KURTVILLADS JENSEN WAR AG/UNST MUSLIMS ACCORDING TO BENEDICT OF ALIGNAI\IO, OFM Extractum ex Periodico Anchtvum Franclscanum Hlstor{cum An. 89 (1996) Grottaferrata (Roma) 1996 WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS ACCORDING TO BENEDICT OF ALIGNANO. OFM Kunr Vrueos JENSEN In 1940 P.A. Throop expressed the theory that the thirteenth century experienced a growing criticism of crusades'. Crusading was gradually being replaced by attempts to convert the infidels by peaceful means, with missions, and by an increasing tolerance towards those outside the Christian Church. It is understandable that we in 1940 should have focused on tolerance and criticism of warfare, but the whole issue of these concepts in the Middle Ages is complicated, and Throop,s theory has been subject to many modifications since 1940. In the last decades it has been shown that theologians felt no opposition between crusade and mission in the thirteenth century, but the two were generally seen as complementary devices. During the 1230's pope Innocent IV formulated the crusade as not aiming at coerced conversion, but ensuring missionaries the possibility to preach the Gospel to infidels. According to this definition, Benjamin z. Kedar has divided theorists into two groups: those milder than Innocent and those harsher than Innocent 2. St. Thomas Aquinas belonged to the latter group which consisted of those who would justify crusading as a direct means to the conversion or the extinction of Saracens. The aim of this article is to present a new text on crusading by Benedict of Alignano, who certainly was one of those harsher than Innocent, and to suggest, in brief terms, an interpretation of this text by comparing it with writings by Thomas Aquinas and others. The text is not long - approximately 4 folios - but it is a chapter in a treatise on the Trinity which is itself very long, in the manuscripts it comprises from 360 to almost 500 folios, and remains unedited. t P. A. Tunoop, Criticism of the Crusade: A Study of public Opinion and Crusade Propaganda, Amsterdam 1940. ' BENJAMTNZ. Ksoen, crusade and Mission. European Approaches toward the Muslims, Princeton 1984, with references to Innocent's theories of crusadins. 182 KURT VILLADS JENSEN Benedict was a member of the Benedictine order and elected abbot of Notre Dame de la Grasse in Aude 1224.'Iwo years later he successfully negotiated the surrender of the population of Carcassonne to the French king, Louis IX. He was nominated bishop of Marseille c. 1228 and became, probably shortly afterwards, a member of the Franciscan order. As a bishop he became much involved in litigations between the city and the count of Toulouse, he sided with the latter part and rose the antagonism of the citicens. In the middle of the 1230's he was forced to leave his see by the canons; it might perhaps have been with some relief that he set out for a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, probably in 7239. He became actively engaged in organising the reconstruction of the fortress of Safed, arguing that it would be a most effective stronghold for the protection of Christianity and the impugnation of the Saracens3. He was back in Marseilles 1242. Around the year 1260, Benedict went on a second pilgrimage to the Holy Land and stayed in Acre where he completed his treatise on the Trinity. He was then in his sixties and retired from his see in 7267. He died the following year and so this treatise presents his most mature thought on the crusade a. His work on the Holy Trinity is well known in literature on Christians and Muslims in the Middle Ages because it includes a description of the Muslim concept of Paradise which probably belongs to the group of sources that Dante might have used for his Divine Comedy 5. Benedict's attitude toward Islam is also well known from 3 A text on the construction of the fortress of Saphet has been attributed to Benedict; this is unfounded and very improbable, cf. R.B.C. HuycENs, Un nouveau texte du traitd "De constrLtctione castri Saphet", in Studi medievali 3. ser. VI, I, (1965) 355-87. a For his life, Gor-usovrcH, Biblioteca Bio-bibliografica della Tersee Grnolluo ra Santa e dell'Oriente francescano. Quaracchi 1906-1927, l, 236-53; MlnrIN GnnsueNN, Der Franziskanerbischof Benedictus de Alignano (f 1268) und seine Summa zurn Caput Firmiter des vierten lnterankonzils, in Kirchengeschichtliche Studien P. Michael BihI o.f.m. als Ehrengabe dargeboten, ed. I.