The Cathars: Cathar Beliefs: Roman
Catholic Propaganda
Setting the Scene
Almost all modern historians are sympathetic to the Cathars.
Even the most scholarly and objective works, laying out
the bare facts as fairly as possible come across as sympathetic.
Here is a quote from what is generally regarded as the best
English language academic work of the twentieth century,
referring to the Cathars:
None were humbler; none were more assiduous in
prayer, more constant under persecution; none made
more insistent claims to be "good men",
and it was on those terms that they were received
by many of the common people.
|
|
|
Walter Wakefield
& Austin Evans, Heresies of The High
Middle Ages (Columbia, 1991), p28.
|
|
and again
... the Gospels were their guide for conduct; their
celibacy and their austerities were those of the
monastic ideal; their criticism of the orthodox
clergy was hardly more severe than that characteristic
of other puritans and reformers; their disdain for
the material world was rivalled by that of anchorites
whose sanctity was revered by the Church.
|
|
|
Walter Wakefield
& Austin Evans, Heresies of The High
Middle Ages (Columbia, 1991), p50.
|
|
Even the better quality contemporary medieval opponents
recognised their merits. Here is James Capelli, a friar
who was lector at a Franciscan convent at Milan writing
around 1240. As Wakefield and Evans say, he "displays
scruples rarely encountered in other authors of polemical
tracts"
... they are, however, most chaste of of body.
For men and women observing the vow and way of life
of this sect are in no way soiled by the corruption
of debauchery. Whence, if any of them, man or woman,
happens to be fouled by fornication, if convicted
by two or three witnesses, he forthwith either is
ejected from their group or, if he repents, is re-consoled
by the imposition of their hands, and a heavy penitential
burden is placed upon him as amends for sin. Actually,
the rumour of the fornication which is said to prevail
among them is most false. For it is true that once
a month, either by day or by night, in order to
avoid gossip by the people, men and women meet together,
not, as some lyingly say, for purposes of fornication,
but so that they may hear preaching and make confession
to their preaching official, as though from his
prayers pardon for their sins would ensue. They
are wrongfully wounded in popular rumour by many
malicious charges of blasphemy from those who say
that they commit many shameful and horrid acts of
which they are innocent.
|
|
|
A number of
manuscripts of James Capelli's work survive.
This extract is based on version is based on
Dino Bazzocchi, La Eresia catara: Saggio
storico filiosofico con in appendice Disputationes
nonnullae adversus haereticos, codice inedito
de secolo VIII della biblioteca Malatestiana
di Cesena, but with errors corrected by
reference to other surviving manuscripts. For
further detail see Walter Wakefield & Austin
Evans, Heresies of The High Middle Ages
(Columbia, 1991), p305.
|
|
An alternative view
This is not how the Roman Catholic Church sees the Cathars
and their "heresy". The Church's modern views,
expressed by writers like Hilaire Belloc, and are not very
different from those of the Medieval Roman Catholic Church
(see Hilaire
Belloc, The Albigensian Attack, Chapter Five of The
Great Heresies
)
To most objective authorities the more serious accusations
against the Cathars appear to be based on no more than propaganda.
No organisation has ever used propaganda to such good effect
as the Roman Church. The very word propaganda
is derived from the name of the part of the Roman Church
set up to propagate the faith. For many centuries
the Catholic Church provided a set-menu of accusations against
any group of which it did not approve: pagans, Eastern Churches,
apostates, schismatics, heretics, Jews, Moslems, witches,
Templars, numerous peoples of the New World, and so on.
They were all accused of black magic, worshipping Satan,
consorting with demons, aping Catholic rituals, murder,
cannibalism, incest, bestiality, sodomy and a range of sexual
excesses. Cathars were no exception. All of the preceding
accusations were made against them, however scant or contrary
the evidence.
|
An example of the contrast between propaganda and
truth is provided by the disparity between alleged
and real attitudes to sex. According to Catholic propaganda,
Cathars including Parfaits and Parfaites habitually
engaged in sexual excesses, including regular orgies.
