This proceeding, and the particular favour which the emperor bestowed on the holy office, singularly increased the pride of the inquisitors, and their audacity in abusing the secrecy of their trials. But the hatred of the people for the Inquisition, and their rebellion in 1535, compelled Charles V. to revoke the privileges which he had granted, and deprive it of the royal jurisdiction for five years.
This measure humiliated the inquisitors, but they contrived to re-establish their authority in 1538, when the inquisitor Don Arnauld Albertius was viceroy _ad interim_: his presence emboldened them to persecute all who offended them; but their despotism was not of long duration. The viceroy returned to Sicily; and finding that the aversion of the inhabitants for the Inquisition was still the same, he communicated it to the emperor, who, as an indispensable measure, prolonged the suspension of their privileges for a fresh term of five years. The aversion inspired by the holy office was not without a cause, as will be seen in the following affair, which happened in 1532.
Antonio Napoles, a rich inhabitant of the island, had been thrown into the secret prisons of the Inquisition: Francis Napoles, his son, applied to the Pope, and described this act of authority as the result of a miserable intrigue of some men of the lowest cla.s.s, of whom the inquisitors had been the dupes, and had granted them a degree of confidence which nothing could justify, since his father had acted like a good Catholic from his infancy. He represented that the dean of the inquisitors had leagued with his father"s enemies, and detained him in prison five months, to the scandal and discontent of the inhabitants of Palermo, and without affording him any means of defence; Francis entreated his holiness not to allow the inquisitor to judge his father.
The Pope referred the affair to his commissioners in Sicily, Don Thomas Guerrero and Don Sebastian Martinez. Scarcely had the inquisitors of Madrid received information of this event, than they pressed the emperor and Cardinal Manrique to write to the Pope, and represent to him that the existence of this commission destroyed the privileges of the Spanish Inquisition, on which that of Sicily depended. The weak Clement VII.
hastened to suppress the commission, and caused Guerrero to send all the writings of the process to the Spanish inquisitor-general. He appointed Doctor Don Augustin Camargo, inquisitor of Sicily, to continue the trial, or in his place any other inquisitor, so that Antonio Napoles fell into the hands of his enemy. He was condemned as an heretic, his property confiscated, (although he was admitted to reconciliation,) and to be imprisoned for life. What can justify the conduct of the Pope, the cardinal, and the judges?
The inquisitors of Sicily depended on the protection of the court of Madrid, and supposed, that when all fear of rebellion had ceased, their privileges would be restored: this was really the case; the emperor, in 1543, signed a royal ordinance, which annulled the suspension at the end of the tenth year. This event inspired the inquisitors with the boldness to signify to the Marquis de Terranova, that he must accomplish the penance to which he had been condemned.
An act appeared on the 16th of June, 1546, renewing the former concessions, and granting new ones. The Inquisition resolved to celebrate its victory; a solemn _auto-da-fe_ was celebrated, in which four contumacious persons were burnt in effigy. Similar ceremonies took place in 1549 and 1551. The inquisitors now became as insolent as formerly, treated the Sicilians of all cla.s.ses with so much severity, that a new sedition was excited in Palermo against the holy office, at the time when the edict _of the faith_ was about to be published. The viceroy succeeded in restoring tranquillity, and the inquisitors appeared more moderate, at least while they were under the influence of fear, and instead of the solemn _autos-da-fe_ which had caused so much indignation, satisfied themselves with celebrating them, from time to time, privately in the hall of the tribunal; but in 1569 they ordained one which was general, and gave rise to a circ.u.mstance which deserves to be recorded.
Among the prisoners of the Inquisition, was an unfortunate creature who had inspired the Marchioness of Pescari, the wife of the viceroy, with some interest. The inquisitors, thinking it necessary to conciliate the first magistrate of the island, remitted his punishment at the request of the marchioness, but at the same time informed the inquisitor-general of the circ.u.mstance, to avoid all reproach. The Supreme Council having deliberated on the affair, addressed a severe reprimand to the inquisitors, for having a.s.sumed a right which they did not possess, _because, in affairs of that nature, intercession could not be admitted_.
