 |
 
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Unknown to him, another blow was developing, one that would shape many of his later actions and strongly influence his future writings. This blow came from the Inquisition! Many claim that Nostradamus was in constant trouble with the dread Inquisition yet contrary to these claims, there is no evidence for this. Yet other assertions that he was never in trouble with the Inquisition also have no basis in fact for there is truth to the claim that the Inquisition took a long hard look at him. In those days, a non-noble could not live such a public life like he did without being investigated by the Inquisition at least once.
The Inquisition was the enforcement arm of the Catholic Church and as such was the deadliest institution the church had ever devised. It went after what it considered to be heresy as a bee flies to pollen. Its decisions were usually final and irrevocable. With the sole exception of Charles (Carlos) of the Hapsburg Empire, no Catholic king, however mighty, dared challenge the authority or decisions of the Inquisition. It was the great danger hanging over every head during those days. A listing of what they did and the punishments they meted out would fill books miles long. They would be responsible for the execution of Giordano Bruno, the thinker who first realized that the stars we see at night were actually suns in their own right. They would force the mathematician Galileo Galilee to retract his claim that the planets moved around the Sun instead of the Earth. They placed Galileo’s books, among others, on the Index of Forbidden Books, which made it forbidden to all Catholics to read on pain of excommunication – total banishment from the Catholic Church and damnation for all eternity. Only bishops and holy abbots could stand up to the power of the inquisitors and even some of the abbots were targeted. Who knows how many life spans were cut short, how much knowledge lost, because certain individuals or statements fell under the suspicious eye of the Inquisition. And now, the Inquisition was coming into the life of Nostradamus.
The fury of the Inquisition was fueled by two historical events. First, in 1517, Martin Luther had posted his famous 95 Thesis. The pope of the time, tired of Luther’s rejection of Papal authority, had excommunicated him. But another event in the development of the Protestant Revolution occurred, one that would have far larger implications. In 1533, Nicholas Cop had delivered an impassioned polemic in the Royal College (nowadays the College de France) about the need for the Catholic Church to reform itself. A violent reaction by the Catholic Church, one supported by the monarchy, forced Cop to flee. This event would play a strong role in the life of another Lutheran Protestant, Jean (John) Calvin, who became firmly opposed to the Catholic Church as a result.
In part due to this last event, Francis I authorized the Inquisition to attempt to eradicate the “Lutheran heresy” from southern France in 1538. The focus of the Inquisition was, naturally, on intellectuals. Because intellectuals tended to side with at least certain tenants of the “heresy” as Lutheranism was known as, the Inquisition was ever suspicious of them. The inquisitors would try to arrest known Protestants who would flee if they heard that the Inquisition was looking into them. Because of this, the Inquisition tried to go everywhere. Thanks to the authorization by Francis a deputation arrived in Agen and went about its business.
One may ask how this ties in with Nostradamus, especially as he had left Agen four years earlier. It is almost certain that Nostradamus had to have known, maybe was friendly with, one or two Lutherans who lived in Agen. But this is speculation. Only one fact we know, which indicates that the Inquisition was looking into the doctor. We know that certain people in Agen testified to the Inquisition in 1538 that Nostradamus was in a town on the Garonne River.
With knowledge that the Inquisition was looking into him, the question why the Inquisition was looking into him must be answered. Unfortunately, though it is a key question, the answer cannot be certain. Beyond knowing that certain people testified that Nostradamus was in a town on the Garonne River, nothing has come down to us. That said, one possibility stands forth: It would be natural that the inquisitors questioned Scaliger who had remained in Agen. In fact, we know that they charged him with heresy. Scaligar would be exonerated only because one of the judges was his longtime friend Arnoul le Ferron, but this fact is a digression. We can only guess what was said, but it is almost definite that using methods standard to the Inquisition at that time, the inquisitors learned that Nostradamus was a one-time friend of Scaligar.
