T HE ABSOLUT ION FORM ULA O F THE A TEM PL RS .

LL D PHI LADELPHIA A A "L N . B" HEN R" CHARLES LEA . . PEN NS , , V I

Am ong the ac c u sat i o ns brought agai n st the Templars by fl' Po e m . 1 08 w as O n e e e ct p Cle ent V in 3 , there to the that

f — the o ficers of the Order the Master, the Visitors , and the

— o Preceptors absolved the brethren fr m their sins . I t is further asserted that de Molay admitted this i n the presence ‘ T of high personages before his arrest . hat the accusation

was an a fter- thought is shown by the fact that it is not con t ai n e d m m in the preli inary list of charges sent in Septe ber,

1 0 m s u 3 7, by the Inquisitor Guillau e de Paris to his bo rd i nates as a guide for them in the expected trials o f the 2 m n o Te m plars . "e t Cle ent was t the first to take note of

m o this assu ption of sacerdotal prer gatives , which , in fact , was well known to all who busied themselves with canon law , and public attention had already been called to it . In

a diatribe on the disorders of the Church , written by a men d i can t friar apparently towards th e e n d of the thirteenth cen

— tury , all the three great Military Orders the Hospital , the

m " — Te ple , and the Teutonic nights are reproved for this

a w the usurp tion of the po er of keys, although it is ascribed

l ' As o ma u l F ac i e m mi sen cordi am Au u 1 2 1 08 f r lly expressed in the b l , g st . 3 , the charge is

m u o cre de ban t e t di cebatur e is uo ma u m a i a e ccat Ite q d , sic q d gn s g ster p is ot e ri t e o a v a m uod o . m uo p s bsol er e . Ite q visit t r Ite q d preceptores qu oru m m u e r an la i lti t yc .

m u o fa i ban t a o m u o ali a c e . ui o um Ite q d h ec de f ct Ite q d q c r . Item qu od m agn u s m agister ordinis pre di cti hoc fuit de se con fe ssus in

a ma at um o ar um an te uam a — presenci gn pers n q esset c ptus . Michelet P rod s dc em /f 1 a ull r o an T em C M . B a . R m . I X. [ 2 : . . Ed p , I 9 . f g 9 ( . 9 P o P r at t‘s at Con de mna ti on dz; Tem /fen Pa i 1 80 iss t f , r s , 5 , p . 39 .

R m ol V Am o o V . . ca S of C u o [ eprinted fr , eri n ciety h rch Hist ry . ] T e Absol ut i on For mula o t e Tem l 38 b f h p ars . rather to ignorance than to wilful intrusion on priestly func 1 The tions . truth or the falsity of the accusation has n ever,

I b e li e v e , been investigated , and though the question is a subordinate one , yet everything connected with the catas t ro h e T m p of the e ple possesses i nterest , and this d erives adventitious importance from its relation to the develop ment o f Catholic doctrine in the thirteenth century . m To understand it rightly, we ust bear in mind that the m m embers of the M ilitary Orders were onks , subject to all the rules and entitled to all the privileges of m onachism . T o appreciate their relations to the great subject of the sac m m ra ent of penitence , we ust , therefore , consider what , at

re the date of their foundation , were the customs o f the li i ou s g Orders , as well as what were the teachings of the

Church with regard to con fession and absolution , and we can then est imate how far Clement V . was j ustified in including r this among the charges for which the Order was dest oyed .

Th e T emplar Rule was based on the Cistercian , which i n turn was a reform o f the Benedictin e . I n the original Rule of Bened ict there are no defined regulations on the subject . The sin ner is counselled to confess to his abbot or to one of m but the older onks and to seek his advice , , of course , there

absol uti on w hi ch , , i i is nothing said as to ‘ n ts sacramental character, was the creation of the schoolmen of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries . Public con fession in the daily as se mblage or chapter was ordered fo r any external fault com 2 mi tt e d in the prescribed routine of daily labor — ah exercise m m which had already , prior to Benedict , beco e custo ary in m m m ” the onachis of the ti e . I n the Cistercian reform this

I In treating of the three Military O rders the writer says Usu rp ant laici sace rdotum offici a oe ni te n ti am ro e xce ssibus i n u n e n te s e t ca m , p p j g nde pro

o a a cum n on a com mi ssae a e t sol v n d libit rel x ntes , sint eis cl ves , nec lig ndi e i uti

debean t o a . R m um u t ma i stri dom or um mi ttan t a a p test te e edi , g fr tres liter tos ad stud e n dum r a the ol o i cas le cti on e s a sci e n ti as sae c u lares u t ci c g , nec circ , ” ' hab e an t a o o t a o — Collecti o de Sean dalzs E ccle liter t s pri res e s cerd tes . si ae (Dol

' B ei tr a e z r oli sc/ze éi r c /zli c/ze n u Cu ltu r u tz n . linger , g p , III . 9 ' ' e a l e i ct u a tr olo a X R S . B n ed c . P z L g . . . vii . xlvi (Mig e s g , VI . 3 73 ,

C mara di Commen t C1 1 Re S Cit r od . S . . . . e an i 1 8 f g (Migne , g g g c . ;

o ac Au re li n sti c li c 1 6 a n I n l . Lai a Lib . . . . J n e s. de I 3 S Eucheri i Hami l vm . . . o til Te m l r Tlze Absol uti on For mula f e p a s. 39