When the island of Malta belonged to the Spanish monarchy, it was subject to the Inquisition of Sicily; but when it was given to the knights of St. John of Jerusalem, it would have been contrary to the dignity of the grand-master to permit the exercise of foreign jurisdiction in it, after having received that of ecclesiastical power from the Pope.
A man was arrested in the island as an heretic, and the Inquisition of Sicily took informations on the affair. The grand-master wrote to demand them; the inquisitors consulted the council, which directed them, in 1575, not only to refuse them, but to claim the prisoner. The grand-master, resolved to defend his privileges, caused the man to be tried in the island, and he was acquitted. This act displeased the inquisitors, who, to revenge themselves, took advantage of an occurrence which took place in the following year.
Don Pedro de la Roca, a Spaniard, and a knight of Malta, killed the first alguazil of the Sicilian Inquisition in the city of Messina. He was arrested and conducted to the secret prisons of the holy office. The grand-master claimed his knight, as he alone had a right to try him. The council being consulted, commanded the inquisitors to condemn and punish the accused as an homicide. The inquisitor-general communicated this resolution to Philip II., who wrote to the grand-master to terminate the dispute.
The quarrels between the secular powers and the Inquisition were not less violent in Sicily: in 1580 and 1597 attempts were made to appease them, but without success; and in 1606 the Sicilians had the mortification of seeing their viceroy, the Duke de Frias, constable of Castile, prosecuted and subjected to their censures.
In 1592 the Duke of Alva, who was then viceroy, endeavoured by indirect means to repress the insolence of the inquisitors. Perceiving that the n.o.bility of all cla.s.ses were enrolled among the _familiars_ of the holy office, in order to enjoy its privileges, and to keep the people in greater order, he represented to the king that the power of the sovereign and the authority of his lieutenant were almost null, and would be entirely so in time, if these different cla.s.ses continued to enjoy privileges which had the effect of neutralizing the measures of government. Charles II. acknowledged that this state of things was contrary to the dignity of his crown; and he decreed that no person employed by the king should possess those prerogatives, even if he was a _familiar_ or officer of the Inquisition. The people then began to feel less respect for the tribunal; and this was the commencement of its decline.
In 1713, Sicily no longer formed a part of the Spanish dominions, and Charles de Bourbon in 1739 obtained a bull, which created an inquisitor-general for that country, independent of Spain; and in 1782, Ferdinand IV., who succeeded Charles, suppressed this odious tribunal.
During the two hundred and seventy-nine years of its existence, the solemn and general _autos-da-fe_ were celebrated of which Munter speaks, and several others which were performed in the hall of the tribunal.
In the year 1546, which corresponds with the administration of Cardinal Loaisa, the number of condemned in the fifteen Spanish tribunals amounted to seven hundred and eighty individuals.
CHAPTER XVIII.
OF IMPORTANT EVENTS DURING THE FIRST YEARS OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE EIGHTH INQUISITOR-GENERAL; RELIGION OF CHARLES V. DURING THE LAST YEARS OF HIS LIFE.
_Trials during the first years of the ministry of Valdes._
Don Ferdinand Valdes was the successor of Cardinal Loaisa in the archbishopric of Seville, and the office of inquisitor-general. At the time of his appointment he was bishop of Siguenza, and president of the royal Council of Castile, after having been successively a member of the grand College of St. Bartholomew de Salamanca, of the Council of Administration for the archbishopric of Toledo, for the Cardinal Ximenez de Cisneros, visitor of the Inquisition of Cuenca and of the Royal Council of Navarre, a member of the Council of State, canon of the metropolitan church of Santiago de Galicia, counsellor of the Supreme Inquisition, bishop of Elna, Orensa, Oviedo and Leon, and president of the Royal Chancery of Valladolid. So many honours could not render him insensible to the mortification of not being a cardinal like his predecessors, and of seeing Bartholomew Carranza elevated to the see of Toledo. This was the true cause of his cruel persecution of Carranza.