-M. FnruorNnucH, Kolmar, 1941, 50-64; P.-A. AvencIen, Benott d'Alignan,4vAque de Marseille (1229-1268). Le contexte et I'4sprit d'une th4ologie, in lz Moyen Age. Revue d'ltistoire et de Philologie 72 (1966), 443-62. According to Salimbene, Benedict lived ten years in the order of the Franciscans and should thus have entered the order in 1258. However, since 1230 Benedict began to call himself /rater inthe letters he issued which strongly indicates that he had decided to become a Franciscan shortly after the nomination as bishop; cf. Got-usovtcu, Biblioteca, 237 f . 5 See ENnrco Cenur-lr, II "Libro della scala" e la questione delle fonti arabospagnole della Divirn Commedia, Citti del Vaticano 1949 (Studi e Testi, 150). Edition of this palt of the treatise on pp. 412-16. WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS 183 his revealing remark in this text, that "The absurdities of this Muhammad, who spoke in the manner of the insane or even beasts, are not worthy of debate but should rather be extirpated by fire and sword." 6 The chapter I want to discuss here has, as far as I know, remained unnoticed. But both for its content and for its composition, it illuminates the thirteenth century attitudes toward Islam. The chapter is found in a part of the work where Benedict wanted to refute heretics' accusations that the Church misused the sacraments. One accusation was that the institution of the indulgence was without scriptural justification and, especially, that the Church could not give a plenary indulgence to those who fought on crusades. So Benedict's aim with this chapter was to defend the institution of indulgence and to do so explicitly by providing theological justifications for crusading against Muslims. He stated this directly and throughout the text refered to Muslims as "Heretics and Pagans". Content of text Benedict first discussed whether killing is permissible at all. It is, he concluded, using various references to Scripture along with the argument that God had inflicted spiritual and corporal death upon man because "he ate of an apple". For more serious sins, Benedict wrote, death should therefore be used as punishment. This was substantiated by a range of references to the Old and New Testaments. The next argument is perfectly understandable in a feudal society. Whoever has received a gift or a benefice and then attacks the giver without cause should, by law, loose the benefice. All hold life as a benefice from the Creator, and he who fights against God has, by law, forfeited his right to life. All who live an evil life fight againsr God, especially heretics and pagans: therefore, their life can lawfully be 6 "Deliramenta ipsius Machometi, qui more insanientium et more etiam pecudum locutus est, non sunt disputatione digna, sed potius igne ac gladio extirpanda,,. Ms. Rome, Biblioteca Alessandrina l4l, f.354v. Quoted by Knoe.p., Crusade and Mission, 189; N. DANTEL,Islam and the West. The Making of an Image, Edinburgh 1960, I 1 3. 184 KURT VILLADS JENSEN taken from them. This last formulation resembles a position of Thomas Aquinas, namely, that non-Christians pose a threat to Christianity and a blasphemy by the sheer fact of being non-Christian 7. Benedict proceeds with arguments drawn from comparison. If existing or material beasts - as wolfs, lions, and dragons - should be exterminated by iron and fire in order to save human bodies, so should the spiritual beasts, who devour and kill the souls, be exterminated by the sword. Or, as a member of the body infected by cancer should be amputated, so heretics and pagans should be cut off and bumed out. Benedict also discusses the heretics' argument that persistent infidels should be killed not by man but by God. To this he concludes that if man did not defend God's religion, it