E was insisted upon and developed . very day, after mass, A n the brethren assembled in chapter . y one conscious of sin was expected to confess it and ask for pardon . I f he did not do so , any one cognizant of it was required to accuse

u m him ; he co ld defend hi self, and judgment was pronounced by a majority of those present . I f he was condemned to m the discipline , he promptly stripped hi self to the waist and was scourged till the abbot commanded it to cease , and the proceedings terminated by the prior listening to private confessions of such thi ngs as nocturnal illusions fo r which ‘ he granted absolution and penance . I n all this there m is evidently nothing of the for al sacrament of penitence , and no other form o f con fession is prescribed . Even o n ” the death - bed the dying monk only said Confite or or “ e ccatis re co r Mea culpa, de omnibus p meis p vos orate ” pro me . Here we have the prototype of the chapters of the Te m plars as described in their Rule . Wherever four or m ore of the brethre n were together they were commanded to hold a on E chapter the vigils of Christmas , aster, and Pentecost ,

and on every Sunday of the year, excepting those of the

: three feasts . These were religious assemblies each one on m m F entering crossed hi self in the na e of the ather, Son , and

Holy Ghost , and recited a Paternoster before taking his seat . f m The Preceptor or presiding o ficer preached a ser on , after which every one conscio us of sin was expected to confess

it . I f he did not do so , any one acquainted with it called

upon him to confess ; if he denied it , witnesses were su m

mo u ed and the case was debated . The culprit withdrew ; b the chapter determined what penance to prescri e , and he

was recalled . I f this was scourging, it was performed on f the spot by the presiding o ficer, but there were many m degrees of penance, cul inating in expulsion , and a long

o fi e nce s catalogue of is detailed , classified according to the

’ ' ’ '

Um : an ti u zor er Ordi n z: Ci rte r czen szr . . x . CLX 1 g c lxx l xv (Migne , VI . 443 9 m f 1 61212 c . . B o St . B r a o , xciv. (p y the ti e e n rd , h wever, there seem s

— to a u om i u of a ua o o at Ea . S. B a e r m be c st spr nging p nn l c nfessi n ster ern rdi S .

i n Di e P are /m: 1 CLXXX . $ 5 (Migne , III 0 Tbe Absoluti on For mula o tlze T m 4 f e plars .

‘ penances d ue to them . In very light cases the chapter some times referred the offender to the chaplain who prescribed “ Th e the penance . proceedings of the chapter closed with

ffi a prayer by the presiding o cer, prior to which he absolved all those present and warned them that those who d id not con fess their sins had n o share in the spiritual m erits ‘ Th and benefits of the Order . e object for which the chapters we‘ re instituted was the con fession and penancing ‘ of sins ; in fact , the chapter was a con fessional , and each brother was instructed before entering it to search his conscience and reflect whether he had any transgression “ to con fess and render satisfaction for. The Rule in the elaborate form in which we have it dates from about the middle of the thirteenth century, and co n tains certain sacerdotal elements which I will consider here m after . I n its early si plicity, as granted by the council of T 1 1 2 royes in 7, the whole matter of hearing con fessions m T and i posing penance is entrusted to the Master . here is nothing said as to absolution , but the expressions used show that the performance of the penance imposed by him ’ A is expected to obtain salvation for the sinner . t that tim e the schoolmen had not fairly commenced thei r work ; nothing was known of pen itence as a sacrament , and even the power o f the keys was as yet a vague

’ La R le d a Tem le ubh ee ou l a So é é l Hi stoi re F a a eg p , p p r ci t de de r nce , p r r Cu z o Par 1 8 86 Art 8 — 02 Hen i de r n , is , , . 3 5 5 . ora Art 2 6 f . . , 5 a Car le M aistre ou cil qui tient l e chapi stre les assols dou pooi r que il ai t " il come nce sa roi e re a ue . Art 0 8 dev nt q p . 5 3 , 5 3 . ’ E t sachi e s qui nostre chapi stre furent e tabli por cc que li frere se con " ssa l or fau e t am a — I b d A i . rt . 8 fe ssent de tes les end ssent . , 3 9. 5 I bi d t Ar . . . , 394

Si ali u i s a l o ue n do m a o a d e li u e r i t q fr ter q vel ilit nd vel liter leve q , ipse m uu m a a m a De l n ltro delictu s s tisf ciendo gi stro oste n dat . e vi bus si con sue tudi

ne m n on habe an t m oe n i te nti am hab e at . Si o e o a al i , leve p ver t cente per qu e m a um u a o a u m a or e t e v ide n ti ori sub ac e at di sci li n li c lp c gnit f erit , j i j p e e t emen

dati on i . Si au m a e r it um re trah e tur a fami liari tate a u te gr ve delict fr tr m , nec cum m u a m m a a o u re fe cti on e m uma D illis si l in e de ens ed t sed s l s s t . ispen sa " ti on i e t u o Ma i stri o um i n cumbat ut sal vus u e rmane at j dici g t t , in die j dicii p .

