The Method of
Initiating a Process
The
first question, then, is what is the suitable method of
instituting a process on behalf of the faith against
witches. In answer to this it must be said that there
are three methods allowed by Canon Law. The first is
when someone accuses a person before a judge of the
crime of heresy, or of protecting heretics, offering to
prove it, and to submit himself to the penalty of talion
if he fails to prove it. The second method is when
someone denounces a person, but does not offer to prove
it and is not willing to embroil himself in the matter;
but says that he lays information out of zeal for the
faith, or because of a sentence of excommunication
inflicted by the Ordinary or his Vicar; or because of
the temporal punishment exacted by the secular Judge
upon those who fail to lay information.
The third
method involves an inquisition, that is, when there is
no accuser or informer, but a general report that there
are witches in some town or place; and then the Judge
must proceed, not at the instance of any party, but
simply by the virtue of his office.
Here it is to
be noted that a judge should not readily admit the first
method of procedure. For one thing, it is not actuated
by motives of faith, nor is it very applicable to the
case of witches, since they commit their deeds in
secret. Then, again, it is full of danger to the
accuser, because of the penalty of talion which he will
incur if he fails to prove his case. Then, again, it is
very litigious.
Let the
process begin with a general citation affixed to the
walls of the Parish Church or the Town Hall, in the
following manner.
WHEREAS we,
the Vicar of such and such Ordinary (or the Judge of
such and such county), do endeavour with all our might
and strive with our whole heart to preserve the
Christian people entrusted to us in unity and the
happiness of the Catholic faith and to keep them far
removed from every plague of abominable heresy:
Therefore we the aforesaid Judge to whose office it
belongs, to the glory and honour of the worshipful name
of JESUS Christ and for the exaltation of the Holy
Orthodox Faith, and for the putting down of the
abomination of heresy, especially in all witches in
general and in each one severally of whatever condition
or estate: (Here, if he is an ecclesiastical Judge, let
him add a summons to all priests and dignitaries of the
Church in that town and for a distance of two miles
about it, who have knowledge of this notice. And he
shall add) By the authority which we exercise in this
district, and in virtue of holy obedience and under pain
of excommunication, we direct, command, require, and
admonish that within the space of twelve days (Here the
secular Judge shall command in his own manner under pain
of penalties suitable to his office), the first four of
which shall stand for the first warning, the second for
the second, and the third for the third warning; and we
give this treble canonical warning that if anyone know,
see, or have heard that any person is reported to be a
heretic or a witch, or of any is suspected especially of
such practices as cause injury to men, cattle, or the
fruits of the earth, to the loss of the State. But if
any do not obey these aforesaid commands and admonitions
by revealing such matters within the term fixed, let him
know (Here the ecclesiastical Judge shall add) that he
is cut off by the sword of excommunication (The secular
Judge shall add the temporal punishments). Which
sentence of excommunication we impose as from this time
by this writing upon all and several who thus stubbornly
set at naught these our canonical warnings aforesaid,
and our requirement of their obedience, reserving to
ourselves alone the absolution of such sentence (The
secular Judge shall conclude in this manner). Given,
etc.
Note also
that in the case of the second method the following
caution should be observed. For it has been said that
the second method of procedure and of instituting a
process on behalf of the faith is by means of an
information, where the informer does not offer to prove
his statement and is not ready to be embroiled in the
case, but only speaks because of a sentence of
excommunication, or out of zeal for the faith and for
the good of the State. Therefore the secular Judge must
specify in his general citation or warning aforesaid,
that none should think that he will become liable to a
penalty even if he fails to proved his words; since he
comes forward not as an accuser but as an informer.
And then,
since several will appear to lay information before the
Judge, he ought to take care to proceed in the following
manner. First, let him have a Notary and two honest
persons, either clerics or laymen; or if a Notary is not
to be procured, then let there be two suitable men in
the place of the Notary. For this is dealt with in the
c. ut officium, § uerum, lib. 6, where it
is said: But because it is expedient to proceed with
great caution in the trial of a grave crime, that no
error may be committed in imposing upon the guilty a
deservedly severe punishment; we desire and command
that, in the examination of the witnesses necessary in
such a charge, you shall have two religious and discreet
persons, either clerics or laymen.
