^{page 37 note 1} As formally expressed in the bull Faciens misericordiam, 08 12, 1308Google Scholar, the charge is—

“Item quod credebant, et sic dicebatur eis quod magnus magister a peccatis potent eos absolvere. Item quod visitator. Item quod preceptores quorum multi erant layci.

“Item quod hæc faciebant de facto. Item quod aliqui eorum.

“Item quod magnus magister ordinis predicti hoc fuit de se confessus in presencia magnarum personarum antequam esset captus.”—Michelet Procès des Templiers, I. 91Google Scholar. Cf. Mag. Bullar. Roman. IX. 129 (Ed. Luxemb.).Google Scholar

^{page 37 note 2} Pissot, Procès et Condamnation des Templiers, Paris, 1805, p. 39Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 1} In treating of the three Military Orders the writer says: “Usurpant laici sacerdotum officia, pœnitentiam pro excessibus injungentes et eandem prolibito relaxantes, cum non sint eis claves commissæ, nec ligandi et solvendi uti debeant potestate. Remedium, ut magistri domorum mittant fratres literatos ad studendum circa theologicas lectiones, nec circa scientias sæculares, ut habeant literatos priores et sacerdotes.”—Collectio de Scandalis Ecclesiœ (Döllinger, , Beiträge zur politischen, kirchlichen u. Cultur-geschichte, III. 196).Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 2} Regul. S. Benedict. c. vii. xlviGoogle Scholar. (Migne, 's Patrologia, LXVI. 373, 694Google Scholar). Cf. Smaragdi, CommentGoogle Scholar. (Migne, , CII. 885Google Scholar); Reg. S. Chrodegangi c. 18Google Scholar; Jonæ Aurelianens. de Instit. Laicali Lib. I. c. 16.

^{page 38 note 3} S. Eucherii Homil. viii.

^{page 39 note 1} Usus antiquiores Ordinis Cisterciensis c. lxx. lxxv. (Migne, , CLXVI. 1443–6Google Scholar).

^{page 39 note 2} Ibid., c. xciv. (p. 1471). By the time of St. Bernard, however, there seems to be a custom springing up of annual confession at Easter.—S. Bernardi Serm. in Die Paschœ: §15 (Migne, CLXXXIII. 281).

^{page 40 note 1} La Règle du Temple, publiée pour la Société de l'Histoire de France, par Henri de Curzon, Paris, 1886, Art. 385–502.

^{page 40 note 2} Ibid., Art. 526.

^{page 40 note 3} “Car le Maistre ou cil qui tient le chapistre les assols dou pooir que il ait devant que il comence sa proiere.”—Ibid., Art. 503, 538.

^{page 40 note 4} “Et sachiés qui nostre chapistre furent etabli por ce que li frere se confessassent de lor fautes et les amendassent.”—Ibid., Art. 389.

^{page 40 note 5} Ibid., Art. 394.

^{page 40 note 6} “Si aliquis frater loquendo vel militando vel aliter leve deliquerit, ipse ultro delictum suum satisfaciendo magistro ostendat. De levibus si consuetudi nem non habeant, levem pœnitentiam habeat. Si vero eo tacente per aliquem alium culpa cognita fuerit, majori et evidentiori subjaceat discipline et emendationi. Si autem grave erit delictum retrahetur a familiaritate fratrum, neccum illis simul in eadem mensa edat sed solus refectionem sumat. Dispensationi et judicio Magistri totum incumbat, ut salvus in die judicii permaneat.”

—Harduin, . Concil. VI. II. 1144.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 1} “Nul frere ne doit reprendre autre frere fors par charité et par entention de faire li sauver s'arme.”—Règle, Art. 412.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 2} “Chaucun frere doit bien et volentiers faire la penance que li est enchargée par chapistre.”—Ibid., Art. 415.

“Et nul frere ne doit avoir honte de penance en maniere que il l'en laisse a faire; mais chascun doit avoir honte de faire le pechié, et la penance doit chascun faire volenterement.”—Ibid., Art. 494.

“Mais bien sachiés que mult est belle chose de faire penance.”—Ibid., Art. 533.

When the penance comprised weekly public scourging in church “et doit venir a sa discipline a grant devocion et receore le en patience devant tout le peuple qui sera au mostier.”—Ibid., Art. 468–73.

^{page 41 note 3} “Biau seignors freres, veés ci votre frere qui vient a la discipline, priés notre Seignor qu'i li pardoint ses defautes.”—Ibid., Art. 502.