— Hard u i n Con ci l . 1 1 1 1 . . VI . 44 . Tbe Absol uti on For mula of til e Templars . 4 1

N conception . aturally, therefore , in this original Rule there are no co mmands as to confession to priests or the seeking o f absolution from them . Whatever power to bind or to loose was exercised in the Order lay in the hands o f fl the Master , and the penalties which he in icted were not punishment , but penance . The distinction between the

or u m i n te r n u m or um ex ter n u m f and the f , between reconcilia tion to the Church and reconciliation to God , had not as

’ yet been clearly defined by the schoolmen ; it was virtually unknown in practice and all offences w ere on the same plane . I n the completed Rule we can trace these same characteristics . The proceedings in the chapter were m not si ply to enforce the discipline of the Order, but to 1 save the soul of the sinner . The penitential character of the i nfli cti o n s is seen in the injunction that the culprit is to endure them cheerfully and willingly— he should feel shame ” n o t for the sin , but for the penance ; and when this is m scourging , ad inistered on the spot , all those present are hi m enjoined to pray God to pardon , whereupon the breth

a ren all recite a Paternoster, and if there is a chapl in present a o fl r ra e r he e s a special p y . When the penance is a pro m m longed one , the chapter ust deter ine when it shall cease , and then before the penitent is introduced all the brethren kneel and pray God to give him grace to preserve him from ‘ sin hereafter . The religious character of the penance is

N u l frere n e doit reprendre autre frere fors par charité e t par e n te n ti on ' " — é le a au s arme . R Art. 1 2 de f ire li s ver g , 4 . 9 Chancum frere doit bien e t vole n ti e rs faire la penance que li est e n é a ha i Ar a tr t 1 . ch rg e p r c p s e . . 4 5

“ ' Et n ul frere n e doit avoir honte de penance en maniere que il l en laisse a a ma s a a o a o o d e a le e chié e t la a f ire i ch sc n d it v ir h nte f ire p , pen nce doit chas Art c un a . f ire 494 . Mai s bi e n sachiés ue mu o a a . Art q lt est belle ch se de f ire pen nce . 5 3 3 . When the penance comprised weekly public scourgi ng in chu rch e t d oit t venir a sa discipline a grant d e voci on e re ce ore l e en patience devant tou t l e " i a a ti r — I bi — u u u mos e . d . Art 68 pe ple q ser , . 4 73 .

' B au se i nors e o u i a l a i g freres , ve s ci v tre frere q vient discipline pries , ' i n r a d i n f A o Se o u i r o t de aute s. rt . 02 n tre g q li p ses 5 . m a , Art . 5 20. 2 Tbe Absoluti on For mula o tlze Te m l 4 f p ars .

still further seen in the regulation that if it is not admi n istered b f l on the spot y the presid ing o ficer, it is subsequent y to be fl in icted by the chaplain as sacerdotalism advanced , indeed , some even argued that it ought always to be done by a priest ‘ and n ot by the master or commander. At the time when the Order was organized there was noth ing strange in thus entrusting to the master or preceptor the administration of the rites of con fession , absolution , an d Th e satisfaction . monk , though not in holy orders , by his vows and h is dedication to the service of God , was invested

- E with a quasi sacerd otal character . ven at the end of the twelfth centu ry we learn from Peter Cantor that i n som e convents a monk could con fess to any of his brethren an d accept penance from him , though by this time absolution was becoming recognized as a sacerdotal function and was b administered by the a bot , the sacram ent being thus split 2 in two . But even apart from this monastic character lay men had not as yet been excluded from the hearing o f con n ot fessions . It was long before the found ing of the Order that the Blessed Lan franc taught that confession o f secret sins could be made to any ecclesiastic , from priest to osti ari us , or in their absence to a righteous layman who could ’ N o cleanse the soul from sin . work o f the twelfth cen t u ry exercised so controlling an influence on the develop ment o f the sacramental conception of penitence as the forgery which passed current under the auth oritative nam e A of St . ugustin , yet in this it is asserted that in the ab

' sence o f a priest confession to a layman is equally e fli c a c i o us — a principle which was adopted by Gratian an d “

m . Peter Lo bard I n the thirteenth centu ry , even after

' I bzd A 2 2 . , rt . 5 3 , 5 5 . ’ m e n i ten t Li V o d e Admi n i str . Sacra . P b . 111 . . o i . 2 J . M rin . c ix n . 3 . ’ Martén de an ti Ri ti bus E cd esi a Lib. 1 . c . . Art. 6 . . e q . vi . n 5

T o of a am w as n ot o a r a fo his divisi n the s cr ent l ng fte w rds rbidden . See Ra m un di Postill i x Li b 1 11 Sn rn rn e S. . ad T t . . . . 4 , xx iv . y a da n essi on : L B . Lan fran ci Li b de Celan Co C . 62 . f (Migne , 9 ’ Ta a i ta ue confe ssion i s est ut a o con fi te atur o m nt q vis si deest s cerd s pr xi o. ' — - P u o Au u Li b d e m m at alsa P a n i ten ti a . . se d g st . . f c x

— m . D 6 P Lo rati an i D ee r 1 Guns xxx . . . . m ar G . . . . . Sen te n tt c Q iii ist b d . .