The Pope approved the nomination of Valdes in January, 1547, and he took possession of his office in the following month. Valdes displayed an almost sanguinary disposition during his administration. It led him to demand from the Pope the power of condemning Lutherans to be burnt, even though they had not relapsed, and had desired to be reconciled. I shall here make known the most ill.u.s.trious of the victims sacrificed before the abdication of Charles V., as it is necessary to make a separate article for the events of that nature under the reign of Philip II.
Among the condemned persons who appeared in the _auto-da-fe_ of Seville in 1552, was Juan Gil, a native of Olvera, in Aragon, and a canon in the metropolitan church of that city; he is better known by the name of Doctor _Egidius_. He was first condemned, as violently suspected, to abjure the Lutheran heresy, and to be subjected to a penance; but four years after his death, in 1556, he was condemned, and, as having relapsed, his body was disinterred, and burnt with his effigy; his memory was declared infamous, and his property confiscated, for having died as a Lutheran. Raymond Gonzales de Montes was his companion in prison, but succeeded in escaping, and was burnt in effigy. In a work written on the Spanish Inquisition, he has introduced several particulars relating to the life of _Juan Gil_. He informs us that Egidius studied theology at Alcala de Henares, and there obtained the t.i.tle of Doctor. He acquired so great a reputation, that he was compared to Peter Lombard, to St. Thomas d"Aquinas, to John Scott, and other theologians of the greatest merit. His talents induced the chapter of Seville to offer him unanimously the office of preacher to the cathedral. Egidius had very little talent for preaching, and the canons soon repented of having appointed him.
Rodrigo de Valero told Egidius that the books from which he derived his knowledge were worth nothing, and that his preaching would never be admired, if he did not study the Bible. Egidius took his advice, and in time acquired a style of preaching extremely agreeable to the people, but his success raised him many enemies.
The emperor gave him the Bishopric of Tortosa in 1550, which increasing the envy and hatred of his enemies, they denounced him to the Inquisition of Seville as a Lutheran heretic, for some propositions which he had advanced in his sermons, and which they separated from the other parts, to give them a different sense from what they would otherwise have had; they took advantage of the favour he showed to Rodrigo Valero in 1540 during his trial, and of some other circ.u.mstances, to injure him.
Egidius was taken to the secret prisons of the holy office in 1550: he made use of this opportunity to compose his apology, which rendered the storm his enemies had raised still more violent. His simplicity had made him, in his apology, establish as certain principles, some propositions which the scholastic theologians looked upon as erroneous, and tending to heresy. The conduct and morals of Egidius were so pure, that the emperor wrote in his favour, the chapter of Seville followed his example, and (what is still more remarkable) the licentiate, Correa, Dean of the inquisitors, was touched by his innocence, and undertook to defend him against his colleague, Pedro Diaz, who bore the greatest hatred to the accused. This circ.u.mstance was particularly mortifying to Egidius, as his enemy formerly held the same opinions, and had likewise studied in the school of Rodrigo Valero.
The interest which Egidius had inspired induced the inquisitors to accede to his proposal of a discussion between him and some learned theologians. Brother Garcia de Arias, of the convent of St. Isidore of Seville, was chosen; but his opinion was not deemed sufficient, and Juan Gil demanded the Dominican friar, Dominic Soto, should be summoned to the conference. This incidence r.e.t.a.r.ded the trial, but Soto at last arrived at Seville.
According to Gonzales de Montes, this theologian held the same opinions as Egidius; but to prevent the suspicions which might arise from this circ.u.mstance, he persuaded Egidius to draw up a sort of confession of faith. They agreed that both should write their opinions, and only communicate them to each other in public. This author states that these confessions of faith were compared, and found to accord perfectly.
