A History of the Inquisition of Spain; vol. 4

by Henry Charles Lea

In this tumultuous breaking down of the standards of thought and belief, in this emergence of a new order on the ruins of the old, the functions of the Inquisition adapted themselves to the exigencies of the times, in other ways besides the increased sharpness and vigilance of its censorship. I have frequently had occasion above to refer to an alphabetical list of all the persons denounced to the various tribunals, from 1780 to 1820, some five thousand in all, and this, taken as a whole, affords us an insight into the change in the objects of inquisitorial activity. Judaism and Islam and Protestantism no more claim its attention. The Church is no longer threatened by enemies from without; what it has to dread is revolt among its own children. Three-fifths of the denunciations are for “propositions,” largely among the cultured classes, including a fair proportion of ecclesiastics. Their precise errors are not stated, but doubtless many were Jansenistic and more were hostile to the claims of the Church Militant and to the absolutism of the monarchy. There is also a large class of cases, virtually unknown a century earlier, significant of a vital change in the intellectual tendencies of the nation, calling for the special vigilance of the Inquisition. Popular indifferentism is revealed in the numerous prosecutions for inobservance or contempt of church observances. Even more noteworthy are those for outrages on images of Christ, the Virgin and the saints, and even for sacrilegious treatment of the Venerable Sacrament. In many other ways was manifested the weakening of the profound and unquestioning veneration which, for three centuries, had been the peculiar boast of the Spanish race. On the other hand it is not a little remarkable that there are very few cases of offences against the Inquisition, for, in all these forty years, there are but nine that can in any way be included in this class.[862]

At the same time, when we recall the old-time punctilious enforcement of profound respect, it argues no little decline in popular awe when, in 1791, a simple parish priest, Dr. Joseph Gines of Polop (Alicante) dared to address the Valencia tribunal in terms of violent indignation at the conduct of its secretary, Dr. Pasqual Pérez, when on a mission to collect testimony. He tells the tribunal that, if it does not dismiss Pérez it will sink greatly in his estimation, and his whole epistle breathes a spirit of independence and equality wholly impossible at an earlier time.[863] It was not without reason that, in 1793, the tribunal, in appealing for increase of salaries, complained of the decline in popular respect for its officials, which it attributed to their meagre pay and the curtailment of their privileges.[864] How completely the tribunals had lost their former energy is indicated by the abandonment, about this time, as we have seen (Vol. II, p. 98) of the publication of the Edict of Faith, which of old had been so impressively solemnized and had proved at once so fruitful a source of denunciations and so powerful a means of maintaining popular awe.

POLITICAL FUNCTIONS

Coincident with this, and as though the Inquisition felt that it was on trial before the people, there was a marked tendency towards amelioration of procedure, coupled with benignity in treatment of culprits. Allusion has been made above to the introduction of the audiencia de cargos, through which the accused was afforded an opportunity of knowing what was alleged against him, and frequently of clearing himself without the disgrace of arrest and trial. There is a very suggestive instance of merciful consideration, in 1791, in the case of Josef Casals, a weaver, charged before the Barcelona tribunal with the utterance of shocking blasphemies in the church of Santa Catalina. A century earlier he would have been arrested and, on proof of the offence, he would have been sentenced to scourging or the galleys. In place of this Padre Miguel Alberch was instructed to report secretly as to the character of the accused, which he did to the effect that Casals had regular certificates of confession, but was of quick temper and occasionally broke out in curses. Then a commission was issued to Alberch to summon Casals and to represent to him the gravity of his offence and of the punishment incurred, and the mercy shown by the tribunal, which would keep a watch on him.

In pursuance of this the good priest reported that Casals was deeply repentant and desired to be heard in confession, which he had permitted.[865] The case is trivial, but of such was the bulk of inquisitorial business, and the temper in which it was conducted was of no little import to the people at large.

Partly this may be attributable to the modern softening of manners, partly to a growing sense of insecurity, and partly to the inertia which led the officials to shun all avoidable labor. It was becoming more and more a political machine and neglectful of the objects of its creation. During the inquisitor-generalship of Manuel Abad y la Sierra, from 1792 to 1794, we are told that, in all Spain, there were but sixteen condemnations to public penance. Abad was an enlightened man; he thought of assimilating the inquisitorial procedure to that of other courts of justice, and consulted with Llorente as to the formula for such a reform, but conservatism, however relaxed in practice, was not ready for total abandonment of the old methods. His design became known: he was forced to resign and was relegated to the Benedictine monastery of Sopetran, under a charge, as we have seen of Jansenism.[866]

In fact, an absolute renunciation of the old procedure would have largely deprived the Inquisition of its usefulness in its new political functions, to which its established methods were peculiarly adapted. When, in 1796, a powerful intrigue was formed for the overthrow of Godoy, the Inquisition was naturally selected as the only weapon with which to strike at the favorite. Three friars were found to denounce him, because for eight years he had avoided confession and communion, and because of his scandalous relations with women. Had Inquisitor-general Lorenzana been resolute, Godoy’s fate might have been that of Olavide, but he was timid. Archbishop Despuig of Seville and Bishop Muzquiz, then of Avila, who were the leaders of the plot, vainly assured him that Godoy’s arrest would insure success; he refused to act except under orders from Pius VI. Despuig then prevailed upon his friend Cardinal Vincenti to induce the pope to write to Lorenzana reproaching him with his indifference to a scandal so hurtful to religion. It chanced that Vincenti’s letter, inclosing that of Pius, was intercepted at Genoa by Napoleon who, to ingratiate himself with Godoy, forwarded to him the correspondence. Godoy assured his position and took a mild revenge, which does credit to his sense of humor, by sending Lorenzana, Despuig and Muzquiz into honorable exile as special envoys to condole with the pope on the occupation of his territories by the French.[867] In fact, Capmany describes the Inquisition of the period as devoted to the unholy work of an Inquisition of State, in order to preserve its imperilled existence, and its ministers as trembling at the sight of the infamous favorite, when they had the honor of joining the crowd of his flatterers.[868]

Inquisitors might reasonably feel anxious as to their position, for projects of reform were in the air. Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos, the most conspicuous Spaniard of his time for intellectual ability and rectitude, had been exiled from the court, in 1790, and had betaken himself to his native Gijon, where for years he labored in founding the Instituto Asturiense. Desiring to endow it with a library of scientific works, he applied, in 1795, to Lorenzana for licence to import them, but Lorenzana refused on the ground that there were good Spanish writers, rendering recourse to foreigners unnecessary, especially as foreign books had corrupted the professors and students in various universities—a process of reasoning applied to works on physics and mineralogy, which Jovellanos characterized as a monumento de barbarie. The attention thus drawn to his library aroused the suspicions of the commissioner of the Inquisition, Francisco López Gil, priest of Somió, who secretly entered it one day while the owner was taking his siesta. Word was brought to him and he hastened thither, finding Gil examining a volume of Locke. Jovellanos turned him out, telling him that his office rendered him an object of suspicion and forbidding him to enter the building without permission. Gil became a spy and was probably the author of a denunciation which cost Jovellanos years of captivity.[869]