Lib. w D xvu . . ist . . 5 uti on For o t e Tem la The Absol mula f h p rs . 43 the Lateran canon which prescribed annual confession

a Cae sariu s to the p rish priest , the stories related by of Heisterbach to allu re the people to the con fessional show that the prevailing conception still w as that the virtue o f confession lay in the act , irrespective of the 1 character of the person to whom it was made . I f by this time the theologians refused to go thus far they at least still admitted the validity of con fession to laymen in case of 2 m a necessity , of which we have an exa ple in the n rrative of i the Sire de Joinville , who relates how he heard the con es ’ d Ebe li n o ru s sion o f Gui , Constable n p , and granted him

a m absolution , when both were expecting instant de th fro ’

m . As m the Mosle the sacramental theory beca e perfected , Aquin as expl ained that in such cases God supplies the place of the priest ; the absolution o f the layman is quasi

am m sacr ental it secures pardon fro God , and the penitent

u or u m i n te r n um is th s absolved in the f , but he is as yet

o o unreconciled to the Church and sh uld therefore , when p

o rt u n it f o a a n o n p y o fers , c n fess g i to a priest and btai the ‘ N o r full sacrament o f penitence . is the lack o f a priest confined to such desperate occasions as that related by J o inville ; if a m an knows his pa rish priest to be unfit and cannot obtain his license to confess to an o ther he is released from the obligation to employ a priest and can lawfully “ confess to a layman . I t is quite probable that the discus sion of the matter provoked by the Templar tri als led to a

A s e sa u . t n s A change in the attitude of the Church de sti , 1 1 m m writing in 3 7, exa ines the subject with a in uteness

a which shows that it had been attracting fresh ttention .

r a While he quotes the autho ities in its f vor, he concludes that l He i te rb D i a D 111 . 2 2 1 Ca a . s . . . . es r . ist c ,

9 — Ra m u n d i Su mmer: Li b . T i t. S . . . . o s u D eer y III XXXIV 4 Gl ss . p . .

au . I I D . C s XXXI . Q . iii . ist 5 . 3 M ' En ou mo a e n oill a Gu d Ebe li n Conn esta c ste de y se g essire y , bl e de Chi ppre ; e t se confessa a m oy e t je l uy donnay telle absol u ci on comm e Dieu ’ ' ' m e n a le — Me moi r es da Si r e de oi n z/ i ll o e Ed . 1 8 T 11 d nn it 7 , 7 5 , . . 20 p . .

4 ' ' T A i n at . Su mma u . V 111 Ar t c . H . u S . . 2 . osti e n s A u r a q ppl Q f . e m i s u mme Li b . D e P a n e t Re s . . S . V . g 7 5 m a V 11 r A t . . A u i nat S u m Su . . 1 . q . ppl Q 4 Tue A soluti on F r mu o t 44 b o la f ire Templars . such con fession is in n o way sacramental an d does not obtain l ill n absol u t i o n . St ot the question would settle itself, for the more the Church in c ulcated the necessity of the sacrament o f penitence for salvation , the more the faithful sought for it in l E whatever form it cou d be obtained . arly i n the fi fteenth

Prie ri as A and century ret urned to the opinion of quinas , even held that a laym an could absolve from e x c om m u n i ca 2 - tion on the death bed . I t was in vain that the co uncil o f T rent in 1 5 5 1 defined absolutely that no one except bishops and priests had power to hear sacram ental co n fe s “ N o a sion and grant absolution . t long fterwards Azpilcueta

— at m — argues that it is not a sin least a ortal sin to believe ,

m an d as any do , that any layman can hear con fessions grant ‘ absolution to the dying . I n the seventeenth century , how D ever, iana condemns the practice as utterly useless , though he ad m its that it is co mmon among sailors in fear of ship “ wreck . A nother point indispensable to a clear appreciation of the functions o f the master or preceptor o f the chapter o f the Tem plars is the nature of the absolution granted to sin ners

Th e in the twelfth centu ry . power of the keys had not at m that time been defined with precision , and uch debate in the schools was still requisite befo re a practical working theory could be evolved and accepted . It would lead m e too far fro m our subject to enter i nto the details of these forgotten wrangles and it will su ffice for ou r p resent pu r poses to state that as yet the priest was held to have scarce more than an intercessory power with God . His intercession was f a u m ore e fic cious than that of a layman , but altho gh the rapid development o f sacerd otalism was constantly tendin g h im m w n ot to con fer on aug ented po er , he as yet did pretend

F Marte of himself to grant absolution . athers Morin and n e

mm le asi u s Aste san i S u a a C b Li b Ti t . . . 2 U m n i . a s e s t . V xiii Q . nde le B e r a offi o d a ralis di c e n s u o lai c us absol ve re o r . sto n e . extr de . p q d p test in ce ssi " m x m m n i cati n tate e t hoc n on tantum a pe cc ati s sed etia ab e co u o e . 2 l s S u mma S ve tr i n 71 Con essor 1 1 6 . a s . y . . f ,

T e a n i t 6 C . S . D F . c . . . rident ess xiv .

me t t n t ale P n i t D v i z i n V1 ] Di s i c . ce . . . c . i A ilcue tee Com n . 8 1 8 p . ist . , n . , 3 . 5 ' u m a a n a s on es ar i s 2 Con essi on i s n ecessztas S m Di . av . C s u . . 1 1 , f n , f n 3 , 4 . Tbe Absol uti on For mula of zbe Te mplars. 4 5 have abundantly shown that prior to the thirteenth century the formulas o f absolution were universally deprecatory, or

a at m ost of a transitional ch racter, in which the priest ‘ as speaks in doubtfu l terms to his own powers . To the