The inquisitors being informed of this arrangement, declared that, as the reputation of a bishop was concerned, it was necessary to convoke a public a.s.sembly, where Dominic Soto should explain the object of the meeting in a sermon, and read his confession of faith; that Egidius should afterwards read his, that the a.s.sembly might judge of the conformity of their opinions. The inquisitors caused two pulpits to be prepared, but, either by chance, or from a private order, they were so far apart, that Egidius could not hear what Soto said.
Soto[12] read an exposition of his principles entirely different from that on which they had agreed in their private conferences; and as Egidius did not hear him, and supposed that he was reading the same confession which he had approved, he consequently made signs with his head and hands that be accorded with his propositions. Egidius then began to read his confession of faith, but those who understood the subject, soon perceived that there was not the slightest resemblance between them, and that Egidius held several opinions entirely opposite to some propositions advanced by Dominic Soto, and acknowledged as dogmatical by _the tribunal of the faith_: this circ.u.mstance effaced the favourable impressions produced by the gestures of Egidius. The inquisitors added these writings to those of the trial, and pa.s.sed judgment upon Egidius according to the advice of Soto. He was declared violently suspected of the Lutheran heresy, and condemned to three years" imprisonment; he was prohibited from preaching, writing, or explaining theology for the s.p.a.ce of ten years, and never to leave the kingdom on pain of being considered and punished as a formal heretic.
Egidius remained in prison until 1555; he was at first extremely astonished at his situation, after having perfectly agreed with the Dominican on all the points in question. He was not undeceived, until some of his fellow-prisoners informed him of the difference of his articles with those of Soto, and the treachery of that monk.
Egidius took advantage of the short interval of liberty which followed his imprisonment to go to Valladolid, where he had an interview with Doctor Cazalla and other Lutherans in that city: on his return to Seville he fell sick, and died in 1556. The tribunal being informed of his intercourse with heretics, inst.i.tuted another trial, and p.r.o.nounced that he died an heretic; his body was disinterred, and burnt with his effigy, in a solemn _auto-da-fe_, his memory declared infamous, and his property confiscated: this sentence was executed in 1560.
It will be necessary here to quote a letter of Don Bartholomew Carranza to Brother Louis de la Cruz, a Dominican, and his disciple. The archbishop mentions as a well-known circ.u.mstance, that his catechism had been presented to the holy office; Brother Melchior Cano and Dominic Soto had been commissioned to censure it, and that they had judged unfavourably of his work. He complained much of this conduct in Soto; he said he could not comprehend such scruples _in a man who had been so indulgent to the Doctor Egidius who was considered as an heretic, while, on the contrary, the author of the Catechism had combated the opinions of the heretics of England and Flanders_; that Soto had judged the book of a Dominican monk no less favourably, while he treated an archbishop, whom he was bound to respect, without consideration; that he would, in consequence, write to Rome and Flanders, where he hoped that his propositions would be more favourably received than at Valladolid; but that, at all events, Pedro de Soto, confessor to the emperor, would write to Dominic, and he hoped that the Almighty would allay the tempest which had been raised around him.
Brother Pedro wrote to Dominic Soto, and a correspondence ensued between him and the archbishop Carranza, on the censure of the catechism, and other works. These letters were found among the papers of Carranza, when he was arrested by the Inquisition. They proved that Dominic Soto had violated the secrecy which he had sworn to maintain before the Inquisition: some details were found in them relating to the violence which had been used to make him condemn the catechism of Carranza; he was arrested by the Inquisition of Valladolid, on account of these expressions.
It appears from the archbishop"s letter, that the censure of Brother Dominic on Egidius was mild and conciliating, which does not accord with the subst.i.tution of the false exposition of his principles mentioned by Gonzales de Montes. I must observe that this author writes like a man blinded by his hatred of his enemies, whom he calls papists, hypocrites, and idolaters; he even carries his fanaticism so far as to look upon the deaths of the three judges of Egidius during his lifetime as a particular effect of divine justice.
