Saint Joan of Arc (Jeanne la Pucelle): Difference between revisions

Line 716:

== Joan and the Saints ==

~~The~~ standard modern histories go with Joan's testimony and experiences about her Voices without affirming, and some outright denying, their reality. Joan resoundingly affirmed them:<ref>Murray, p. 357</ref>

stacThe standard modern histories go with Joan's testimony and experiences about her Voices without affirming, and some outright denying, their reality. Joan resoundingly affirmed them:<ref>Murray, p. 357</ref>

<blockquote>As firmly as I believe Our Saviour Jesus Christ suffered death to redeem us from the pains of hell, so firmly do I believe that it was Saint Michael and Saint Gabriel, Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret whom Our Saviour sent to comfort and to counsel me.</blockquote>

Line 841:

<blockquote>Article XLII. Jeanne hath said and published that Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret and Saint Michael have bodies — that is to say, head, eyes, face, hair, etc.; that she hath touched them with her hands; that she hath kissed them and embraced them. </blockquote>

Historians make much of Joan's testimony on the physicality of her Saints and the Archangel Michael, some saying that it was a theological trap that the ignorant girl fell into, as if she should have sculpted her testimony to match learned Church doctrine. Article XLII conforms to Joan's testimony, but any condemnation derived from it is theologically incorrect, and they knew it.<ref>>> to add here Vatican debate on these points in canonization process</ref> Near its start, a legal expert, the cleric Jean Lohier, was asked to review the Trial with expectations of his blessings. He found the whole thing repugnant and out of order, and left Rouen rather than having anything to do with it. Among his observations, which will be discussed later, Lohier told the notary, Manchon, that he could not participate in it in good conscience:<ref>Murray, p. 167</ref><blockquote>You see the way the are proceeding. They will take her, if they can, in her words — as in assertions where she says, "I know for certain," as regards the apparitions; but if she said, "I think" instead of the words "I know for certain," it is my opinion that no man could condemn her.</blockquote>So you see the slippery "I believe that..." or "I recollect..." defense, so famous in modern political depositions, is nothing new. Were he her counsel, Lohier would have had Joan tone down the assertions of her visions, which she never would have done. Joan told it straight and asserted her Voices plainly, so the Trial court didn't have to worry about Lohier's advice to her. It shows that Lohier likely didn't believe her, but he plainly saw how ~~she was being, to use a modern term, railroaded upon in~~ the Trial.

Historians make much of Joan's testimony on the physicality of her Saints and the Archangel Michael, some saying that it was a theological trap that the ignorant girl fell into, as if she should have sculpted her testimony to match learned Church doctrine. Article XLII conforms to Joan's testimony, but any condemnation derived from it is theologically incorrect, and they knew it.<ref>>> to add here Vatican debate on these points in canonization process</ref> Near its start, a legal expert, the cleric Jean Lohier, was asked to review the Trial with expectations of his blessings. He found the whole thing repugnant and out of order, and left Rouen rather than having anything to do with it. Among his observations, which will be discussed later, Lohier told the notary, Manchon, that he could not participate in it in good conscience:<ref>Murray, p. 167</ref><blockquote>You see the way the are proceeding. They will take her, if they can, in her words — as in assertions where she says, "I know for certain," as regards the apparitions; but if she said, "I think" instead of the words "I know for certain," it is my opinion that no man could condemn her.</blockquote>So you see the slippery "I believe that..." or "I recollect..." defense, so famous in modern political depositions, is nothing new. Were he her counsel, Lohier would have had Joan tone down the assertions of her visions, which she never would have done. Joan told it straight and asserted her Voices plainly, so the Trial court didn't have to worry about Lohier's advice to her. It shows that Lohier likely didn't believe her, but he plainly saw how the Trial was stacked against her. He genuinely sympathized with her. <ref>He was not interviewed in the Rehabilitation Trial, having left France for Rome to serve as Dean of the Court of Appeals at the Vatican.Murray, p. 167, fn 1</ref> Lohier's analysis demonstrates how the matter of the Visions was central to the Trial court's entire case, and who merely dismissing them as imagined would be insufficient to their job to put Joan to death.