Church of the twelfth centu ry, therefore , there was nothing o fle n sive or sho c king in a man clothed with the quasi sacerdotal character of a monk offering the prayer an d granting the condition al absolution which were custo mary “ 1 2 0 abso at the period . It was not until about 4 that the

E o te a bsolvo u lute indicative form , g , was introd ced , giving rise to so m uch objection and animadversion that so me thirty years afterwards Aquinas was required by the Dom in i a n d w can General to write elaborate efence of it , in hich he tells us that the U niversity of Paris had decided that

Even as l ate as the eleventh cent ur y the Corr ector B u reba rdi knows nothing ’ mo a can do to ofi e r a a u as : of ab o u o . Th e s l ti n st th t the priest is pr yer , s ch De u s omni pote ns sit adj utor e t protector tuus e t pra ste t i nd u lge nti am de " e c cati s u raete ri tis raese nt ibus e t utu — Wasserschle be n B ussor d p t is p , p f ris . , n a n e n 66 g , p . 7 .

a a a an o a o mu a a um om a m o In typic l l ter tr siti n l f r l , the priest ss es s ewh t re fi o but a u n ot to . absol vat ab om bu p wer, is c ref l de ne its extent Ipse te ni s pe ccati s e t de i stis pe ccati s qu ae m odo m ihi coram De o con fessus es c u m ista pce niten ti a quam mod o acc e pisti sis absolu tas a De o Patr e e t F il io e t

S i u a o o e t ab om us a s e us e t a me m o a o u t di mi ttat p rit s n t nib s ncti j iser pecc t re , tibi Dominus omnia de licta tua e t pe rducat te Christus ad vi tam ae ternam absolvat a u P u e t a u a archan e l us e t nos i n te s nct s etr s be t s Mich el g , u a um data o o a a e t solve ndi absol uti on e m am u q nt est n bis p test s Iig ndi , d s . " — l a u a Dom o o o u C o . Garofali O r ao M Jo rd an: P e n i ten dj v nte in n str Jes hrist ,

' ti a Ri tuali Codzce me mbr anaeeo x1 n d m ex i nsi n i . Sa i B i bi Canon i cor u m g .

Re t s on on i te Roma 1 1 5 Sal va or i B . 1 g . . , e , 79 , p 5 . It will be seen how closely this compares with the es sential part of the

T emplar absol ution . 2 The formula of absolu tion as set forth in the Regle is M ais cil qui se confessent bien de lor de fau te s e t n e laissent adire n e aconfesser l or failles por o la a ne or ao l a u stise la ma o e t ui o b n h nte de ch r p p r de j de is n , q s nt ie

a o ue i l ont m au fa o a a repent nt des ch ses q ites , cil prennent b ne p rtie n p ardon de nostre chapistre e t as au tres b iens qu i se font en nostre m aison e t a ceaus fais- j e autel pardon come j e pu is de par Dieu e t de par nostre Dam e e t de par monseignor saint Pierre e t m on se ign or saint Pol apostres e t de par ' ' ' o l a ostoille e t ar vos me i sme s ui rn ave s o é l e n stre pere p , de p q d n pooi r ;e t prie ’ a Dieu que il por sa misericorde e t por l amor de la soe doce mere e t por les m e rite s de l ui e t de tou s les sains v os deet pardoner vos fautes ensi com e il " a Ma dal i — Ré le ard ona a la o o a a n e . Art p gl ri se s inte M rie g g , . 5 39 . 6 or m o e m 4 Tbe Absolution F ula f tb Te plars .

b without these words there was no a solution . Various

w u formulas , ho ever, contin ued to be sed and towards the close of the centu ry Duns Scotus argues that while Eg o te absolzzo is well fitted for its purpose , the priest should not be n ff restricted in his form of expressio , which is indi erent so ” 1 long as the purport is conveyed . It was not till 439, at F D U the co uncil of lorence , in the ecree of nion with th e A m ’ rmen ians, that the Church formally adopted this for ula, T 1 1 and the council of rent , in 5 5 , pronounced it to be the sole essential part of the sacrament and that all else is ‘ unnecessary . Evidently the error of the Templars consisted in n ot m m oving with the wo rld , in not adapting the selves properly to the development of the sacramental theory i n the

Church , and in this they were pardonable , seeing that they were ostensibly warriors and not theologians or can on

r l lawyers . F o a ong while , indeed , after the fo undation o f the Order the deli mitation of sacerdotal functions was still 1 1 80 vague and undefi ned . John of Salisbury, who died i n , complains of m onks in general that they sought to obtain a share in the harvest created by the constantly enlarging power of the keys and did not hesitate to hear con fession s “ and exercise a stolen authority to bind and to loose . A s T for the emplars , it was doubtless because their sacerdotal m functions were confined to their own embers , that he find s no fault with them for this , though his indignation is ex

oi n cited by their increasing patronage church livi gs , through which indirectly they furnished sacraments to the “ T m faithful . That the emplar custo of capitular absol u

A u i nat . O u se X . c . 2 . Th . . S. q p X II

b n n t i b Se te t Ed . . 1 0 fol 2 8 a s u er L . . . . . o . S o u J c t s p ( Venet c 47 , 5 ) 3 Ha d i n c l F o . an n . 1 r u Con i . I X U o . C . . . Deer . ni n in l rent 439 ( 4 ce n i t n t D e P e . . Tr . S . . . C . ident ess xiv c 3 5 “ Confes siones e xc i pi u n t e t claves Ecclesiae u su rpan te s au t sub ripi e n tes

P o a rae su mun t e t o e t Dom o rohi be n t e fal ce m mi ttu n t etr lig re p s lvere , , in p , in " — n ol r a t V I m a am are sburi e s . P e . I . S . . m osse lien . J y xxi 6 M ili te s n amque T empli sui [papae]favore e ccle si arum di sposi ti on e m vindi

a o u a e r son atu s e t uo ammo o a u m Ch fid e libus m c nt , cc p nt p q d d s ng ine risti inis " a raesumun t uo um fe t e rofes si o humanam sa u m fun de re — 1 bi d tr re p q r p est ng ine . .

