If any person comes in within the appointed time to accuse himself, he is asked, how long he hath continued in his errors, and from whom he learnt them? whether he hath had, and read any heretical or suspected books? what they were, from whom he had them, and what he hath done with them? Other questions are added concerning his accomplices in heresies, that he may tell the names of all those heretics, or persons suspected of heresy, whom he knows. He is farther asked, whether he hath ever been inquisited, processed, or accused or denounced in any tribunal, or before any judge, on account of the aforesaid errors, or other things relating to heresy? He is also admonished simply to tell the whole truth which he knows, as well of himself as of others; because, if he is afterwards found deceitfully to have concealed any thing, he is judged as one whose confession is imperfect, and as impenitent, and feignedly converted. Finally, he is interrogated, whether he repents of these errors and heresies into which he hath fallen? and whether he is ready to abjure, curse, and detest them, and all other heresies whatsoever, that exalt themselves against the holy apostolic and Roman church, and to live for the future catholicly, according to the faith of the church of Rome, and devoutly to fulfil the salutary penance enjoined him?
However, such as come thus voluntarily, are far from escaping all punishment, but are either treated kindly at the pleasure of the inquisitor, according to the quality of their persons and crimes, or else condemned to pay a fine, or give alms, or some such works of charity. But if they wait till they are accused, denounced, cited or apprehended, or suffer the time of grace to slip over, they are pronounced unworthy of such favours.
And in this case many foolishly deceive themselves with a false opinion, believing, that because favour is promised to such who appear voluntarily, they shall be free from all punishment; because they are only saved from the more terrible ones, it being left to the pleasure of the inquisitors to inflict some penitential punishment on them, according to the nature of their crime, as will appear from the following instance. “There was at the city of Cadiz a certain foreigner, who yet had lived in Spain for twenty years; who, according to a common superstition, dwelt in a desart in a certain chapel, upon the account of religion. Hearing in his chapel of the great number of those who were taken up every day at Seville by the inquisitors, for what they call the Lutheran heresies; having heard also of the decree of the inquisitors, by which he was commanded, under the terrors of excommunication, immediately to discover to the inquisition whatsoever he knew of those things, either as to others or himself; the poor stupid hermit comes to Seville, goes to the inquisitors and accuses himself, because he thought the said inquisitors would use singular clemency towards those who thus betrayed themselves. His crime was, that whereas being about twenty years before this at Genoa, and hearing a certain brother of his disputing about a man’s justification by faith in Christ, of purgatory, and other things of the like nature, he did not wholly condemn them, though he never thought of them afterwards. He therefore acknowledged his crime, and came to ask mercy. When the lords inquisitors had received his confession, they commanded the poor hermit to jail; where, after a long confinement, he was brought out in public procession, and was sentenced to wear the sanbenito, to three years imprisonment, and the forfeiture of his effects.”
Sometimes also they use a certain stratagem to draw persons to a voluntary appearance before the inquisitors. “When they have apprehended any remarkable person, who hath been the teacher of others, or who they know hath been resorted to by many others, upon account of his doctrine and learning, as being a teacher and preacher of great repute; it is usual with them to cause a report to be spread amongst the people, by their familiars, that being grievously tortured, he had discovered several of those that had adhered to him, suborning some persons out of the neighbouring prisons to assert that they heard his cries amidst his tortures, in order to give the greater credit to the report. These reports are spread for this reason, that such who have attended on his instructions, or have been any ways familiar with him, may in time go to the holy tribunal, confess their fault, and implore mercy, before they are sent for, or apprehended. By this means they impose on many, who, if they had waited for their summons, had never been summoned at all. Or if it should have happened that they had been summoned, would not have been dealt with more severely than they generally are, who trust to the inquisitors promises.”