The fact that Scaligar was accused of heresy does raise the obvious question why did they not go right after Nostradamus. A good question, but to ascertain the likely answer, we need to view it from the probable viewpoint of the inquisitors. First, with the old association was noted, and it almost had to have been noticed, it is understandable that the Inquisition’s attention would be turned to the doctor. But as it was four years after he had left Agen they could not quickly get their hands on him. Second, there might have been a mighty defense in the doctor’s favor. If he was alive, for he died in 1538, the Bishop of Agen that Nostradamus knew, Marc-Antoine de La Rovère, would have likely been friendly to the doctor and testified favorably on his behalf, this would certainly tell in the man’s favor. If he was not alive, his successor would likely note the friendship between the doctor and La Rovère to the inquisitors. Even inquisitors did not discount the testimony of a Bishop, for the Bishops collectively were, as they are today, the rulers of the Church – The Pope is merely the head Bishop, the Bishop of Rome. Finally, there would be some favorable comments by others from Agen. So, on the one hand there were the favorable comments, including the likely favorable comment by Bishop La Rovère. But on the other hand there the fact that he was a one-time friend of the accused heretic, Scaliger. It would be true that the Inquisition would be looking into the doctor, but busy with many investigations, and the trial that Scaligar would undergo, the inquisitors would not push the matter of Dr. Nostradamus very hard. However, it would be surprising were they to forget about it.
In all probability they would eventually get around to the matter of Nostradamus. Likely they eventually sent a deputation to question him. However, when arrived in that village on the Garonne River, a village the name of which has not come down to us, he was gone!
How did this investigation affect Nostradamus? One cannot know, with any absolute certainty what the effect was. We know that the Catholic Church was at least a passive supporter of Nostradamus once the Prophecies were published. Yet a clue seems to be found in the Quatrains. It seems that Nostradamus’ famed Catholicism was limited. His writings do not condemn every Protestant who lived, only those who lived within a certain time period, the time when the Inquisition was dominant. Fulfilled quatrains during the time of the Inquisition are remarkably hostile to people if they are Protestant. But after this time, his anti-Protestant hostility seems to have died out, the quatrains that are fulfilled after the time of the Inquisition does not necessarily condemn any protestant.
This hardly agrees with the reputation given to him which is that of a staunch Catholic. Both his honesty and his Catholicism are two traits that stand out according to most commentators. Yet a thorough examination of his prophecies, combined with his reputed stay in Navarre, indicates that his Catholicism was measured, it was neither spontaneous nor natural. Bluntly stated, though he was definitely Christian, he was not a Catholic at heart. Yes he attacked Protestants in his quatrains. But the question is, did he dare do otherwise? In the quatrains fulfilled during the time of the Inquisition it is the religious nature of the individual that draws the ire of the seer. In the later days, the days after the inquisition, it is not the religious nature of the person that draws the ire of Nostradamus, it is what he does. For example: Nostradamus slammed Elizabeth I of England even though she did such great work for her people, simply because she was a Protestant. Yet Winston Churchill, who was as Protestant as Elizabeth was, was not condemned.
Why is this? Why this contradiction? This contradiction makes no sense unless there was a scare given to him by the Inquisition. Because of this scare, when he wrote his prophecies he would remember the power of the one institution that, more than any, could destroy him and his work. Though he survived this, he would be prudent, careful of the Inquisition during the time of its power. The fact that Elizabeth lived during the time of the power of the Inquisition while Churchill lived long after it explains this discrepancy and reveals just how wary Nostradamus was of that vile institution.
Before we continue on, I think it is important that it is mentioned how I think his troubles with the Inquisition were resolved. It is probable that Nostradamus traveled many places during the years 1534 to 1543. Towards the end of that time, it is reputed he found himself in a monastery that had a particular reputation for strictness. The reason for this will be made apparent later, but it is almost certain that the Inquisition would learn of it. Naturally, a deputation would have been sent. The deputation would want to get at the doctor, get the doctor’s side of the story and make a judgment. That he was in a monastery because of a concern about the devil acting on him would be a very good mark in his favor. The abbot of the monastery would certainly talk about Nostradamus’ piety and his determination to get rid of any influence of the Devil, this would be an exceedingly strong mark in his favor. Because of this, and his friendship with the deceased Bishop of Agen, they would be much more open than normal about listening to his testimony. Very likely, they got the doctor’s side of the story, took the testimony of the abbot, and closed the book on the investigation that started in 1538. He would never suffer the opposition of the Church during what was the most important time of his life, the time that was quickly approaching. But the good doctor would remember.