8 Tbe Absoluti on For mula o the Te m lars 4 f p .

‘ society and privileges and d uties of the brethren . I n esti mating the force o f these provisions we must bear in min d

that they were not the work of rude and ignorant kn ights , bu t that all the rules and statutes of the Order required the approval o f the Holy See .

I f further confirmation of all this were needed , i t is to be found i n the gradual change of theory as to the sacramental character of the proceedings in monastic chapters , as the doctrine of the sacrament o f penitence and power of the

. To aesari keys was elaborated the good Cistercian , C u s of

Heisterbach , the monastic chapter covered the whole field of ’ r u m i n ter n u m ex ter n u m the fo as well as . By the time of Aqu i n nas there had arise doubts as to the principle involved , though the fact was still admitted in practice— the chapter was a j udicial m ore than a penitential forum ; it could be held by one who was not a priest , but the absolution m “ granted in it was good in the foru o f penitence . This m T m 1 1 covers co pletely the e plar case , and even in 3 7 , after the destruction o f the Order, it was still quoted as ‘ good cano n law by Ast e san u s but subsequent theologian s had n o d ifficulty in declaring that chapters were wholly u n m A “ sacra ental , and even cited quinas to this effect . I n addition to this I m ay observe that the special question as to the power of the masters an d preceptors of the Military Orders to grant valid absol utio n was debated at least as

. Pe fi afort early as the time o f St Ramon de (c . who

1 ' Quando frater ali qui s a magi st ro vel ejus vi c e mgére n te penitenci am sus c e e ri t n on ossu n t e u m o marschal chu s a u o abs l v p p precept r , vel li s inferi r o e re sine li ce n ti a m agi stri si fu erit tam v i ci n u s u t adiri v al e at de hoc nego cio con

At m a ad m o a o a re ce de re t fratri sul e ndus. i s ue a b si g ster re t l c , q penitenci ene e racta n on ossi t ab li ce bi t re ce tori c u m alii s fratri bus a p , p h eri , p p in c pitu lo ” i ti am re l axare — bi cl m e n te n . 1 . . con r e atis se e di cta . g g p p , c 3 (p 9 D 111 . . . a a He i s e rb D i al . t . . C es r . ist c 49

- u a a u o a u ua o um u a ma u am oe n i te n ti ale Q i in c pit l git r q si f r j dici le gis q p , un cl e etiam n on sacerdotes capitu lum tenent sed absol v e tur a p oena i nj u n cta

n i n ti ali - A i n at u mm a ro a o o o oe te . u . S . Su le m vel debit p pecc t in f r p q pp . Q . x d 2 xv11 . Art . 2 a .

4 ' m d e as bus Li b Ti t . Art 2 Aste sani Su m C i ...... V xl 5 , Q 5 ’ 2 — umma S lvestr i n a s i t n i use T a . c . S u l n Ca e a O . . . . . au l e t p r ct XVI y , g n i a

2 1 . Tbe Absoluti on For mula of tbe Templars . 49 replies to it hesitatingly ; he does not think that a layman can absolve unless he has special delegated powers from the Holy See — and we have seen fro m the Templar formula that the pope was included among those in whose behalf

N o the absolution was given . adverse decision was rendered

a against the practice , for this st te of doubt in the minds of theologians seems to have contin ued until the do w n fall F of the Order, since John of reiburg quotes Ramon without 1 a adducing any lat e r authority or dding any opinion of his own . F rom all this it is fairly deducible that if the Templars had persevered to the last i n thei r original custom o f co n fessing exclusively in the chapter an d receiving abso lution f only from the presiding o ficer, the Church would have had

a m a no re l ground o f co plaint gainst them . They did not m m do this, however, for to their early si ple for s they super added regula r sacrament al c o n fession and absol u tion when At that had grown to be the rule of the Church . first they had no special chaplains of their own in the earliest Rule

m m o m fo r their religious needs of co uni n , asses the dead .

