“Thereupon followed,” writes M. S. Boxhorn, “several additional solemn adjurations (these, however, he does not relate), which, when the priest had finished, the accused was stripped stark-naked, and cast or driven into the water. If he sank, he was considered innocent; but if he floated, he was forthwith condemned and punished by fire, as being guilty.” Page 26.
If any one should desire to read a full account as regards said papistic adjurations over the water, let him consult M. S. Boxhorn, Nederlandtsch Hist., 1st book, pp. 25, 26.
THE MANNER IN WHICH THESE TRIALS WERE COMMENCED IN THE NETHERLANDS, ABOUT THE YEAR 1215.
Before bringing persons to the trial with red-hot iron, hot or boiling water, or in cold rivers, which was called the severest or extremest examination, milder means were employed, especially in the Netherlands; however, with such intricacies, and so many snares, that an honest soul, that would act candidly, and without dissimulation, could not escape, but was in danger of losing his life.
The above-mentioned Boxhorn, describing the manner of examination used at that time against the Vaudois, who also belonged to the Poor Men of Lyons, and were at that time one people with the Albigenses and Waldenses, but afterwards differed with them in various articles, relates: That the Dominicans, a certain order of monks, were at that time sent by the Pope here into the Netherlands, as inquisitors; who, in order to well execute their office as it were, had put in writing a certain mode of examination, which literally read as follows:
Examination.—“When any one in the Netherlands is brought before the judge, suspected and accused of heresy, he shall first be asked: Why are you apprehended? Does any one know of your imprisonment? Have you not learned from any one the cause of your apprehension? If he say: I do not know; answer him: They say that you, seduced by certain teachers who keep themselves concealed, have, to a considerable extent, departed from the Christian faith, as it is publicly taught in this country and elsewhere, throughout all Christendom. Let him answer as well or as much as he will, and let forthwith an oath be demanded and put to him, unless his youth does not admit of his swearing. Before he takes the oath, these words shall be spoken to him: See, you are to swear here, that you will tell in all sincerity the truth as it is known to you, concerning yourself as well as others in regard to whom you will be questioned. If he refuses to swear,[171] he shall be suspected so much the more.
“See well to it also, that he have no reason to say that he was compelled by threats or otherwise to swear; but if he is ready willingly to take the oath, present these words to him:
The oath administered by the inquisitors, near the chapter-house of Utrecht, to those who at that time were called heretics.—“I, N. N. N., swear to God Almighty, my lord of Utrecht (or otherwise) and the lords present in his stead, that I will tell the pure truth, without fear, of all matters known to me, concerning which I shall be questioned here; not only in regard to myself, but also to others. So help me God and his holy mother, in my last hour.” Boxhorn, Nederl. Hist., p. 15.
In this manner the inquisitors proceeded, and then observed the following mode of examination, which it seems they had to employ as their fundamental rule, against those who were called heretics:
“If he is not known to you (says this rule) question him thus: What is your name? Where were you born? Who was your father? Again: How often have you confessed to the teachers of the heretics, who secretly circulate that they have come into the world in place of the apostles, to go from place to place, preaching the Gospel?[172]