would be exposed to the danger of extermination. Therefore it was necessary to kill infidels. He discusses whether it is legitimate to compel others to convert against their own will. He opens this question by stating that man shall be taught just as dogs are taught and made better by correction, training, and discipline. But it is certain to all that man is nobler than animals and therefore needs more teaching and more discipline. It might be necessary to enforce this discipline upon man against his own will if it is the only way to save him from danger. Accordingly one should drag children and other humans out of the waves of the sea if they are about to drown, even if they protest, and even more should one drag infidels out of the spiritual sea, which is a danger to their souls, even against their own will. Similar arguments, comparisons, and quotations from Scripture and Canon Law were produced to support the opinion that the use of force against infidels is justifiable. Benedict then ends his chapter with a discussion of the problem that infidels, if killed, cannot be converted. He concedes that they might be tolerated for this reason but only in those instances where it was certain that they would convert. In those instances where their perversity was manifest and there were no apparent signs of conversion, they should immediately be killed. One should not spare a few in the vain hope of conversion and thereby risk the perdition of a multitude of faithful - just as one should not let a wolf live among sheep in the vain hope that it would be converted into a sheep. ' Summa Theologica II, II, 10, 11, cf. also note 11-12 below WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS 185 This chapter certainly categorizes Benedict as one harsher than Innocent and harsher than the great majority of theologians in the thirteenth century. Benedict gave the theological justification for an unlimited use of force in the crusades, and the aim of crusading was defined primarily as that of the extinction of Saracens, not as that of defending Christianity against Islam or as ensuring preaching to Muslims. Conversion of Saracens is mentioned only briefly by Benedict and then as an exception. Composition The structure of the arguments in this chapter might give an explanation of his harsh attitude. None of the arguments are Benedict's own. They are all quotations from a treatise by the Paris bishop Wilhelm of Auverne written around 1226-28. In Wilhelm's work, however, the arguments are used in a totally other context than in Benedict's E. Wilhelm wrote about religion in general, and in the first chapter he gave an exposition of the content of Lex hebreorum, of the Law of Moses in the Old Testament. He discussed the problem that although God's law can be expressed in three or even in only two commandments, the Old Testament contains 613 different precepts (which is a number, Wilhelm almost certainly had learned from Jewish exegesis). This great number is explained by the fact that Jewish law was only part of the law or a law in an imperfect state. It therefore contains precepts that were necessary for that time, such as those concerning divorce, and were later abrogated by the Christian religion. But the law of the Old Testament also contains principles that are still valid such as the institution of justice and the principle of talion (that injustice shall be met with a fitful punishment corresponding to the injustice done), and for certain crimes, capital punishment is necessary as is evident from the Old Testament. 8 Benedict's treatise on the Holy Trinity was much dependent on Wilhelm's De fide et de legibus; cf. MsrNor-r MUcKsHoFF, Die Quaestiones disputatae de .fide des Bartholomius von Bologna O.F.M., MUnster in W., 1940, (Beitrcige zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters 24,4): ll8-9; Ar-gsnr Lar.rc, Dia Entfultung des apologetischen Problems in der Scholastik des Mittelalrers, Freiburg 1962, passim. I have used the edition Gunslvrr AlvenNr Opera Omnia, Paris 1674, the pertinent passages on pp.26-29. 