If any person is accused by another, the accuser is interrogated, “How long he hath known N. against whom he denounces? likewise, how he came to know him? Again, whether he observed that the aforesaid N. was suspected of matters relating to the faith from his words, or his actions? Likewise, how often he had seen the said N. do or say those things for which he thought him an heretic, or suspected of heresy? Likewise, at what time, and in the presence of whom the aforesaid N. did or said those things of which he is denounced? Likewise, whether the aforesaid N. hath had any accomplices in the aforesaid crimes, or any writings belonging to the offences denounced? Likewise, to what end and purpose the aforesaid things were done or said by the aforesaid N. whether seriously, or in jest? If it appears that there was a long interval of time between the commission of the crimes denounced, and the making the denunciation, the inquisitor interrogates the denouncer, why he deferred so long to come to the holy office, and did not depose before, especially if he knew that he incurred the penalty of excommunication by such omission?” He is moreover asked, “Whether he knows any thing farther of N. which concerns the holy office, or of any other person? Likewise, whether he hath at any time had any cause of hatred or enmity with the aforesaid N. and whence it proceeded? With what zeal, and with what intention he comes to the holy office, and to make denunciation? Whether he hath denounced through any passion of mind, ill will, hatred, or subornation? And he is admonished ingenuously to tell the truth.” He is especially interrogated how he came by his knowledge, because on that principally the truth and weight of the testimony depends.
When the denunciation is received; first, it must be read over to the denouncer, that he may add, take away, or alter as he pleases. Secondly, he must subscribe to his deposition; or if he cannot write, he must at least put under it the sign of the cross. Thirdly, he must take an oath of secrecy.
After this, the witnesses are called on. And in this affair all persons, even such as are not allowed in other tribunals, are admitted. Persons excommunicated, heretics, Jews, and infidels, wives, sons and daughters, and domestics, are allowed as witnesses against those accused of heresy, but never for them: those who are perjured and infamous, whores, bawds, those under the ban, usurers, bastards, common blasphemers, gamesters, persons actually drunk, stage-players, prize-fighters, apostates, traitors, even all without exception, besides mortal enemies.
When the witnesses are summoned, first they take an oath upon the scriptures to speak the truth. After this he is asked by the inquisitor, whether he knows, or can guess the cause of his citation and present examination? If he says yes, he is interrogated how he knew it? If he says no, he is interrogated, whether he hath known, or doth know now any one or more heretics, or persons suspected of heresy, or at least is able to name any such? Whether he knows N.? What was the occasion of his acquaintance with him? How long he hath known him? Whether he hath been used to converse with him? Whether he hath heard at any time any thing from the said N. concerning the Catholic religion? Whether ever he was in such a place with the said N. and whether the said N. did or said there such and such heretical things, or favouring of heresy? Who were present when N. did or said the aforesaid things? How often he saw them said or done, and on what occasion, and how? Whether the said N. spoke the aforesaid things in jest, or without thinking, or through a slip of his tongue, or as relating the heresies of some other person or persons? Whether he said any thing which ought not to have been said, through hatred or love, or omitted and concealed somewhat that ought to have been explained? He is farther admonished to tell the single truth, because, if he is detected of speaking falsely, he will be made to suffer the penalties, not only of perjury, but of favouring heresy.
After this, one of the proctors of the court demands that the criminal be taken up, and the inquisitor subscribes an order for this purpose. When he is apprehended, he must be well guarded, put in irons, and delivered to the jailkeeper of the inquisition.
When the criminal is put in jail, he is brought before the inquisitor. The place where he appears before the inquisitor, is called by the Portuguese the table of the holy office. At the farther end of it there is placed a crucifix, raised up almost as high as the ceiling. In the middle of the room there is a table. At that end which is nearest the crucifix, sits the secretary or notary of the inquisition. The criminal is brought in by the beadle, with his head, arms and feet naked, and is followed by one of the keepers. When they come to the chamber of audience, the beadle enters first, makes a profound reverence before the inquisitor, and then withdraws. After this, the criminal enters alone, who is ordered to sit down on a bench at the other end of the table, over against the secretary. The inquisitor sits on his right hand. On the table near the criminal lies a missal, or book of the gospels; and he is ordered to lay his hand on one of them, and to swear that he will declare the truth, and keep secrecy.