Saint Joan of Arc (Jeanne la Pucelle): Difference between revisions
| Line 727: | Line 727: | ||
For a believer, what an an opportunity to learn about a Saint! If we listen to her, Joan gives us a unique view into the experiences of an actual mystic. | For a believer, what an an opportunity to learn about a Saint! If we listen to her, Joan gives us a unique view into the experiences of an actual mystic. | ||
=== Spiritual or material? === | |||
The entire case rose or fell upon the validity of Joan's Voices. Consequently we get to hear a lot about them: <ref>Murray, pp. 39-40</ref> | |||
<blockquote>Was Saint Gabriel with Saint Michael when he came to you?</blockquote> | <blockquote>Was Saint Gabriel with Saint Michael when he came to you?</blockquote> | ||
| Line 843: | Line 844: | ||
<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> | <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 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. | 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. | |||
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) | 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 897: | Line 902: | ||
<blockquote>I took it of my own free will, and with no constraint: I prefer a man's dress to a woman's dress.</blockquote> | <blockquote>I took it of my own free will, and with no constraint: I prefer a man's dress to a woman's dress.</blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>You promised and swore not to resume a man's dress.</blockquote><blockquote>I never meant to swear that I would not resume it.</blockquote><blockquote>Why have you resumed it?</blockquote> | <blockquote>You promised and swore not to resume a man's dress.</blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>I never meant to swear that I would not resume it.</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>Why have you resumed it?</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>Because it is more lawful and suitable for me to resume it and to wear man's dress, being with men, than to have a woman's dress. I have resumed it because the promise made to me has not been kept ; that is to say, that I should go to Mass and should receive my Saviour and that I should be taken out of irons.</blockquote> | <blockquote>Because it is more lawful and suitable for me to resume it and to wear man's dress, being with men, than to have a woman's dress. I have resumed it because the promise made to me has not been kept ; that is to say, that I should go to Mass and should receive my Saviour and that I should be taken out of irons.</blockquote> | ||
| Line 945: | Line 954: | ||
We'll get in to more of Beaupère's bitter words later, but what's interesting is that of all the justifications it was about the Voices. Another, lesser player from the Rouen court, Bishop Jean Lefevre,<ref>or Jean Favri</ref> whom the biographer Pernoud calls, "a dubious character,"<ref>Pernoud, Retrial, p. 176, fn 4</ref> told the examiners essentially the same, that her Voices were not real:<ref>Murray, p. 210, from May 9, 1452</ref> | We'll get in to more of Beaupère's bitter words later, but what's interesting is that of all the justifications it was about the Voices. Another, lesser player from the Rouen court, Bishop Jean Lefevre,<ref>or Jean Favri</ref> whom the biographer Pernoud calls, "a dubious character,"<ref>Pernoud, Retrial, p. 176, fn 4</ref> told the examiners essentially the same, that her Voices were not real:<ref>Murray, p. 210, from May 9, 1452</ref> | ||
<blockquote>Jeanne answered with great prudence the questions put to her, '''with the exception of the subject of her revelations from God''': for the space of three weeks<ref>I.e., that she was not always divinely inspired. Lefevre's testimony, as posted in Murray, is short and rarely referenced in other works on Saint Joan. Several of the participants at the Rouen Trial of Condemnation who testified to the Trial of Rehabilitation retained a bit of their animosity or disbelief in her that they had exercised vehemently at the trial. To Lefevre's credit, Massau recollected the Lefevre was worried that Joan "was being too much troubled" by the constant questioning regarding "whether she was in a state of grace." Lefevre makes a big point about this incident in the trial, opening his statement at the Rehabilitation Trial with, "When Jeanne was asked if she were in the Grace of God, I, who was present, said it was not a suitable question for such a girl. Then the Bishop of Beauvais said to me, "It will be better for you if you keep silent." Murray states that Lefevre objected to Joan's confinement in a military not ecclesiastic prison (Murry, p. 338).</ref> I believed her to be inspired. She was asked very profound questions, as to which she showed herself quite capable; sometimes they interrupted the enquiry, going from one subject to another, that they might make her change her purpose. The Examinations were very long, lasting sometimes two or three hours, so that the Doctors present were much fatigued. </blockquote>Joan's execution was predetermined. Charles the VII abandoned her, and the English would kill her no matter what. It was, however, in fulfillment of what the Voices had told Joan all along. On Thursday, March 1, 1431, after lengthy queries and ongoing questions about the Voices, Joan was asked,<blockquote>Have your Voices said that before three months you will be delivered from prison?</blockquote><blockquote>That is not in your Case. Nevertheless I do not know when I shall be delivered. But those who wish to send me out of the world may well go before me.</blockquote><blockquote>Has not your counsel told you that you will be delivered from your actual prison?</blockquote><blockquote>Speak to me in three months, and I will answer. Moreover, ask of those present, upon oath, if this touches on the Trial.