18 6 KURT VILLADS JENSEN At this point, Wilhelm's exposition is intemrpted by a long digression against "The mob of quarreling heretics of our time who dare to argue against the justice and law of God, saying that it is never permissible to kill a man." All the arguments just mentioned are produced in order to prove: first, that death might be the necessary and just punishment against those violating justice; and second, that those violating justice are primarily the heretics against whom it is justifiable to use compulsion and death. Death is even an advantage to heretics, since they, if they live a shorter time, will sin less and thus be spared some of the corporal pains in hell ,. There are only minor differences between the two versions of the text. The order of the arguments in Benedict's text differs slightly from Wilhelm's, and Benedict's arguments are a little more condensed '0. A striking difference is, however, that the arguments by Wilhelm were all directed specifically against heretics, while they were collected by Benedict and used against Muslims. This means that Benedict did not distinguish between heretics and Muslims, and that to him the same arguments were applicable to both. But why did he identify Muslims as Heretics? Muslims and heretics The concept of Islam as a heresy within Christianity can be found in Christian literature back to the eight century, but the implication of this concept seems to change during the thirteenth century. until then most theologians would make the distinction that heretics defined as those who has been baptised and then elapsed from faith could legally be forced back into the church; while Jews, pagans, and Muslims could not be coerced to believe. This was a distinction based on whether they actually had or had not received the sacrament of baptism, and the implication was that one could at any time and with " "Et p'opter hoc sicut per mortem corporum prosunt eis, licet invitis ne peccent amplius, sic et ne amplius torqueantur. Non solum ne in animabus, sed etiam ne in corpot'ibus. Quapropter ipsis corporibus eorum occidendo parcitur evidenter, cum pars suppliciorum infelnalium, qua in corpore passuri erant, eis detrahitur per mor.tem". De legibus cap. l; in Opera Ornnia 7674, 28, col. 2. l0 Benedict's version also contains references to canon Law that are not found in the printed edition of wilhelm's text. I have not consulted any manuscript to see whethel this difference is caused by Benedict or by the editor of wilhelm's texr. WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS r87 no further cause fight Heretics, while Muslims - in principle - should produce a cause other than being Muslims. During the thirteenth century more emphasis was placed on the individual's intention and on the individual's personal responsibility. Therefore the sharp distinction between heretics and Muslims was blurred. The main point was no longer their formal status but their intention to do evil or deliberately to deviate from faith. With the emphasis on the intention it is no wonder that Benedict might use the same arguments against heretics and Muslims. The same tendency is found at Thomas Aquinas who, although he did uphold the distinction between heretics and those who had not received baptism, allowed Christians to wage war against the latter because of their persecutions, their evil persuasions, and their blasphemy ". This was actually an almost unlimited permission to fight infidels, because, wrote Thomas elsewhere, non-Christians presented a blasphemy and sinned in serving their own religion, and Christians would be involved in their sins if they allowed them to continue'2. Intention is also the keypoint in the Dominican general master, Humbert of Romans' treatise on preaching the Holy Cross. Humbert's aim was to prove that crusades were certainly just wars, bellum iustissimum, because Muslims were attacking and therefore had provided the cause for war. They were so even if they had not actually raised arms against Christians, because their sole intention was to destroy Christianity: "They thirst incessantly for the blood of Christians."'3 rr "Respondeo dicendum quod infidelium