Sacred-Texts
Neo-Paganism
Index
Previous
Next
Malleus Maleficarum Part 3
Question IX
What is to be done after the Arrest, and whether the Names of the Witnesses should be made Known to the Accused. This is the Fourth Action
THERE are two matters to be attended to after the arrest, but it is left
to the Judge which shall be taken first; namely, the question of allowing
the accused to be defended, and whether she should be examined in the
place of torture, though not necessarily in order that she should be
tortured. The first is only allowed when a direct request is made; the
second only when her servants and companions, if she has any, have first
been examined in the house.
But let us proceed in the order as above. If the accused says that she is
innocent and falsely accused, and that she wishes to see and hear her
accusers, then it is a sign that she is asking to defend herself. But it
is an open question whether the Judge is bound to make the deponents
known to her and bring them to confront her face to face. For here let
the Judge take note that he is not bound either to publish the names of
the deponents or to bring them before the accused, unless they themselves
should freely and willingly offer to come before the accused and lay
their depositions in her presence And it is by reason of the danger
incurred by the deponents that the Judge is not bound to do this. For
although different Popes have had different opinions on this matter,
none of them has ever said that in such a case the Judge is bound to
make known to the accused the names of the informers or accusers (but here
we are not dealing with the case of an accuser). On the contrary, some
have thought that in no case ought he to do so, while others have thought
that he should in certain circumstances.
But, finally, Bonifice VIII decreed as follows:
If in a case of heresy it appear to the Bishop or Inquisitor that grave
danger would be incurred by the witnesses of informers on account of the
powers of the persons against whom they lay their depositions, should
their names be published, he shall not publish them. But if there is no
danger, their names shall be published just as in other cases.
Here it is to be noted that this refers not only to a Bishop or Inquisitor,
but to any Judge conducting a case against witches with the consent of the
Inquisitor or Bishop; for, as was shown in the introductory Question, they
can depute their duties to a Judge. So that any such Judge, even if he be
secular, has the authority of the Pope, and not only of the Emperor.
Also a careful Judge will take notice of the powers of the accused persons;
for these are of three kinds, namely, the power of birth and family, the
power of riches, and the power of malice. And the last of these is more to
be feared than the other two, since it threatens more danger to the
witnesses if their names are made known to the accused. The reason for this is
that it is more dangerous to make known the names of the witnesses to an
accused person who is poor, because such a person has many evil accomplices,
such as outlaws and homicides, associated with him, who venture nothing but
their own persons, which is not the case with anyone who is nobly born or
rich, and abounding in temporal possessions. And the kind of danger which is
to be feared is explained by Pope John XXII as the death of cutting off
of themselves or their children or kindred, or the wasting of their
substance, or some such matter.
Further, let the Judge take notice that, as he acts in this matter with the
authority of the Supreme Pontiff and the permission of the Ordinary, both
he himself and all who are associated with him at the depositions, or
afterwards at the pronouncing of the sentence, must keep the names of the
witnesses secret, under pain of excommunication. And it is in the power of
the Bishop thus to punish him or them if they do otherwise. Therefore he
should very implicitly warn them not to reveal the name from the very
beginning of the process.
Wherefore the above decrees of Pope Bonifice VIII goes on to say: And that
the danger to those accusers and witnesses may be the more effectively
met, and the inquiry conducted more cautiously, we permit, by the
authority of this statute, that the Bishop or Inquisitors (or, as we have
said, the Judge) shall forbid all those who are concerned in the inquiry
to reveal without their permission any secrets which they have learned from
the Bishop or Inquisitors, under pain of excommunication, which they may
incur by violating such secrets.
It is further to be noted that just as it is a punishable offence to
publish the names of witnesses indiscreetly, so also it is to conceal them
without good reason from, for instance, such people as have a right to know
them, such as the lawyers and assessors whose opinion is to be sought in
proceeding to the sentence; in the same way the names must not be concealed
when it is possible to publish them without risk of any danger to the
witnesses. On this subject the above decree speaks as follows, towards the
end: We command that in all cases the Bishop or Inquisitors shall take
especial care not to suppress the names of the witnesses as if there were
danger to them when there is perfect security, not conversely to decide to
publish them when there is some danger threatened, the decision in this
matter resting with their own conscience and discretion. And it has been
written in comment on these words: Whoever you are who are a Judge in such
a case, mark those words well, for they do not refer to a slight risk but
to a grave danger; therefore do not deprive a prisoner of his legal rights
without very good cause, for this cannot but be an offence to Almighty God.
The reader must note that all the process which we have already described,
and all that we have yet to describe, up to the methods of passing sentence
(except the death sentence), which it is in the province of the
ecclesiastical Judge to conduct, can also, with the consent of the Diocesans,
be conducted by a secular Judge. Therefore the reader need find no difficulty
in the fact that the above Decree speaks of an ecclesiastical and not a
secular Judge; for the latter can take his method of inflicting the death
sentence from that of the Ordinary in passing sentence of penance.
Next: Question X
What Kind of Defence may be Allowed, and of the Appointment of an Advocate. This is the Fifth Action