^{page 41 note 4} Ibid., Art. 520.

^{page 42 note 1} Ibid., Art. 523, 525.

^{page 42 note 2} Jo. Morini de Administr. Sacram. Pœnitent, Lib. viii. c. ix. n. 23.–Martène de antiq. Ritibus Ecclesiœ Lib. I. c. vi. Art. 6, n. 5.

This division of the sacrament was not long afterwards forbidden. See Postill. ad § 4, Tit. xxxiv. Lib. iii. Summœ S. Raymundi.

^{page 42 note 3} Lanfranci, B.Lib. de Celanda ConfessioneGoogle Scholar (Migne, , CL. 629–30).Google Scholar

^{page 42 note 4} “Tanta itaque vis confessionis est ut si deest sacerdos confiteatur proximo.'

—Pseudo-August. Lib. de vera et falsa Panitentia c. x.

^{page 42 note 5} Gratiani Decr. c. 1. Caus. xxxiii. Q. iii. Dist. 6.—Lombard, P.. Sententt. Lib. iv. Dist. xvii. § 5.Google Scholar

^{page 43 note 1} Cœsar. Heisterb. Dial. Dist. iii. c. 2, 21.

^{page 43 note 2} Raymundi, S.SummœGoogle Scholar Lib. III. Tit. xxxiv. § 4. — Gloss, , sup. Decr.Google Scholar Caus. XXXIII. Q. iii. Dist. 5.

^{page 43 note 3} “En couste de moy se agenoilla Messire Guy d'Ebelin, Connestable de Chippre; et se confessa a moy; et je luy donnay telle absolucion comme Dieu m'en donnait le povoir.”—Mémoires du Sire de Joinville, Ed. 1785, T. II. p. 20.Google Scholar

^{page 43 note 4} Aquinat, T.. SummœGoogle Scholar Suppl. Q. viii. Art. 2; cf. Hostiens. Aureœ Summœ Lib. v. De Pœn. et Remiss. § 7.

^{page 43 note 5} Aquinat, . Summœ Suppl. Q. viii. Art. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 44 note 1} Astesani Summœ de Casibus Lib. v. Tit. xiii. Q. 2. “Unde male sensit Ber. extra de offi. ord. pastoralis dicens quod laicus absolvere potest in necessitate et hoc non tantum a peccatis sed etiam ab excommunicatione.”

^{page 44 note 2} Summa Sylvestrina s. v. Confessor I. §§ 1, 6.

^{page 44 note 3} C. Trident. Sess. xiv. De Panit. c. 6.

^{page 44 note 4} Azpilcuetæ Comment, in VII. Distinct, de Pœnit. Dist. VI. c. i., n. 81, 83.

^{page 44 note 5} Summa Diana, s. vv. Confessarius n. 2, Confessionis necessitas n. 13, 14

^{page 45 note 1} Even as late as the eleventh century the Corrector Burchardi knows nothing of absolution. The most that the priest can do is to offer a prayer, such as: “Deus omnipotens sit adjutor et protector tuus et præstet indulgentiam de peccatis tuis præteritis, præsentibus et futuris.”—Wasserschleben, Bussordnungen, p. 667.Google Scholar

In a typical later transitional formula, the priest assumes somewhat more power, but is careful not to define its extent. “Ipse te absolvat ab omnibus peccatis et de istis peccatis quæ modo mihi coram Deo confessus es … cum ista pœnitentia quam modo accepisti sis absolutus a Deo Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto et ab omnibus sanctis ejus et a me misero peccatore, ut dimittat tibi Dominus omnia delicta tua et perducat te Christus ad vitam æternam

… absolvat te sanctus Petrus et beatus Michael archangelus et nos, in quantum data est nobis potestas ligandi et solvendi, absolutionem damus. adjuvante Domino nostro Jesu Christo.”—Garofali, Ordo ad dandam Pœnitentiam ex insigni Rituali Codice membranaceo XI. Sœculi Bibl. Canonicorum Reg. S. Salvatoris Bononiœ, Romæ, 1791, p. 15.Google Scholar

It will be seen how closely this compares with the essential part of the Templar absolution.