quidam sunt qui nunquam susceperunt fidem, sicut gentiles et Iudaei. Et tales nullo modo sunt ad fidem compellendi, ut ipsi credant: quia credere voluntatis est. Sunt tamen compellendi a fidelibus, si facultas adsit, ut fidem non impediant vel blasphemiis, vel malis persuasionibus, vel etiam apertis persecutionibus. Et propter hoc fideles Christi frequenter contra infideles bellum movent, non quidem ut eos ad credendum cogant (quia si etiam eos vicissent et captivos haberent, in eorum libertate relinquerent an credere vellent): sed propter hoc ut eos compellant ne fidem Christi impediant. Alii vero sunt infideles qui.quandoque fidem susceperunt et eam prpfitentur: sicut haeretici vel quicumque apostatae. Et tales sunt etiam corporaliter compellendi ut impleant quod promiserunt et teneant quod semel s-usceperunt". Summa Theologictt ll, II, 10, 8; cf. art. 6, 9. 12 "Manifestum est enim quod infideles in suis ritibus peccant eos selvando. Sed peccato consentire videtur qui non prohibet cum prohibere possit: ut habetur in Glossa Rom. 1, super illud, Non solum qui faciunt, sed etiam qui consentiunt facientibus. Ergo peccant qui eorum ritus toleranf'. Summa Teologicc II, II, 10, 11. t' "sitiunt enim sanguinem christianum sine modo". HuMBERTUs RoveNrs, Opas Tripartitum, in EDwARD BnowN, Appendix ad Fasciculurn rerum expetendarum et t88 KURT VILLADS JENSEN Muslims then sinned by being Muslims and therefore having an evil intention, and they could now in the thirteenth century be made personally responsible also by theologians so that this intention in itself provided the cause for waging war against them. This might explain the tendency to identify Muslims and heretics and therefore to show an attitude that .was harsher than pope Innocent's. In conclusion, it might be interesting to elaborate on this thought and its implications for the following century. In another context, Thomas Aquinas discussed the question whether it was possible to be saved without baptism. His answer was that those who had had the intention of being baptised but died before they actually received the sacrament, would be savedra. The emphasis put on the intention is also evident from another position of Thomas Aquinas, wherein he states that a child who dies in the desert before being baptised, will not be saved because it cannot have a desire or an intention of being so. Children can only gain salvation through baptism or through being martyrdom. It is formulations like these, where the focus is on the intention rather than on the act of baptism, that mark the beginning of a new attitude toward infidels. It became possible in the late thirteenth century to develop an idea of salvation outside the Church and independent of the sacraments, a thought that slowly becomes visible in the writings of Thomas Aquinas, of Roger Bacon, and perhaps of Ramon Lull, and a thought that Robert Holkot and others in the fourteenth century elaborated on. It marks, more than any criticism of crusading a new tolerance toward non-Christians, a tolerance generated by a concept of the individual's intention, which paradoxically also led to the harsh and unrestrained attitude of Benedict of Alignano. fugiend.arum,London 1690, 185-228, cap. 12. Cf. also his De predicatione Sancte Crucis, Niirenberg c. 1495. ta Summa Theologica III, 68, 3. WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS 189 THE TEXT Benedict's treatise saw a wide diffusion in the fifteenth century in Eastern and Central Europe, where it was used against the Hussite heresy. Eighteen manuscripts are known'5 of which six are now in Krakau, three in Prague, and others are in Berlin, Leipzig, Danzig, and Munice. All these manuscripts date from the last decade of the fourteenth century with the exception of two early manuscripts, one in Paris and one in Rome, which were copied in the early fourteenth century. The following edition is based on these two manuscripts on which all the later seem to depend. There is a omission of one or two lines in the Rome-ms compared to the one from Paris. The latter therefore seem to be a fuller and more faithful rendering of