At the same as propagating these calumnies the Catholic
Church authorities were detecting heretics not by
their sexual excesses but by their sexual purity.
We have a striking example from the twelfth century
in the Archdiocese of Rheims where a group of heretics
("Poblicani") were discovered through the
refusal of a young girl to submit to the attentions
of a monk. The refusal of a girl to submit to a monk's
sexual demands appears to have been so unusual that
she was questioned and admitted that she believed
she had an obligation to keep her virginity. As a
result, she and her friends were investigated more
closely and soon a nest of heretical believers was
exposed. The heretics were described by the Archbishop,
Samson, who asserted that heresy was being spread
by itinerant weavers who encouraged sexual promiscuity.
|
|
|
Epistla Ecclesiae Leodensis
in E Martène et V Durand, Veterum
Scriptorum Amplissima Collectio (Paris,
1724-33) vol I, p 777. See Steven Runciman,
The Medieval Manichee (Cambridge University
Press, 1999) p 121.
The event is also described
in a chronicle by Ralph the abbot of the Cistercian
monastery of Coggershall (1207-1218). An English
translation can be found in Wakefield and Evans,
§42A (pp251-2). Click on the following
link to read an English
translation of Ralph's account.
Runciman places the event
around 1157 while Wakefield and Evans place
it between 1176 and 1180.
|
|
|
The Roman Church accused Cathars of various crimes
and sins. These claims ranged from the true to the
preposterous. Here we untangle them. Each of the following
charges is dealt with separately:
|
|
|
A Sexual Retainship Between
Jesus and Mary Magdelene?
An intriguing accusation made
against the Cathars was that they taught that
Jesus and Mary Magdelene had engaged in a sexual
relationship. It is difficult to know if this
was just propaganda. On the one hand it hardly
matches the Cathar view that Jesus was a divine
phantom. On the other hand there does seem to
have been a school of Gnostic Dualist thought
that there were two Jesus Christs - one divine
and good, the other earthly and bad. Cathars
could well have believed that the bad earthly
Jesus had married.
Also this was an accusation
made often in the very earliest years of Christianity
and it consistent with other hints. Early Gnostic
gospels have Mary ranking above the "other
apostles" and one refers to Jesus kissing
Mary on the .... (tragically, there is a gap
in the manuscript here, but most scholars slot
in the word "mouth" as a best guess).
In any case the accusation concerning a sexual
relationship is not an invention of modern fiction
writers as is sometimes claimed. The accusation
appears in works by thirteenth century Inquisitors
and Church chroniclers. Here is one example
from a Cistercian
Monk:
Further, in their secret
meetings they said that Christ who was born
in the earthly and visible Bethlehem and crucified
at Jerusalem was evil, and that Mary Magdelene
was his concubine - and that she was the woman
taken in adultery who is referred to in the
scriptures [John 8:3]
Peter des Vaux-de-Cernay,
Historia
Albigensis (In WA & MD Sibly's
translation into English (Boydell, 2002) at
{11} p 11). The accusation is repeated at {91}
p51. Incidentally the
Roman Catholic Church later adopted the Cathars'
identification of Mary Magdelene with the woman
taken in adultery (hence for example terms such
as "the Magdene Sisters")
According to some authorities
the Cathars believed that Mary Magdelene was
not merely Jesus['s concubine, but had been
married to him. As Durand de Huesca tells us,
writing between 1208 and 1213:
Also they teach in
their secret meetings that Mary Magdelene
was the wife of Christ. She was the Samaritan
woman to whom he said "Call thy husband"
[John 4:16]. She was the woman taken in adultary,
whom Christ set free lest the Jews stone her,
and she was with Him in three places, in the
temple, at the well, and in the garden [cf
John 8:3-11].
This English translation
(with my square brackets) is from Wakefield
and Evans, Heresies of the High Middle Ages,
p 231, and based on the text printed by Antoine
Dondaine "Durand de Huesca et la polemique
anti-cathare" Archivum fratrum praedicatorum,
XXIX (1959) 268-71.
|
|
|
|
Catholic
views of Catharism |
|
Next Page: Cathar
Vindications
|
|
|