^{page 45 note 2} The formula of absolution as set forth in the Règle is: “Mais cil qui se confessent bien de lor defautes et ne laissent à dire ne à confesser lor failles por honte de la char ne por paor de la justise de la maison, et qui sont bien repentant des choses que il ont mau faites, cil prennent bone partie au pardon de nostre chapistre et as autres biens qui se font en nostre maison; et a ceaus fais-je autel pardon come je puis de par Dieu et de par nostre Dame et de par monseignor saint Pierre et mon seignor saint Pol apostres et de par nostre pere l'apostoille, et de par vos meismes qui m'avés doné le pooir; et prie a Dieu que il por sa misericorde et por l'amor de la soe doce mere et por les merites de lui et de tous les sains vos deet pardoner vos fautes ensi come il pardona a la gloriose sainte Marie Magdalaine.”—Règle, Art. 539.

^{page 46 note 1} Aquinat, S. Th.. Opusc. XXII. c. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 2} Scotus, Jo.super Libb. Sententt. (Ed. Venet. c. 1470, fol. 285a).Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 3} Decr. Union, in C. Florent. ann. 1439 (Harduin, . Concil. IX. 440).Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 4} C. Trident. Sess. xiv. De Pœnitent. c. 3.

^{page 46 note 5} “Confessiones excipiunt et claves Ecclesiæ usurpantes aut subripientes Petro ligare præsumunt et solvere, et, Domino prohibente, falcem mittunt in messem alienam.”—Saresburiens, J.. Polycrat. vii. xxi.Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 6} “Milites namque Templi sui [papæ] favore ecclesiarum dispositionem vindicant, occupant personatus et quodammodo sanguinem Christi fidelibus ministrare præsumunt quorum fere professio est humanam sanguinem fundere.”—Ibid.

^{page 47 note 1} Perlbach, , Die Statuten des deutschen Ordens, pp. XLIV., XLVI., LI., LII., LixGoogle Scholar. (Halle a. S., 1890).

^{page 47 note 2} Fratrum Teutonicor. Institt. c. 33 (Perlbach, , p. 77Google Scholar): “Statuim us ut culpe, licet leves videantur, occulte quidem per confessionem expientur, manifeste vero in capitulo proclamate, competentem accipiant satisfactionem … ut sic religionem pro purgatorio habentes in capituli judicio cremabilia ignis purgatorii abstergant, et in morte demon quid eis obiciat non valeat invenire.” Or, as more clearly expressed in the French version, “et que ils espurgent en jugement dou chapistre les choses qui devraient estres brulees en purgatoire.”

See also the Rule cap. 36 (p. 55), providing in general terms for the prescription of penance by the chapter “ut salvus in die judicii permaneat.”

^{page 48 note 1} “Quando frater aliquis a magistro vel ejus vicemgerente penitenciam susceperit non possunt eum preceptor, marschalchus vel alius inferior absolvere sine licentia magistri si fuerit tam vicinus ut adiri valeat de hoc negocio consulendus. At si magister ad remota loca recederet, fratrisque penitencia bene peracta, non possit haberi, licebit preceptori cum aliis fratribus in capitulo congregatis sepedictam pemtentiam relaxare.”—Ibid., c. 3 (p. 64).

^{page 48 note 2} Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Dist. III. c. 49.

^{page 48 note 3} “Quia in capitulo agitur quasi forum judiciale magis quam pœnitentiale, unde etiam non sacerdotes capitulum tenent, sed absolvetur a pœna injuncta vel debita pro peccato in foro pœnitentiali.”—Aquinat. Summ. Supplem. Q. XXVII. Art. 2 ad 2.

^{page 48 note 4} Astesani Summ. de Casibus. Lib. v. Tit. xl. Art. 5, Q. 2.

^{page 48 note 5} Caietani Opusc. Tract, xvi. c. 2.—Summa Sylvestrina, s. v. Indulgentia § 21.

^{page 49 note 1} “Quis possit absolvere Templarios, Hospitalarios et alios religiosos non habentes prælatum sacerdotem? Respondeo secundum Raym. § xviii. Item quod Templarii. Credo quod non possint absolvi a talibus prelatis cum non habeant ordinem clericalem nisi habeant hoc de speciali privilegio sedis apostolicæ.”— Joh. Friburgens. Summœ Confessorum Lib. III. Tit. xxxiii. Q. 47.

John of Freiburg adds that the question had settled itself as to the Hospitallers by requiring their priors to be in priest's orders: “Hodie autem expressum est de fratribus Hospitalis Jerosolymitani quod possunt a suis prioribus, qui presbyteri debent esse, absolvi sicut regulares alii a suis prælatis.”