the text of Benedict's original than the Rome-ms and it has therefore been chosen af the base-ms. for the edition. In other variants, the Rome-ms. often seem to have the better readings, but it is not possible to determine whether they actually are Benedict's own words or merely sound corrections made by the copyist. They have therefore been indicated in the apparatus only. t5 Seventeen mss. are described in M. Gnasr\,raNlr, Der Franziskanerbishof, 5l53. To these should be added London British Library Arundel 458, f. r09r-230r (s. xv) which is a compilation based on Benedict's treatise but with passages included from later authors. The chapter under consideration here is rendered in full and without major changes. 190 KURT VN T ADS JENSEN BENEDIC'TUSMASSILIENSISEPISCOPUS De Summa Trinitate et fide catholica (Paris, Bibt Nat. Int. 4224, fol. 389v-392ra)l [BN 389v] Quid episcopalis est officiiz Quia cuius potestatis est penitentiales satisfactionesiniungere, eiusdem est eas augere, minuere, et mutare, prout ad Dei gloriam, honorificentiam et animarum salutem publicamque spiritualem utilitatem uiderit expedire. honorem et gloriam et regni uel domus sue utilitatem tenetur expendere, et ubi maiorem uel honorem uel utilitatem uidet, ibi largius, cum eius fidei commissa sit eorum dispensatio,xxvi. q. vii a. "Alligant". Additiones autem, diminutiones, commutationes atque penalitates penitentialium satisfactionum prelatis commisse sunt, Mt. xvi. d. '"Tibi dabo claues" etc., Jo. xx. f. "Quorum remiseritis" etc. Manifestum est igitur pertinere ad eos, ut expendanthoc largius aut parcius, prout negocia uel opera ex paruitate uel magnitudine diuini honoris requisierint, Quare fiant maxime indulgentie contra fidei inimicos et pro subsi.dio terre sancte et propter hoc, quia maximus honor Dei est in terra christiana religio, maximaque utilitas animarum pro ea plantanda,conseruanda,amplianda, defendenda,necessehabent servi Dei, scilicet prelati ecclesie, de 5 prenominatisbonis sibi commissis expenderequantum[39Orb]cumque predicte necessitatesrequirunt. t Mss.: Paris Bibliotheque Nationale lat. 4224, fol. 390ra-392ra (=BM); Roma Biblioteca Alessandrina141, fol. 306va-307vb(=BA). 2 Italicis huiusmodi typis designantur rubricae in margine scriptae in BA et BN. 3 His verbis exempla adiunguntur. t Decretum C.26, q.7, c. 12: Corpus Juris Canonici, ed. Ae. FriedberE, CJC) G I, col. 1044. 5 quam add BA. WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS Contra illos, qui dampnant indulgentias Et hoc est causa, propter quam largissime indulgentie fiunt ab ecclesia pro subsidio terre sancte et generaliter contra inimicos fidei et christiane religionis, quod est contra illos, qui dampnant indulgencias, quas facit ecclesia contra hereticos et sarracenos, dicentes quod per hoc datur occasio et licentia occidendi contra legem, Exo. xx., Deut. vi., et contra evangelium, Mt. v., Contra illos, qui dicunt quod non licet occidere hominem nullo casuT asserentesquod non licet occidere hominem nullo casu 8. Contra quos. Gen., vbi Deus mortem anime ac e corporis inflixit homini pro comestione pomi, ergo multo fortius inferenda est pro peccato maiori. Ad idem Item si mors eterna est infligenda pro culpa aliqua, ergo multo fortius temporalis, sed mors eterna infligitur, Mt. xxv .e. S., pro culpa boni omissi, ergo multo fortius infligenda est mors temporalis pro culpa mali commissi. Ad idem Item Deus precipit occidere pro multis causis, Exo. xxi. et xxx. S. et xxxii. S., Numeri xvi. et xxv., Deut. xiii. et vij.'0 et xix., et multis aliis locis. Item in novo testamento Mt. xiii. c., Lucas xix. d. Ratione ostenditur, quod licet occidere hereticos et paganos Ratione etiam ostenditur, quod licitum est occidere hereticos et paganos, quia qui dato [390va] sibi beneficio impugnat datorem omnino innocentem et in nullo illum ledentem, de iure debet amittere illud. Quicumque igitur vita, quam revera ut beneficium a Deo datore habet, Deum inpugnat, de iure debet amittere illam. Omnis autem maliciose ac maligne vivens vita sua Deum impugnat, maxime autem hereticus et paganus. Illi enim aperte Deum inpugnant auferendo illi