It goes on to
say: In the presence of these persons the depositions of
the witnesses shall be faithfully written down by a
public official if one is obtainable, or, if not, by two
suitable men. Note therefore that, having these persons,
the Judge shall order the informer to lay his
information in writing, or at least give it clearly by
word of mouth. And then the Notary or the Judge shall
begin to process in the following manner.
In the year of Our Lord —, on the — day of the —
month, in the presence of me the Notary and of the
witnesses subscribed, N. of the town of — in the
Diocese of —, as above, appeared in the person at —
before the honourable Judge, and offered him a schedule
to the following effect.
(Here shall
follow the schedule in its entirety. But if he has not
deposed in writing buy by word of mouth, it shall
continue thus.)
He appeared,
etc. and laid information to the Judge that N. of the
town or parish of — in the Diocese of — had said and
asserted that he knew how to perform or had actually
done certain injuries to the deponent or to other
persons.
After this,
he shall immediately make the deponent take the oath in
the usual manner, either on the four Gospels of God, or
on the Cross, raising three fingers and depressing two
in witness of the Holy Trinity and of the damnation of
his soul and body, that he will speak the truth in his
depositions. And when the oath has been sworn, he shall
question him as to how he knows that his depositions are
true, and whether he saw or heard that to which he
swears. And if he says that he has seen anything, as,
for example, that the accused was present at such a time
of tempest, or that he had touched an animal, or had
entered a stable, the Judge shall ask when he saw him,
and where, and how often, and in what manner, and who
were present. If he says that he did not see it, but
heard of it, he shall ask him from whom he heart it,
where, when, and how often, and in whose presence,
making separate articles of each of the several points
above mentioned. And the Notary or scribe shall set down
a record of them immediately after the aforesaid
denunciation; and it shall continue thus:
This
denunciation, as we have said, having been made, the
Inquisitor himself did at once cause him to swear as
above on the four Gospels, etc. that he was speaking the
truth in his depositions, and did ask him how and why he
knew or suspected that he what he said was true. He did
make answer either that he saw, or that he heard. The
Inquisitor did then ask him where he saw or heard this;
and he answered on the — day of the — month in the
year — in the town or parish of —. He asked him how
often he saw or heard it, etc. And separate articles
shall be made, and the whole set down in process, as has
been said. And particularly he shall be asked who shared
or could share in his knowledge of the case.
When all this
has been done, he shall finally be asked whether he lays
his information out of ill-will, hatred, or rancour; or
if he has omitted anything through favour or love; of if
he has been requested or suborned to lay information.
Finally, he
shall be enjoined, by virtue of his oath, to keep secret
whatever he has said there, or whatever the Judge has
said to him; and the whole process shall be set down in
writing. And when all this is completed, it shall be set
down a little lower as follows. This was done at such a
place on the — day of the — month in the year —,
in the presence of me the Notary or scribe together with
those associated with me in the duty of writing, and of
such and such witnesses summoned and interrogated.
The third
method of beginning a process is the commonest and most
usual one, because it is secret, and no accuser or
informer has to appear. But when there is a general
report of witchcraft in some town or parish, because of
this report the Judge may proceed without a general
citation or admonition as above, since the noise of that
report comes often to his ears; and then again he can
begin a process in the presence of the persons, as we
have said before.
In the year of Our Lord —, on the — day of the —
month, to the ears of such and such official or judge
there came a persistent public report and rumour that N.
of the town or parish of — did or said such and such a
thing savouring of witchcraft, against the faith and the
common good of the State.
And the whole
shall be set down according to the common report. And a
little lower:
The case was
heard on the — day of the — month in the year —,
in the presence of me the Notary of such and such
authority, or of such and such a scribe, and of such and
such witnesses who were called and interrogated.
But before we
proceed to the second Head, which deals with the method
of conducting this sort of process, we must first say
something of the witnesses who are to be examined, as to
how many they should be, and what should be their
condition.
|