If we may believe the confession of Bertrand de Villiers, Preceptor of Roche St. Pol, March 29, 1311, the question as to the validity of the absolution granted in the chapters had begun to be discussed in the Order itself.— Michelet, , Procès des Templiers, II. 124.Google Scholar

^{page 49 note 2} Regulœ Art. iii. iv. (Harduin, . VI. II. 1134Google Scholar): “capellanis ac clericis vobiscum ad terminum caritative summo sacerdoti servientibus.” The retention of this in the completed Rule (Art. 62, 64) shows how the latter is an accretion and accumulation of statutes. The interpolations not infrequently conflict with the original text, rendering it difficult to determine what was the precise usage at the time of compilation.

^{page 50 note 1} “Ut autem ad plenitudinem salutis et curam animarum vestrarum nichil vobis desit et ecclesiastica sacramenta et divina officia vestro sacro collegio commodius exhibeantur.” At the same time he took care to provide that they should not be restricted to their own chaplains in the emergencies of their warlike lives, when at any moment they might need the consolations of religion. “Decernimus insuper auctoritate apostolica ut ad quemcunque locum vos venire contigerit, ab honestis atque catholicis sacerdotibus pœnitentiam, unctiones seu alia quælibet sacramenta ecclesiastica vobis suscipere liceat, ne forte ad perceptionem spiritualium bonorum vobis quippiam deesse valeat.” In this the word “catholicis” suggests that the object of the clause was inferentially to interdict the ministrations of Greek priests, who doubtless in Palestine were often more accessible than Catholic ones.

Professor Prutz, in his admirable Entwicklung und Untergang des Tempelherrenordens, gives the date of this bull (pp. v. and 33) as 18 June, 1163, and p. 260 as Tours, 7 January, 1162. This latter can scarce be correct, as Alexander at that time was travelling through Italy on his way to France (Jaffé, , Regesta, p. 684Google Scholar). Rymer (Fœdera, I. 30, 54Google Scholar) gives two copies of it, one issued in 1172 by Alexander to the Grand Master Eudes de S. Amand, and the other by Lucius III. in 1181 to Amand de Torroge. The latter of these Jaffe dates April 28, 1183.

^{page 50 note 2} “Sed nee ipsis liceat de capitulo aut cura domus vestræ se temere intromittere nisi quantum a vobis fuerit injunctum. Curam quoque animarum tantum habeant quantum a vobis fuerint requisiti.”—Bull. Omne datum optimum.

^{page 51 note 1} Régle, Art. 271. In the Teutonic Order there was some limitation on the punishment to be inflicted by the chapter on clerics, but enough was permitted to destroy the principle of clerical immunity.—Fratrum Teuton. Institt. 40, 44Google Scholar (Perlbach, , pp. 87–9).Google Scholar

^{page 51 note 2} Règle, Art. 468–73, 493, 495Google Scholar.—Segregation and eating on the ground were customary features of monastic penance. See Statuta Ordinis Cisterciens. ann. 1186, c. 6 (Martène, , Thesaur. Anecd. IV. 1260Google Scholar); Gousset, , Actes de la Province ecclésiastique de Reims, II. 345–8.Google Scholar

^{page 51 note 3} Règle, Art. 270.Google Scholar

^{page 51 note 4} Ibid., Art. 188.

^{page 52 note 1} Vaissette, , Hist, de Languedoc, IV. 141.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 2} Règle, Art. 450Google Scholar. Thus the Templars had not the resource of the Hospitallers, whose priors were required to be in priests' orders.

^{page 52 note 3} Ibid., Art. 542: “Mais se le frere chapelain n'i estoit chascun frere doit dire après la prière une patre nostre et le salut de nostre Dame une fois.”

^{page 52 note 4} The prescriptions of the Rule are well calculated to lead astray any one who does not bear in mind the distinction between general and auricular confession. Thus Art. 504 says: “Et après la proiere de celui qui a tenu le chapistre, chascun frere doit dire sa confession, et li frere chapelains, après que li frere ont dite lor confession doit faire l'asolution autele come bien li semblera.” Art. 542 is even more misleading. The chaplain addresses the brethren: “Biaus seignors freres dites vos confessions après moi … et quant tuit auront dit lor confession, li frere chapelain doit dire l'asolution et assoudre tous les freres ensi come li semblera que bon soit, et ensi come il est acostumé a nostre maison. Quar sachiés que li frere chapelain a grant pooir de par nostre pere li pape de assoudre les freres toutes fois selon la qualité et la quantité de la faute.” This has every appearance of sacramental confession and absolution, except that the ceremony was performed in common in the assemblage which was never authorized with the sacrament, except in extreme necessity, such as battle or shipwreck; to do so otherwise was a mortal sin (Angeli de Clavasio Summa Angelica s. v. Confessio 1. § 29). Moreover, Templars could confess sacramentally only to their own priests, while they had no hesitation in inviting Franciscans, Dominicans, and Carmelites to officiate in their chapters.—Processus Cypricus (Schottmüller, , II. 317).Google Scholar

