CHAP. XVI.

_Confessors at length assume to themselves a kind of flagellatory

power over their Penitents. The abuses that arise from it._

The submission of Sovereigns to receive disciplines from the hands

of their Confessors, together with the accounts of such disciplines,

which, though they might not always be true, were industriously

circulated in Public, helped much, without doubt, to increase the

good opinion which people entertained of the merit of flagellations,

as well as to strengthen the power of Confessors in general. In fact

the latter, from prescribing Disciplines, soon passed to inflicting

them upon their penitents with their own hands; and, without loss of

time, converted this newly-assumed authority into an express kind

of privilege, to which it was a most meritorious act, on the part

of penitents, readily to submit. On this occasion, I shall again

quote the old French Book, mentioned in p. 218; which, though it be

only a Romance, may serve to shew the opinions generally entertained

by people, during the times in which it was written. ‘If you are

estranged from our Lord’s love, you cannot be reconciled to him,

unless by the three following means: First, by confession of mouth;

secondly, by a contrition of heart; thirdly, by works of alms and

charity. Now, go and make a confession in that manner, and receive

discipline from the hands of thy Confessors; for it is the sign of

merit.’

The power of Confessors of _disciplining_ their penitents, became in

process of time so generally acknowledged, that it obtained even with

respect to persons who made profession of the Ecclesiastical life,

and superseded the laws that had been made against those who should

strike an Ecclesiastic. To this an allusion is made, in the lines of

that Poet of the middle age, who has put the _Summula_ of St. Raymund

into Latin verses. ‘You are guilty of sacrilege if you have violated

holy things, if you have struck a person in religious Orders, or of

the Clergy; unless it be a holy beating, such as is performed by a

Teacher with respect to his Disciple, or a Confessor with respect to

a person who confesses his sins[90].’

Attempts were, however, made to put a stop to these practices of

Priests and Confessors; and so early as under Pope Adrian I. who was

raised to the Purple in the year 772 (which by the by shews that the

power assumed by Confessors, was pretty ancient) a regulation was

made to forbid Confessors to beat their Penitents. ‘The Bishop (it

is said in the _Epitome_ of Maxims and Canons) the Priest, and the

Deacon, must not beat those who have sinned[91].’ But this regulation

proved useless: the whole tribe of Priests, as well as the first

Dignitaries of the Church, nevertheless continued to preach up the

prerogatives of Confessors and the merit of flagellations; and

Cardinal Pullus, that Chancellor of the Roman Church who has been

mentioned in the foregoing Chapter, did not scruple to declare, that

the nakedness of the Penitent, and his situation at the feet of his

Confessor, were additional merits in him in the eye of God, as being

additional tokens of his humility[92].

All these different practices of stripping and flagellating Devotees

and Penitents, at length gave rise to abuses of a very serious

nature; instances of which take place, we may say, every day. Numbers

of Confessors, in process of time, have made such religious acts as

had been introduced with a view to mortification, serve to gratify

their own lust and wantonness. They have tried to inculcate the

same notions, as to the merit of flagellations, into the minds of

their Devotees of the other sex, as they had brought even Kings and

Princes to entertain; and at last have made it a practice to inflict

such corrections on their female Penitents, and under that pretence,

to take such liberties with them, as the blessed St. Benedict, St.

Francis, St. Dominic, and St. Loyola, had not certainly given them

the example of.

Among the many instances that might be recited of the abuses here

alluded to, it will suffice to produce that of a Man who wore a

hood, and was girt with a cord (a _Cordelier_ or _Franciscan_) who

lived about the year 1566. This Man’s name was Cornelius Adriasem;

he was a native of Dort, and belonged to a Convent in Bruges, and

was a most violent preacher against the Heretics, called _Gueux_. He

had found means to persuade a certain number of Women, both married

and unmarried, to promise him implicit obedience, by certain oaths

he made them take for that purpose, and under the specious pretence

of greater piety. These Women he did not indeed lash with harsh

and knotted cords, but he used gently to rub their bare thighs and

posteriors, with willow or birch rods[93].

In order to shew how common the above practices were become, as

well as to entertain the Reader, I shall conclude this Chapter

with the following story, which is to be found in _Scot’s_ Book,

entitled, _Mensa Philosophica_. A Woman, says Scot, who was gone

to make her confession, had been secretly followed by her husband,

who was jealous of her; and he had hid himself in some place in the

Church, whence he might spy her; but as soon as he saw her led behind

the altar by the Priest, in order to be flagellated, he made his

appearance, objected that she was too tender to bear a flagellation,

and offered to receive it in her stead. This proposal the Wife

greatly applauded; and the Man had no sooner placed himself upon his

knees, than she exclaimed, ‘Now, my Father, lay on lustily, for I am

a great Sinner[94].’

[Illustration: (end of chapter mark)]

Memorials of Human Superstition being a paraphrase and commentary on the Historia Flagellantium of the Abbé Boileau, Doctor of the Sorbonne · 第 51 / 93 题