. t o m m etc , are directed be supplied by priests who they ight

a engage for stated periods , and who were p id by whatever m “ m . 1 1 6 oblations or alms ight be given to the In 3 , how

u ossi t absol ve re T m ar o o al ar o e t a o o o n on Q is p e pl i s , H spit i s li s religi s s hab e n te s rze latum sac e rdo te m ? Re s on d e o u u m Ra m I te m p p sec nd y . xviii .

u od e m lar i i C o u o n on ossi n t ab g T p . red q d p solvi a tali bu s pre lati s cu m n on habe an t ordi n e m cle ri cale m nisi habe an t h oc de Speciali privilegio sedis apos " — n S u mma Con essar a toli cae oh F ri bu r e s . m Li b 1 11 i . . . T t . . J g f . xxxiii . Q 47 . John of F reiburg adds that the qu estion had settled itself as to the H ospital ' lers by requiring their priors to b e in priest s o rders H odie au tem expres su m fratr ibus Hos i tali s e rosol mi tani uo ossu n t a u ri oribu s est de p J y q d p s is p ,

u i re sb te ri d e be n t ab o si c ut u a a a u r lati s q p y esse , s lvi reg l res lii s is p ae .

m a b o o of B a P o of Ro h If we y elieve the c nfessi n ertr nd de Villiers , recept r c e

St . Pol a 2 1 1 1 u o as t o a of ab o , M rch 9 , 3 , the q esti n the v lidity the s lu tion a a h ad u to u O gr nted in the ch pters beg n be disc ssed in the rder itself. i e r P r od s des Te m l s 1 2 . Michelet , p , II . 4 ’ 2 r Hard ui n . 11 j i e u l Art . . . 1 1 ca g az iii iv ( . VI . 3 4) pell an i s ac cl e ri ci s ” ob u m ad te rmi nu m a a ummo a o se rvi e n ti bu h v isc c rit tive s s cerd ti s . T e reten

o of om Ru Art . 62 6 o how a ti n this in the c pleted le ( , 4) sh ws the l tter is an an d a u m u a o of a h a ccretion cc l ti n st tu tes . T e i n te rpol ati ons n ot infrequ ently

o fl o a fi u to m c n ict with the rigin l text , rendering it dif c lt deter ine what w as the u a at m of om a o precise s ge the ti e c pil ti n . 0 Tbe Absol uti on For mula o tbe Tem lar 5 f p s .

e A O mne da tu m o ti mum ev r, lexander by the bull p , granted to them the right to receive into the Order clerics and priests, so that they might more conveniently enjoy the l ffi n sacraments and d ivine o ces . It is a convinci g evidence of the quasi sacerdotal character of the Order that the priests thus admitted into it were entitled within it to none of the i mmun ities an d exemptions for which the Church was then so earnestly battling with the secular power . It was i n 1 1 70 that Thomas Becket fell a martyr to the un flinching resolution of Rome to en force its claim o f the exemption o f T all ecclesiastics from secular jurisdiction , yet the emplar priests , by the term s of the bull , were held in strict subjee tion to the laymen who ruled the Order . On admission they were to place on the altar a writing in which they promised i mplicit obedience seque milit atu ros Dom ino d i e bu s vit ae " su m su b obe di e n t ia Magist ri Templi — they could be d is m w issed at pleasu re , and , hat is especially significant , they were not to take any part in the chapters beyond what m ight m be enjoined on the , nor to take any care o f the souls of z T the brethren unless called upon to do so . his subordina

Ut au tem ad ple n i tudi ne m sal uti s e t cu ram an imarum v e straru m nichil vobis d e si t e t ecclesiastica sacramenta e t divina ofli ci a v estro sacro collegio com " At am m ook a to m odiu s e xhibe an tur . the s e ti e he t c re provide that they should n ot be restricted to their ow n chaplains in the emergencies of their a i k at an m om m o o a on w rl e lives , when y ent they ight need the c ns l ti s of t e

i i on De ce rnim u s u auc tori tate a o o i a ut ad ue m cun ue o u m l g . ins per p st l c q q l c vos con ti e ri t ab hon e sti s a u catholi ci s sac e rdotib u s aani te n ti am venire g , tq e p , un cti one s se u alia quael ibe t sacramenta ecclesiastica vobis susci pere li ce at n o

o ad e rce ti on e m s i ri tuali um o o u m o ui i am d ee sse val e a f rte p p p b n r v bis q pp t . In this the word c atholi ci s suggests that the object of the cl au se w as i n fe re n ti all to m a o of k w h o ou t Pa y interdict the inistr ti ns Gree priests , d b less in lestine mo a a a o o were often re ccessible th n C th lic nes .

P o o P u z a m ab E n tw i c kl u n u n d Un ter an des em l r fess r r t , in his d ir le g g g T pe

berr e n or den s a of u . . and as 1 8 u 1 1 6 an d , gives the d te this b ll (pp v 3 3) J ne , 3 ,

a u a 1 1 62 a . 2 60 as Tou . T can a o as p rs , 7 J n ry , his l tter sc rce be c rrect , Alexander at that tim e w as travelling throu gh Italy on his w ay to F rance

affé Re es to . R m F re der a . 0 t w o o of (J , g , p y er ( , I 3 , 54) gives c pies it , o n e u 1 1 2 A a to a a Eu A a S . m an d iss ed in 7 by lex nder the Gr nd M ster des de nd , Ama Tor h o Lu u . 1 1 8 1 to r T e a f the ther by ci s III in nd de oge . l tter o these

aflé a A 2 8 1 1 8 . J d tes pril , 3 9 Se d nec i psi s li ce at de capitulo aut cu ra domus vestraa se tem ere introm it

m a o u i n u n t m Cu am uo u a ma am a tere nisi quantu v bis f erit j c u . r q q e ni r t ntum " — habeant u a um a o fue ri n t u . Bu . O mn e datu m o ti m u m q nt v bis req isiti ll p . m l 1 The Absol uti on For mula of the Te p ars . 5

w as tion was strictly construed and en forced . The priest subj ect to the ju risdiction of the chapter and was punished

like other brethren . H e could even be placed in irons or l h im . in perpetual prison . One single privilege was allowed Am ong the heavier penances was that of being degraded

for a longer or shorter period , usually for a year and a day , during which time the offender was deprived o f intercourse

with his fellows , he ate on the ground , and performed the l vilest services with the slaves , such as eading asses, scul ’ th e o lion s work , etc . , with additi n in certain cases of a 2 weekly scourging in church on Sundays . In such penance ,

for the honor of the cloth , a priestly penitent was spared

labor with the slaves , in lieu of which he was required to “ A recite his psalter. further tribute to his position was that at table he was placed next to the master and that b o th ‘ he and the master had special cups .