What really was the ceremony in the chapters is clearly described in the confession of Giraud de Caux, Jan. II, 1311. After the final prayer of the preceptor all knelt “et frater presbyter dicebat eis: Dicatis ista verba quæ ego dicam: Confiteor omnipotenti Deo etc. sicut confessio generaliter fit in ecclesia; et ipsi in secreto dicebant et faciebant dictam confessionem, tundendo pectora sua; et facta confessione dictus presbyter, secundum quod fit in ecclesia, dicebat: Misereatur vestri etc. et absolucionem et remissionem omnium peccatorum vestrorum tribuat vobis omnipotens et misericors Deus, et recedebant” (Michelet, , Procès, I. 390–1Google Scholar). See also the confessions of Raoul Gisi and Gui Dauphin (ibid., pp. 398, 419).

I have dwelt on this point because Professor Prutz has confounded this general confession with sacramental confession, leading him to state that the Templars confessed to the priest in the chapters (Entwicklung und Untergang, etc., pp. 47–8Google Scholar). In his subsequent remarks on the faculties of the Templar priests he has been somewhat misled through lack of familiarity with the rather intricate canon law respecting reserved cases.

^{page 53 note 1} Hostiensis Aureœ Summœ Lib. v. De Pœn. et Remiss. § 8

^{page 54 note 1} Michelet, , Procès, I. 398.Google Scholar

^{page 54 note 2} Raymundi, S.SummœGoogle Scholar Lib. III. Tit. xxxiv. § 4.—Hostiensis Aureœ Summœ Lib. v. De Pœn. et Remiss. § 58. —Bonaventuræ Confessionale cap. iv. Partic. iii.—Synodus Nemausensis ann. 1284 (Harduin, . VII. 910–IIGoogle Scholar).—Caietani Opusc. Tract, v. De Confessione Q. 3.—Zerola, Praxis Sacr. Pœnitent. c. xxv. Q. 9, 36).

Alexander Hales, however (Summœ P. iv. Q. xviii., Membr. 2, Art. 1), argues against the current theory that the penitent can elect between accepting adequate penance and taking his chances in purgatory.

^{page 54 note 3} “Attamen de omnibus illis que obmitteretis nobis dicere ob verecundiam carnis vel ob metum justicie ordinis, nos facimus vobis indulgenciam quam possimus et debemus.”—Confession of Giraud de Caux (Michelet, , Procès, I. 390Google Scholar). See also those of Raoul Gisi (ibid., p. 398), of Renaud de Tremblaye (p. 425), of Pierre de Blois (p. 517), and of Guillem de Masayas (II., 126).

^{page 55 note 1} Confession of Robert le Brioys (ibid., I. 448).

^{page 55 note 2} “Les freres chapelains doivent oyr les confessions des freres; ne nul frere se doit confesser a autre part fors que a lui, par que il puisse avoir le frere chapelain sans congié.”—Régle, Art. 269, cf. Art. 354. This was also the rule in the Teutonic Order.—Fratrum Teutonicor. Institt. c. III., XXI. (Perlbach, , pp. 63, 72).Google Scholar

^{page 55 note 3} Confession of Raoul Gisi (Michelet, , Procès, I. 398Google Scholar); of Ramon Sa Guardia (ibid., II. 458).

^{page 55 note 4} “Car il en ont greignor pooir de l'apostoile d'eaus assoudre que un arceveque.”—Règle, Art. 269.

^{page 55 note 5} Gratian, . Decr. c. 29 Caus. xvii. Q. iv.Google Scholar

^{page 56 note 1} Prutz, , Entwicklung, etc., pp. 282, 289.Google Scholar

^{page 56 note 2} Règle, Art. 272–3.Google Scholar

^{page 56 note 3} Joh. Friburgens. Summœ Confessorum Lib. III. Tit. xxxiii. Q. 47

^{page 57 note 1} Ibid., Art. 593.

^{page 57 note 2} Règle, Art. 591.Google Scholar