hereditatem suam, videlicet animas hominum et suas et aliorum, similiter gloriam suam et honorem, dum cultum eius et religionem totis viribus ac 6 BA hanc rubricam infi'a ad "Quod est contra" refert 7 nullo casu: ulla causa BA. 8 nullo casu: ulla causa BA. e et BA. ro xviij BA. 192 KURT VILLADS JENSEN studiis destruere conantur. Ista enim genera hominum totam fere vitam suam in Dei inpugnationem, in eius iniuriam et contumeliam converterunt. De iure ergo eis auferri potest non solum vita corporalis, sed etiam animarum. si anime essent mortales. Ad idem Item aut pog.runir* est contra Dei inimicos aut non. Si sic, expugnandi igitur sunt, et iustum est bellum contra eos. Tam diu igitur pugnandum est contra eos, quam diu re[390vb]bellant. Si igitur usque ad mortem corporum suorum nolentes ad huc t' cedere vel desistere a Dei iniuriis ac contumeliis, pugnandum est contra eos usque ad mortem corporalem ipsorum. Manifestum est igitur, quod iusto bello occidendi sunt, si dixerint, quod non est pugnandum, sed cedendum vel fugiendum. Remanebit ergo indefensum regnur4 Dei, et tollitur Dei cultus et religio christiana, et misera vita corporum mortalium prefertur divine honorificentie et beate vite immortalium animarum. Ad idem Item queratur ab eis, utrum contradicendum sit hereticorum erroribus saltem verbo. Si dixerint quod non, restat ergo, ut veritas salutaris nec predicanda sit, nec docenda, cum erroribus huiusmodi non sit contradicendum secundum illos. Si dixerent quod sic'2 contradicendum verbo, pugnandum est igitur contra eos lingua. Nullo autem privilegio excepta est manus a divini honoris servitute sive servitio, immo per omnia eque debetrix est eius vt lingua, quare eque manu [391ra] pugnandum est contra errores huius'3 pro Dei gratia|a et animarum salute. Ad idem Item si bestie litterales sive materiales, videlicet lupi et leones, serpentes atque dracones, ferro et igne omnique genere debellationis exterminande sunt pro salute corporum humanorum, que devorant et occidunt, quanto fortius bestie spirituales pro salute animarum, quas seducendo et subvertendo spiritualiter devorant et occidunt seperantes eas a Deo, qui vita est animarum, omni gladio et bello exterminande sunt. rr ad huc: omnino BA. rz sit aut sic. 13ut lingua, quare ... errores huius: Ut res huius/hiis BA. ra gloria BA. WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS r93 Que convenientia malarum bestiarum et hereticorum Et attende comparationem bestiarum materialium et spiritualium, quia convenientissima est ac propria, si sevicia potestatum hereticorum, si venerositatem pseudopredicatorum attenderis. Exemplis ostenditur, quod blasphemi et heretici de medio sunt tollendi Item quia blasphemus inconigibilis blasphemiarumque predicator sic est in ecclesia Dei sicut ovis contagiose's morbida in grege et sicut membrum cancerosum in corpore, cancerosum dico cancro incurabili et iugiter serpente, ergo idem faciendum est de eo pro salute totius ecclesie, quod faciendum est de ove et membro huiusr6 pro totius gregis et corporis salute, quare resecandi sunt et exurendi et modis [391rb] omnibus ex necessitate de medio tollendi. po Cor. v.. Thi. pr. 1., xxiiij. q. iii. "Secande", "Corripiantur", ,,F;cce,,t1 . Quid dicunt heretici, et que inde sequitur inconvenientia Quid si forte dixerint, quia revera occidendi sunt impii pertina_ ces, non autem ab hominibus sed a Deo, sequitur secundum eos ex necessitate, quod honor Dei atque religio exterminio exponendi sunt nullaque eis defensio adhibenda. Accidit etiam, ut Deo nichil honoris penitus debeatur, cum nec in nobis, nec in aliis liceat nobis eius honorem defendere defensione, qua repellat oppugnantes. Quod non solum doctrina adhibenda est hominibus, ut dicunt heretici. sed invitis etiamts disciplina, rationibusts ostenditur et exempliszo Item queratur ab eis, si sunt erudiendi homines vel corrigendi. Si dicant quod non, restat igitur quod homines omnibus vitiis exponantur, et deterioris conditionis sint homines secundum ipsos quam canes et cetera animalia, que docentur et meliorantur per correctionem, eruditionem et disciplinam. Sed constat apud omnes, quod quanto nobiliores sunt homines quam iumenta, tanto est eis amplior eruditio disciplina et custodia adhibenda. rs contagiosa BA. 16 huiusmodi BA. 17 De c r e t u m C . 