</blockquote> | <blockquote>Jeanne answered with great prudence the questions put to her, '''with the exception of the subject of her revelations from God''': for the space of three weeks<ref>I.e., that she was not always divinely inspired. Lefevre's testimony, as posted in Murray, is short and rarely referenced in other works on Saint Joan. Several of the participants at the Rouen Trial of Condemnation who testified to the Trial of Rehabilitation retained a bit of their animosity or disbelief in her that they had exercised vehemently at the trial. To Lefevre's credit, Massau recollected the Lefevre was worried that Joan "was being too much troubled" by the constant questioning regarding "whether she was in a state of grace." Lefevre makes a big point about this incident in the trial, opening his statement at the Rehabilitation Trial with, "When Jeanne was asked if she were in the Grace of God, I, who was present, said it was not a suitable question for such a girl. Then the Bishop of Beauvais said to me, "It will be better for you if you keep silent." Murray states that Lefevre objected to Joan's confinement in a military not ecclesiastic prison (Murry, p. 338).</ref> I believed her to be inspired. She was asked very profound questions, as to which she showed herself quite capable; sometimes they interrupted the enquiry, going from one subject to another, that they might make her change her purpose. The Examinations were very long, lasting sometimes two or three hours, so that the Doctors present were much fatigued. </blockquote> | ||
Joan's execution was predetermined. Charles the VII abandoned her, and the English would kill her no matter what. It was, however, in fulfillment of what the Voices had told Joan all along. On Thursday, March 1, 1431, after lengthy queries and ongoing questions about the Voices, Joan was asked, | |||
<blockquote>Have your Voices said that before three months you will be delivered from prison?</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>That is not in your Case. Nevertheless I do not know when I shall be delivered. But those who wish to send me out of the world may well go before me.</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>Has not your counsel told you that you will be delivered from your actual prison?</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>Speak to me in three months, and I will answer. Moreover, ask of those present, upon oath, if this touches on the Trial.</blockquote> | |||
| Line 975: | Line 994: | ||
The court was leading her on here, which is why there was no surprise expressed from her examiner at her answer:<ref>Murray, p. 23</ref> | The court was leading her on here, which is why there was no surprise expressed from her examiner at her answer:<ref>Murray, p. 23</ref> | ||
<blockquote>It is the Voice<ref>Singular "Voice" which conforms to the French version that reads, "cette '''voix''' était celle de sainte Catherine 18s et de sainte Marguerite" (Champion, p. 47)</ref> of Saint Catherine and of Saint Margaret. Their faces are adorned with beautiful crowns, very rich and precious. To tell you this I have leave from Our Lord. If you doubt this, send to Poitiers, where I was examined before.</blockquote>The modern reader may be bewildered by Joan's sudden introduction of Saints Catherine and Margaret; the court was not. Well briefed by their spies and investigators in France,<ref>For example, on March 3, the Rouen court asked her, "What did you do in the trenches of La Charité?" Joan already knew what they were getting at, and shut down the line of inquiry before it could be asked: "I made an assault there; but I neither threw, nor caused to be thrown. Holy Water by way of aspersion." The questioner then moved on, asking, ""Why did you not enter La Charité, if you had command from God to do so?" Joan replied indignantly, "Who told you I had God's command for it?" (Murray pp. 53-54). She knew the games they were playing.</ref> they likely already knew about Joan's Saints and wanted her to affirm it for the record. The follow up question displays no incredulity:<blockquote>How do you know if these were the two Saints? How do you distinguish one from the other?</blockquote>Joan confirms "it is they" and then explains,<blockquote>By the greeting they give me. It is seven years now since they have undertaken to guide me. I know them well because they were named to me. </blockquote> | <blockquote>It is the Voice<ref>Singular "Voice" which conforms to the French version that reads, "cette '''voix''' était celle de sainte Catherine 18s et de sainte Marguerite" (Champion, p. 47)</ref> of Saint Catherine and of Saint Margaret. Their faces are adorned with beautiful crowns, very rich and precious. To tell you this I have leave from Our Lord. If you doubt this, send to Poitiers, where I was examined before.</blockquote>The modern reader may be bewildered by Joan's sudden introduction of Saints Catherine and Margaret; the court was not. Well briefed by their spies and investigators in France,<ref>For example, on March 3, the Rouen court asked her, "What did you do in the trenches of La Charité?" Joan already knew what they were getting at, and shut down the line of inquiry before it could be asked: "I made an assault there; but I neither threw, nor caused to be thrown. Holy Water by way of aspersion." The questioner then moved on, asking, ""Why did you not enter La Charité, if you had command from God to do so?" Joan replied indignantly, "Who told you I had God's command for it?" (Murray pp. 53-54). She knew the games they were playing.</ref> they likely already knew about Joan's Saints and wanted her to affirm it for the record. The follow up question displays no incredulity: | ||
<blockquote>How do you know if these were the two Saints? How do you distinguish one from the other?</blockquote> | |||