. He was not interviewed in the Rehabilitation Trial, having left France for Rome to serve as Dean of the Court of Appeals at the Vatican.~~<ref>~~Murray, p. 167, fn 1</ref>

The examiners deliberately used the noun "object"<ref>as well as "stuff", another reference to earthly not spiritual matter: "Are these two Saints dressed in the same stuff? (Murray p. 24)

@@ Line 716: / Line 716: @@
 == Joan and the Saints ==
-The standard modern histories go with Joan's testimony and experiences about her Voices without affirming, and some outright denying, their reality. Joan resoundingly affirmed them:<ref>Murray, p. 357</ref>
+stacThe standard modern histories go with Joan's testimony and experiences about her Voices without affirming, and some outright denying, their reality. Joan resoundingly affirmed them:<ref>Murray, p. 357</ref>
 <blockquote>As firmly as I believe Our Saviour Jesus Christ suffered death to redeem us from the pains of hell, so firmly do I believe that it was Saint Michael and Saint Gabriel, Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret whom Our Saviour sent to comfort and to counsel me.</blockquote>
@@ Line 841: / Line 841: @@
 <blockquote>Article XLII. Jeanne hath said and published that Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret and Saint Michael have bodies — that is to say, head, eyes, face, hair, etc.; that she hath touched them with her hands; that she hath kissed them and embraced them. </blockquote>
-Historians make much of Joan's testimony on the physicality of her Saints and the Archangel Michael, some saying that it was a theological trap that the ignorant girl fell into, as if she should have sculpted her testimony to match learned Church doctrine. Article XLII conforms to Joan's testimony, but any condemnation derived from it is theologically incorrect, and they knew it.<ref>>> to add here Vatican debate on these points in canonization process</ref> Near its start, a legal expert, the cleric Jean Lohier, was asked to review the Trial with expectations of his blessings. He found the whole thing repugnant and out of order, and left Rouen rather than having anything to do with it. Among his observations, which will be discussed later, Lohier told the notary, Manchon, that he could not participate in it in good conscience:<ref>Murray, p. 167</ref><blockquote>You see the way the are proceeding. They will take her, if they can, in her words — as in assertions where she says, "I know for certain," as regards the apparitions; but if she said, "I think" instead of the words "I know for certain," it is my opinion that no man could condemn her.</blockquote>So you see the slippery "I believe that..." or "I recollect..." defense, so famous in modern political depositions, is nothing new. Were he her counsel, Lohier would have had Joan tone down the assertions of her visions, which she never would have done. Joan told it straight and asserted her Voices plainly, so the Trial court didn't have to worry about Lohier's advice to her. It shows that Lohier likely didn't believe her, but he plainly saw how she was being, to use a modern term, railroaded upon in the Trial.
+Historians make much of Joan's testimony on the physicality of her Saints and the Archangel Michael, some saying that it was a theological trap that the ignorant girl fell into, as if she should have sculpted her testimony to match learned Church doctrine. Article XLII conforms to Joan's testimony, but any condemnation derived from it is theologically incorrect, and they knew it.<ref>>> to add here Vatican debate on these points in canonization process</ref> Near its start, a legal expert, the cleric Jean Lohier, was asked to review the Trial with expectations of his blessings. He found the whole thing repugnant and out of order, and left Rouen rather than having anything to do with it. Among his observations, which will be discussed later, Lohier told the notary, Manchon, that he could not participate in it in good conscience:<ref>Murray, p. 167</ref><blockquote>You see the way the are proceeding. They will take her, if they can, in her words — as in assertions where she says, "I know for certain," as regards the apparitions; but if she said, "I think" instead of the words "I know for certain," it is my opinion that no man could condemn her.</blockquote>So you see the slippery "I believe that..." or "I recollect..." defense, so famous in modern political depositions, is nothing new. Were he her counsel, Lohier would have had Joan tone down the assertions of her visions, which she never would have done. Joan told it straight and asserted her Voices plainly, so the Trial court didn't have to worry about Lohier's advice to her. It shows that Lohier likely didn't believe her, but he plainly saw how the Trial was stacked against her. He genuinely sympathized with her. <ref>He was not interviewed in the Rehabilitation Trial, having left France for Rome to serve as Dean of the Court of Appeals at the Vatican.Murray, p. 167, fn 1</ref> Lohier's analysis demonstrates how the matter of the Visions was central to the Trial court's entire case, and who merely dismissing them as imagined would be insufficient to their job to put Joan to death.
-. He was not interviewed in the Rehabilitation Trial, having left France for Rome to serve as Dean of the Court of Appeals at the Vatican.<ref>Murray, p. 167, fn 1</ref>
 The examiners deliberately used the noun "object"<ref>as well as "stuff", another reference to earthly not spiritual matter: "Are these two Saints dressed in the same stuff? (Murray p. 24)