As the affair of Juan Gil is connected with the history of Rodrigo Valero, I shall here relate it. He was born of a good family in Lebrija.
In his youth, he was extremely irregular and dissipated, but all at once he quitted society, and shut himself up to study the Scriptures with so much ardour, that his conversation, and his contempt for food and clothing, made him pa.s.s for a madman.
He endeavoured to persuade priests and monks, that the Roman church was far from holding the pure doctrine of the Evangelists, and became one of the sect of Luther. His attachment to their doctrine was so great, that when he was asked from whom he held his mission, he replied from G.o.d himself through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
This fanatic was denounced to the holy office, which paid no attention to it, being persuaded that Rodrigo was mad. But as he continued to preach in the streets in favour of Lutheranism, and as no part of his conduct showed that he was deranged, he was arrested, and would have been condemned to be delivered over to secular justice, if the inquisitors had not persisted in believing him to be mad, and if his disciple Egidius, whose opinions were not then known, had not undertaken his defence. Nevertheless, he was condemned in 1540 as an heretic and _false apostle_; he was admitted to reconciliation, deprived of his property, condemned to the _San-benito_, to perpetual imprisonment, and to a.s.sist on every Sunday at the grand ma.s.s of St. Saviour of Seville.
Several times, when he heard the preacher advance propositions contrary to his own, he raised his voice, and reproached him for his doctrine: this boldness confirmed the inquisitors in the opinion that he was deprived of reason: he was shut up in a convent in the town of San Lucar de Barrameda, where he died at the age of fifty. Gonzales de Montes considers him as a man miraculously sent by G.o.d to preach the truth: he adds, that his _San-benito_ was suspended in the metropolitan church of Seville, where it excited great curiosity, as he was the first person condemned as a _false apostle_.
Although, during the period of which I have related the history, there were fewer Judaic heretics than in former times, yet there were many more than might be supposed. Of this number was _Mary de Bourgogne_, who was born at Saragossa: her father-in-law was a native of Burgundy, of Jewish extraction. A _New Christian_ slave, (who had renounced the law of Moses, to obtain his liberty, and was afterwards burnt for having relapsed,) in 1552, denounced Mary de Bourgogne, who resided in the city of Murcia, and had attained her eighty-fifth year. This man deposed that, before his conversion, some person asked him if he was a Christian; he replied that he was a Jew, and that Mary then said to him, _You are right, for the Christians have neither faith nor law_. It will no doubt appear incredible, but the trial proves that in 1557 she was still in prison, waiting until sufficient proof was found to condemn her. After having waited in vain, the inquisitors commanded that Mary should be _tortured, though she was then ninety years old_, and the council had decreed that in such cases the criminal should only be intimidated by the preparations. The inquisitor Cano says, that the _moderate_ torture was applied; but such were the effects of this gentle application, that the unfortunate Mary ceased to live and suffer in a few days after.
The inquisitors took advantage of some expressions which escaped from the unfortunate woman during the torture, to condemn her as a Judaic heretic, in order to confiscate her property, which was considerable.
Her memory, her children, and her descendants in the male line were declared infamous, her bones and effigy were burnt, and her property confiscated.
The Supreme Council showed a certain degree of moderation in another affair, before the tribunal of Toledo. Michael Sanchez died in prison, before his sentence, which was a pecuniary penalty, could be announced to him: the inquisitors were uncertain if his property was liable for this penalty; they applied to the council, which replied in the negative.
I now terminate the history of the remarkable events of the reign of Charles V. After a reign of forty years, this prince abdicated the crown in favour of his son Philip II., on the 16th of January, 1556. He did not long survive his abdication; he died in the convent of the Jeronimites, at Yuste in the province of Estremadura, on the 21st of September, 1558, aged fifty-seven years and twenty-one days. He had made his will at Brussels on the 16th of June, 1554, and a codicil in the monastery of Yuste, twelve days before his death.