Joan confirms "it is they" and then explains, | |||
<blockquote>By the greeting they give me. It is seven years now since they have undertaken to guide me. I know them well because they were named to me. </blockquote>T | |||
he court merely presses her as to how she tells the two Saints apart, how old they are, and how they are dressed, until Joan put a pause on the topic: | |||
<blockquote>I will tell you no more just now; I have not permission to reveal it. If you do not believe me, go to Poitiers. There are some revelations which come to the King of France, and not to you, who are questioning me.</blockquote> | |||
More questions, to which she again defers to the Poitiers Examination, | |||
<blockquote>If I had leave, I would tell you willingly: it is written in the Register at Poitiers. I have also received comfort from Saint Michael.</blockquote> | |||
Joan had no reason to assume they had no access to the "Register at Poitiers," which was a transcript of her interviews by the "Doctors" at Poitiers on behalf of Charles VII in early 1429. She even begged the court to get a copy of it, saying to her interrogator, Beaupère,<ref>Murray, p. 25</ref> | |||
<blockquote>I wish you could get a copy of this book at Poitiers, if it please God.<ref>The Poitiers Register disappeared, likely destroyed by her enemies at the Court of Charles VII, most likely by the Archbishop of Reims who turned against her after Charles' coronation.</ref></blockquote> | |||
Her statement here is declaratory, not deferral: ''just go look at the book!'' Ironically, it is entirely possible that the Rouen court had acquired a copy, seen one, or at a minimum learned of it in detail, as its custodian, Regnault de Chartres, Archbishop of Rouen, along with Charles VII's minister,Georges de La Trémoïlle, had negotiated extensively for two years with the Burgundians and the English, and they pushed Charles to abandon Joan, who was an ever-present friction grinding away at their designs. I have no evidence of this possibility, but the occasion points strongly to it, as they had the motive to share the Poitiers Register or its contents, and the Burgundians would have been most interested in it, perhaps even demanding a look at it. | Her statement here is declaratory, not deferral: ''just go look at the book!'' Ironically, it is entirely possible that the Rouen court had acquired a copy, seen one, or at a minimum learned of it in detail, as its custodian, Regnault de Chartres, Archbishop of Rouen, along with Charles VII's minister,Georges de La Trémoïlle, had negotiated extensively for two years with the Burgundians and the English, and they pushed Charles to abandon Joan, who was an ever-present friction grinding away at their designs. I have no evidence of this possibility, but the occasion points strongly to it, as they had the motive to share the Poitiers Register or its contents, and the Burgundians would have been most interested in it, perhaps even demanding a look at it. | ||
I am intrigued by Joan's seemingly contradictory statements about Saints Catherine and Margaret. She states that she went to Mass, and "often" or "from that time" her her (plural) Voices. Biographer Murray uses<ref>From Murray (p. 12): From Barrett (p. 56): "and from that time she frequently heard her voices." And in French per Champion, "et alors, fréquemment, elle entendait ses voix"</ref>, | I am intrigued by Joan's seemingly contradictory statements about Saints Catherine and Margaret. She states that she went to Mass, and "often" or "from that time" her her (plural) Voices. Biographer Murray uses<ref>From Murray (p. 12): From Barrett (p. 56): "and from that time she frequently heard her voices." And in French per Champion, "et alors, fréquemment, elle entendait ses voix"</ref>, | ||
<blockquote>On the way, I passed through Auxerre, where I heard Mass in the principal Church.<ref name=":14" /> Thenceforward I often heard my Voices. </blockquote> | |||
The original Latin transcript gives us, ''et tunc frequenter habebat voces suas'', which I can best translate as, "then she frequently was having<ref>I'm not sure "have" or "heard" is interchangeable here, but "habēre," does mean "to have"</ref> her voices," as in an ongoing event that followed Mass at Auxerre. It doesn't mean the Voices started there, which we know from Joan's testimony that, | |||
<blockquote>It is seven years now since [the Saints Catherine and Margaret] have undertaken to guide me.</blockquote> | |||
But it may well indicate that the Mass at Auxerre marked a greater frequency of their accompaniment of Joan, which would explain why her earlier declarations state that she was "sent by God" as opposed to having been sent by the Saints or the Archangel. Although, for Joan, they were all one in the same, be it a Voice, Voices, or "sent from God":<ref>Murray, p 13</ref> | |||
<blockquote>Those of my party knew well that the Voice had been sent me from God; they have seen and known this Voice, I am sure of it. My King and many others have also heard and seen the Voices which came to me;</blockquote> | |||
Taken with the strong likelihood that the Rouen court already knew about Saints Catherine and Margaret, or at least of multiple Saints, and that for Joan "Voice" and "Voices" were interchangeable, all equally coming from God, I find no inconsistency between her mention of the Saints by name at Rouen and the absence of references to them in the Trial of Rehabilitation. That is, the theory that she made them up at the Trial at Rouen is weak. | |||
Next, let's take a look at her [[Joan of Arc letter to the English|letter to the King of England]], in which Joan stated, | Next, let's take a look at her [[Joan of Arc letter to the English|letter to the King of England]], in which Joan stated, | ||