Official Proscription
In 1887, Pastor Nathaniel Weiss published a series of extracts from the criminal records of the Parlement of Paris which showed a flood of heresy cases in the period 1547-1551.* Accused Protestants from the bailliage of Amiens figured very prominently among these cases. Pastor Weiss also noted having seen another large cluster of cases from Amiens and surroundings in the period around July 1544. I looked at these earlier cases in 1973 and found two previously unpublished interrogations of Protestant suspects and a diverse body of cases that give insight into the spread of Protestant beliefs (in their pre-Calvinist form), and into how they were criminalized and punished.
*La Chambre Ardente : Etude sur le liberté de conscience sous Francois I et Henri II. Paris, 1887.
“Did he know Morand in Amiens?”
“Did he say ‘Soon the truth will
be known!”
Did he say that the councils and constitutions of the Church were made by popes and cardinals out of avarice?
Did he say there was no such thing as purgatory?
Did he say that priests were nothing but the devil?
Did he say that the wafer consecrated by the priest was not the body of Jesus Christ but remained dough or wheat?
Petition of Damoiselle Ysabeau De Raincheval
July 17, 1544
A lady of the bourgeoisie, Ysabeau de Raincheval, whose own husband Anthoine de Rely, seems to have been caught up in the web of accusations and counter-accusations, solicited the support of the Amiens town council in a petition to the French monarchy for leniency to those currently charged with heresy.
“Damoisellle Ysabeau de Raincheval humbly observes that because of the diversity of preaching, the banning of books which had been authorized until recently, and the fact that the articles [of religion] newly approved by the King had not yet been published, a number of simple [i.e ordinary/common] folk of this city, not thinking any harm by it, have been led [seduictz] to utter remarks against the holy catholic faith, which have caused the authorities to proceed against them with rigor including by imprisonment of their persons and seizure of their property, circumstances of which some of their enemies have taken advantage to make false accusation against them with the results that as of today these poor inhabitants of the city are in some cases prisoners, in others fugitives, to the great distress of their families and friends…
Source: A.M. Series BB Deliberations of the Town Council
The Criminal Registers of the Parlement of Paris show the substance of what Damoiselle de Raincheval was decrying. Here are three minutes of interrogations of accused Protestants from Amiens
Translations
Three Interrogations before the Parlement of Paris
Jehan Warocquier
September 26, 1544
Did he know Morand in Amiens? – said that he did.
Did he know Morand had been condemned as a heretic?
Did he say that the Truth would be known and that Morand had begun to open up the Truth?
He said that he had in his hands a book entitled “The Fountain of Life”
Why did he say those words that soon the Truth would be known?
-- said he didn’t recognize having said that.
Asked who is Fouache?-- said that he is a barber from Amiens.
What company does he keep with the said Fouache -- says he doesn’t keep any
and knows nothing more about him.
Asked who is the man mentioned in the charges against him?
-- says he has no idea.
rev 4/9/2024
Francois de Fenyn
July 11, 1544
rev 4/9/2024
He’s from Amiens, father’s profession (blank), he is an apothecary;
he studied in Amiens.
he doesn’t know how to speak Latin or only a little.
He sometimes attended preachers’ meetings,
he never heard somebody named Morand preach;
he once heard the Augustinian friar who preached in Amiens.
Did he have books from those from Amiens? – yes.
Never heard any propositions from the pulpits.
Did he speak about purgatory and that there was no such thing?
-- he never spoke about it.
Did he speak about the councils of the church and that they were made by popes and cardinals out of avarice?
-- he said that he didn’t say this himself but he once heard a Franciscan friar say it but that he himself believed they were well made.
Did he say that a man who had lively faith, in eating a morsel of bread, ate the body of our Lord?
-- he said he never said those words and said that the judge who handled his case at the local level seemed somewhat prejudiced.
Did he say that it was foolhardy and served no purpose to deck out the churches with chasubles and other things --- he said no.
Did he say there was no danger eating a morsel of ham on Easter whether before one attended Mass and took communion or after?
Did he say that the sole passion of our Lord had effaced and purged all of our sins?
–he said no.
He was shown a book that he said he had annotated in several places.
rev 4/9/2024
Pierre Guenard
July 12, 1544
Cases before the Parlement of Paris
In the Grand Chamber
Said he was from Amiens, a shoemaker ("savetier") (or a weaver?) ("saietier") and his father as well. Learned his seven psalms, has no books other than his “Hours”
Did he say that priests were nothing but the devil? -- No.
Did he have it in for priests? – No
Did not say that there was no need to place candles before images of the saints but has always done his duty as a Christian.
Did not say that it was unnecessary to pray to God for the dead and that at the hour of bodily extinction the soul was either saved or damned.
Did he say that a person did not need to believe that after the priest had blessed the sacramental wafer it was anything more than dough or grain and not the body of Jesus Christ? – No.
Nor did he utter the words touching the crucifix.
Did he say that he did not believe that the body of our Lord Jesus Christ was in the sacramental wafer after it had been consecrated? -- He did not say that.
On the contrary he believed it was just as much there as it was in the tree of the cross/
This decision of the Parlement follows on the interrogation of Pierre Guenard on 12 July 1544 (See Three Interrogations)
“Seen by the Court the criminal case brought by the Bailly of Amiens against Pierre Guenard, prisoner in the Conciergerie of the Palais on a charge of heresy, the conclusions rendered by the sollicitor general of the King and hearing and examining the prisoner regarding the said case, and all considered,
The court orders that to know the truth from the mouth of the said prisoner regarding the crime of heresy, the said prisoner is to be subjected to torture and extreme measures of interrogation, in order after that to do what is appropriate.
P.Lizet Gayant
And it is to be kept in the mind of the Court that if during the said torture he does not confess to anything, nonetheless he is to be punished short of death. That is to say he will be condemned to make honorable amend, feet bare and head uncovered and wearing a plain tunic, holding in his hands a burning candle weighing two pounds as he attends a high mass on a holiday or Sunday, celebrated in the Cathedral of Amiens. After the said mass, the prisoner is to be whipped around the perimeter of the said church. This done, he shall be shut up and confined in a monastery or other place of detention of the said Amiens and there live out the remainder of his days.”
P. Lizet Gayant
Did he say that priests were devils and there was no such thing as purgatory?
This decision of the Parlement follows on the interrogation of Pierre Guenard on 12 July 1544 (See Three Interrogations)
“Seen by the Court the criminal case brought by the Bailly of Amiens against Pierre Guenard, prisoner in the Conciergerie of the Palais on a charge of heresy, the conclusions rendered by the sollicitor general of the King and hearing and examining the prisoner regarding the said case, and all considered,
The court orders that to know the truth from the mouth of the said prisoner regarding the crime of heresy, the said prisoner is to be subjected to torture and extreme measures of interrogation, in order after that to do what is appropriate.
P.Lizet Gayant
And it is to be kept in the mind of the Court that if during the said torture he does not confess to anything, nonetheless he is to be punished short of death. That is to say he will be condemned to make honorable amend, feet bare and head uncovered and wearing a plain tunic, holding in his hands a burning candle weighing two pounds as he attends a high mass on a holiday or Sunday, celebrated in the Cathedral of Amiens. After the said mass, the prisoner is to be whipped around the perimeter of the said church. This done, he shall be shut up and confined in a monastery or other place of detention of the said Amiens and there live out the remainder of his days.”
rev 4/9/2024