_Religion of Charles V._
Some historians have a.s.serted, that Charles V. adopted, in his retreat, the opinions of the German protestants; that in his last illness he confessed himself to Constantine Ponce de la Fuente, his preacher, who was afterwards known to be a Lutheran; that after his death Philip II.
commissioned the inquisitors to examine the affair, and that the holy office took possession of the emperor"s will, to examine if it contained anything contrary to the true faith. These statements compel me to enter into some details which will elucidate this point of history.
To ascertain that the report on the religion of Charles V. is only an invention of the protestants and the enemies of Philip II., it is sufficient to read the life of that prince, and that of his father, composed by Gregorio Leti. Although this historian has made use of the least authentic doc.u.ments, in his work, he is entirely silent on this point. He enters into a minute detail of the life and occupations of Charles V. in his retreat, and he relates many decisive proofs of his attachment to the catholic faith, and his zeal in wishing that it might triumph over the Lutheran heresy; and though no dependance can be placed on what he says concerning the conversations of the emperor with the Archbishop Carranza, (since there is nothing relating to them in his trial, which I have read,) yet it must be confessed that his recital is otherwise very exact.
It is not true that Constantine Ponce de la Fuente attended the emperor in his last moments, either as his preacher, (which office he had filled in Germany,) or as a bishop, since he did not possess that dignity, as foreign authors have a.s.serted without any foundation, or as his confessor, since he had never directed his conscience, though the emperor had always looked upon him as one of the most learned and respectable priests in his kingdom. Lastly, Ponce de la Fuente could not a.s.sist Charles V. in his last moments, since it appears from his trial before the Inquisition of Seville, that he was in the secret prisons of the holy office long before the illness of the emperor. Don Prudent de Sandoval, Bishop of Tui and Pampeluna, speaking of the last circ.u.mstances of the life of Charles V., relates that when that prince heard of the imprisonment of Ponce, he said, _Oh! if Constantine is an heretic, he is a great heretic_: an expression very different from that which he used on hearing that a monk named Dominic de Guzman had been arrested in the same city: _They might rather imprison him as a fool than an heretic._
In his codicil, written twelve days before his death, Charles V. thus expresses himself: "When I had been informed that many persons had been arrested in some provinces, and that others were to be taken, as accused of Lutheranism, I wrote to the princess my daughter, to inform her in what manner they should be punished, and the evil remedied. I also wrote afterwards to Louis Quixada, and authorized him to act in my name in the same affair; and although I am persuaded that the king my son, the princess my daughter, and the ministers, have already, and will always, make every possible effort to destroy so great an evil, with all the severity and prompt.i.tude which it requires; yet, considering what I owe to the service of our Lord, the triumph of his faith, the preservation of his church and the Christian religion, (in the defence of which I have performed such painful labours at the risk of my life, as every one knows;) and particularly desiring, above all, to inspire my son, whose catholic sentiments I know, with the wish of imitating my conduct, and which I hope he will do, from knowing his virtue and piety, I beg and recommend to him very particularly, as much as I can and am obliged to do, and command him moreover in my quality of father, and by the obedience which he owes me, to labour with diligence, as in a point which particularly interests him, that the heretics shall be prosecuted and chastised with all the severity which their crimes deserve, _without permitting any criminal to be excepted, without any respect for the entreaties, or rank, or quality of the persons_: and that my intentions may have their full and entire effect, I desire him to protect the holy office of the Inquisition, for the great numbers of crimes which it prevents or punishes, _remembering that I have charged him to do so in my will_, that he may fulfil his duty as a prince, and render himself worthy that the Lord should make his reign prosperous, conduct his affairs, and protect him against his enemies, to my consolation[13]."