2 4 , q . 3 , c. 1 6 , c. 1 7 , c. 1 8 ; CJC I, co t. 9 95 r8 invitis etiam: inviti BA. re ratione BA. 20 exemplo BA. I 194 KURT VILLADS JENSEN Ad idem Item queratur,si infantes vel arii homines retrahendisunt a precipiciis submersionibusexustionibus et aliis corporum periculis, etiam inviti. Si dixerint quod non: vide quanta eorum stultitia, quanta nequitia, quanta crudelitab, [391va] quantum inconveniens apud omnes. Si dic.antquod sic, multo fortius igitur ista adhibendasunl ut occurratur morti eorum et periculo animarum, quare multo fortius incomparabiliter extrahendisunt etiam inviti de periculis spiritualibuset avertendi ab eis propter mortem spiritualem. Hec autem mors est vitium et peccatum, que a Deo seperant,qui est vita fidelium animarum. Ad idem Item si asinus ceciderit in lucum, numquid flagenis et stimulis urgendus est, ut inde exiliat, numquid non funibus, si aliter exire noluerit, quantumcumque renitatur extrahendus erit? euanto fortius homo de lacu miserie et de luto fecis erit totis viribus et studiis extrahendus,quantumcumquesit invitus. Manifestum est igitur, disciplinam esse invitis hominibus adhibendamet non solummodo doctrinam, sicut heretici dicunt. Ad idem Item queritur ab eis, si furiosi sunt recludendi vel rigandi inviti, vel si auferendi sint eis gladii vel alia instrumenta nocendi, ne sibi vel aliis noceant, sed nemo sani capitis hoc negabit. Multo forcius igitur facienda sunt ista furiosis mente, ne sibi vel aliis spiritualiter noceanr, cum nocumenta spiritualia, quibus anime pereunt, incomparabiliter sint maiora magisque quam temporalia declinanda. patet igitur, quod non solum doctrinaadhi[39lvb]bendaest hominibus,sed invitis etiam disciplina. Et ideo si minores pene non sufficiant, secundumqualitatem delicti et contumatie crescere debet pena. euia igitur potest quantumlibet contumacia, cresceredebet quantumlibet "r"r""." et pena, quare necesseest, quod sit mors corporalis vel equalis illi. per hanc viam a levibus flagellis venitur ad gravia, a gravibus ad vulnera, et ab illis ad tormenta, et a tormentis ad ipsam mortem, per similia contumacie incrementa, huius probatio est per crementa et comperationes culparum et penarum. WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS Quezr opponunt heretici et qualiter respondendum Opponunt heretici Mt. xiij., ubi dicitur, quod sinantur zizania crescere usque ad messem, ne forte simul eradicetur triticum. Responde, illud esse dictum tantum ut tritico parceretur. Non enim voluit parci zizaniis sed tritico soli, xxiiii. q. iii. "Notandum" 22,quare noluit parci zizaniis in tritici detrimento. Et ideo ubi non potest eis parci sine tritici detrimento, voluit eis parci. Ubicumque ergo crescunt zizania in suffocacionem aut detrimentum tritici, ibi nullatenus voluit 23eis parci. Ubicumque ergo impii in consumptionem populi Dei vel diminutionem crescunt, ibi nullatenus [392ra] crescere sinendi sunt sed eradicandi, et hoc per corporalem mortem, quando aliter eradicari non possunt incorrigibiles et contumaces, et ideo sunt necessario occendi. Alia oppinio. Responsio Si vero obiciant, quod ideo sinendi sunt, quia forte possunt converti, responde quod sinendi sunt, ubi certum est de conversione illorum, sed ubi manifesta eorum perversitas, nec signa conversionis apparerent, tollendi sunt de medio festinanter ut pestis et incendium, ne, dum uana spe paucis parcitur, per eos perdatur fidelium multitudo. Exemplis ostenditur, quod non sunt sinendi heretici in medio Jidelium sub spe convertendi Non sunt ergo sinendi heretici obstinati in medio fidelium sub spe convertendi, sicut nec lupi sinendi,sunt in medio gregis ovium ea spe, quod convertantur in oves, et sicut non sunt sinendi faces ardentes ea spe, quod in arbores fructiferas convertantur, et sicut leprosi non sunt sinendi in medio sani populi, quia forte sanari poterint, cum interim suo contagio alios inficiant et corrumpant. 2I quod BA. 22 Decretum C. 24, q. 3, c. 37: CJC I, col. 1000. 23 noluit BA.