Since its inception in the 12th Century, the Inquisition has been the dominant enforcement arm of the Catholic Church. Staffed by the ultra-conservative Dominican Order since the middle of the 13th Century, the primary focus of inquisitors has been one thing: Heresy. Anyone who was even remotely suspected of deviating from the Catholic creed, at least as interpreted by the Dominicans, was rendered suspect. And when it was formalized as a sacred congregation in 1542 by Pope Paul III, there was no stopping it.
People talk about the horrors of the Spanish Inquisition. An accused was often tried without knowing what the charges were, unable to face their accusers, tortured to give confessions, even tried by being dumped in the water to see if the water would accept or reject the accused (and thereby prove their guilt when they floated on the water). And talk about the variety of executions the inquisitors utilized. If one was simply hung one got off lightly, for inquisitors often utilized exotic forms of execution, including being burned, being drawn and quartered, stretched till ones bones broke, crushed, having lead poured into their bodies, the list was often limited only by the imagination of the inquisitor. Yes, the Spanish Inquisition was brutal, but what people do not realize was that the Spanish Inquisition was just the Spanish arm of the Congregation of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, which spread its reach with impunity throughout anywhere Catholicism was. And what the Spanish Inquisition did the other branches of the Inquisition did with equal impunity. They were ruthlessly murderous in the pursuit of their goals. We may talk in horrified tones about how the Nazis killed Jews using poisoned gas, but if the gas had been available back then the inquisitors would have willingly utilized it.
Practically nobody was safe from the inquisition. Yes, they focused on intellectuals because they were often the most likely to break from the path as laid out by the Catholic Church, but farmers, common workers, even nobles were grabbed by the Inquisition. There are no records of kings being grabbed, nor are there records of any of the greater dukes being forced to defend themselves, but the lesser nobility was just as vulnerable in that religious day and age. When one considers that even kings looked upon the Inquisition with dread, one realizes the power that vile institution had over the life of the people for centuries.
And were their eyes focused on just Christians? One would wish it were so. Throughout Europe, especially in Spain yet also elsewhere, inquisitors looked after Jews and Muslims quite readily for was not Judaism and Islam heresies according to the rites and doctrine of Christianity? They were especially hard on converted Jews and Muslims because they often suspected them of reverting to their original faith – and there was no worse heresy than that of apostasy. The only exception was, of course, blasphemy, but nobody dared to claim they were God or insult God in front of others - except the insane and they were quickly killed or institutionalized.
What about the innocent? Did not the inquisition execute innocent people? To this the inquisition had but one answer, but for their purposes it was effective. “What innocent?” It was presumed guilty unless proven innocent. And with the record that the Inquisition had concerning people, once they accused a person, it was usually all over for that individual.
That said, there were those people that the Inquisition did back off from. Priests, as a rule, were not frowned upon unless there was strong evidence, for a priest was presumed to be defending the Church and ministering to the flock. True, the Dominicans who ran the Inquisition did go after the Jesuits but that was inter-order rivalry, not a matter of heresy, though there is some indication that the Dominicans tried to make it a matter of heresy. Monks also tended to be presumed innocent, one did not join a holy order unless one had a deep, abiding faith in God and the ways of the Church. People who were defended by holy abbots tended to be looked upon favorably, especially if the person was under the Abbots protection while dealing with the issue that the person was accused of – then the person was considered to be striving for reformation. And if a bishop spoke in defense of a person, the inquisitor sat up and took note for the bishops, collectively, were then as now the princes and rulers of the Church. For example, the Inquisition did not dare touch Galileo while Pope Urban, the Bishop of Rome and the chief bishop, protected him. But once Galileo angered Urban enough to withdraw his protection, Father Vincenzo Maculano da Firenzuola, the chief inquisitor during Galileo's trial, pounced.
People talk about how vile the Nazis were and in their short time they committed some very vile acts. But the institution they learned from was the Inquisition. Even genocides that occurred across the ocean, like that which happened in the Americas against the natives there, utilized some practices developed by the Inquisition. It was the original torturer and was probably the bloodiest institution ever devised. Today it is known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith but make no mistake, the Inquisition is still alive. If the church ever regains power, the Congregation of the Holy Office of the Inquisition will be unleashed.