited his property and was ineligible to public employment, while by the Council of Narbonne in 1244, any one holding temporal jurisdiction who delayed in exterminating heretics was held guilty of fautorship of heresy, became an accomplice of heretics, and thus was subjected to the penalties of heresy; this was extended to all who should neglect a favorable opportunity of capturing a heretic, or of helping those seeking to capture him. From the emperor to the meanest peasant the duty of persecution was enforced with all the sanctions, spiritual and temporal, which the Church could command. Not only must the ruler enact rigorous laws to punish heretics, but he and his subjects must see them strenuously executed, for any slackness of persectution was, in the canon law, construed as fautorship of heresy, putting a man on his purgation.[1]

These principles were tacitly or explicitly received into the

  1. Böhmer, Regest. Imp. V. 86. Innocent. PP. III. Regest. de Negot. Rom Imp, 189.-Muratori Antiq. Ital. Dissert, IT-artzheim Concil. German. III.540 Cod. Epist. Rodolphi I. Auct. IT. pp. 75-7 (Lipsie 1800)Theod. Vrie, Hist. Concil. Constaut, Lib. uI. Dist. 8; Lib. vI. Dist. 7.-Thom. Aquin. de Principum Regimine Lib. I. c. xiv.; Lib, . c. x., xiii.-xviii-Lib. v. Extra. Til. vii. c 13 3-Concil. Tolosan. ann, 1229 c. 5. Concil. Narbonn. ann, 1244 c. 15, 16.- Zunchini de Hæret. c. v.-Beaumanoir, Contumes du Beauvoisis, XI. 27.-Sce also he scrmon of the Bishop of Lodi at the condemnation of Huss, Yon der Hardt, III. 5
    The treatise "De principum regimine," though not wholly by St. Thomas Aquinas, was the authoritative exponent of the ecclesiastical theory as to the structure and duties of government. See Poole's "Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought," p. 240.