The Order being thus provided with priests of its own , when the necessity of sacramental confession and absolution became more strongly u rged by the Church and was pre 1 2 1 6 scribed by the Lateran decree of , the practice of the Templars became complicated with a curious and illogical

admixture of the old system and the new . Th e new was

superadded to the old , without m uch care to reconcile their

incompatibility, and the result , as recorded in the contra d i ct ory prescriptions of the later Rule is not easy to analyze m a and define with accuracy . Probably this y in pa rt be attributed to a deficiency in the n umber of priests admitted

to the Order, together with the minute subdivision of its m em bers scattered among its numerous and widely separated E Th possessions throughout urope and Syria. e proportion

é le u o a R Art . 2 1 . T O w s om m a g , 7 In the e t nic rder there s e li it tion on the

u m to fl a on but ou w p nish ent be in icted by the ch pter clerics , en gh as perm itted mmu — F r atr u to o of a . m Te u ton . I n sti tt 0 destr y the principle cleric l i nity . 4 , P lb e r ach . 8 44 ( , pp 7

Ri li 68— — S a o an d a Art . . on g , 4 73 , 493 , 495 egreg ti n e ting the ground were

u oma a u of mo a a . Se e Sta tu ta O r di n i s Ci ster c e c st ry fe t res n stic pen nce i n s . n Marténe Thesa u r A n eed 1 260 a n . 1 1 86 . 6 . . . ou t , c ( , IV ) G sset , Ae es de la P r ovi n ce eee lesi asti ue de Rei ms — 8 o , II . 345 . R /e Art 2 0 eg , . 7 . I bi d A t 8 . , r . 1 8 . 2 The Absol u ti on For mula o the Tem l 5 f p ars . of p riests among the Templars whose con fessions have m reached us is exceedingly s all . O ut o f sixty members arrested at Beaucaire in 1 307 but one was a p ri e st ;of thirty ' d Alai s 1 1 three imprisoned in the Chateau in J une , 3 0, there l Th was but one priest . e leaders of the Order seem to have desired to limit the number of unproductive mem bers who could neither work nor fight , and possibly there

fl F r was a jealousy of allowing und ue sacerdotal in uence . o a lay member to take holy orders was classed with the gravest offences and was visited with the heaviest punish 2

. m m ment , that o f expulsion When it is re e bered that the holding o f weekly chapters was required in all places where four members could assemble , it is evident that i n m ost of them no priest of their own could be present , an d that con fession and absolution m ust be performed according to the o riginal Rule , unless the temporary services of some h T neig boring chaplain could be secured . his do ubtless explains so me of the apparent discrepancies of the later

and o n e Rule , in fact it is provided for i n article , show ing that the presence of the chaplain was in no sense ” indispensable .

Some con fusion , moreover, has arisen as to the functions of the chaplain in the chapters from the double meaning o f ” the word confession , which signifies either a formal ritual i st i c general confession of a vague and comprehensive character, or a special sacramental con fession of sins actually A committed . fter the int roduction o f priests into the

Order, when they were present in chapters , the services were assimilated to the regular church ritual by the chaplain causing all present to recite after him this general co n fe s r sion , after which he granted them the customa y general absolution - ah absolution which was held by the theo

’ Vai sse tte Hi st ae Lan u edoc . 1 1 . , . g , IV 4 9 T m a had Ri /e Ar t. 0 . T u n ot our of g , 45 h s the e pl rs the res ce the '

o a o o u r to r o . H spit llers , wh se pri rs were req i ed be in p iests rders 3 b A t 2 a le a a 1 e stoi t chascu n l i d . r o , . 54 M is se frere ch pel in n frere d it " a la r u n e a o e t l e a u o Dam un e o dire pres p iere p tre n stre s l t de n stre e f is . Th e prescriptions of the Ru le are well calculated to lead astray any on e w ho does n ot bear in mind the distinction between genera l and au ricular con The Absoluti on For mula of the Te mplars . 53

x logian s to secure pardon for venial and forgotten sins . There was no sacramental con fession to the chaplain in the chap

m a ters , but grad ually the custo of uricular confession to priests virtually supplanted t h e original capitular con fession

a and penance . It is e sy to understand why this change i n m should occur, for not only was it con for ity with the

general tendency of the Chu rch and its prescriptions , but it

was in every way attractive to the sinner. The con fession of derelictions in the chapter was of itself a hu m iliation

hard to endure , and yet harder were the penances provided

fe i n u Ar t 0 a Et a rés la roi e re u u i a m lo T . ss o . h s 5 4 s ys p p de cel i q ter

ch a i st re chascu n o sa o o e t a a a rés p , frere d it dire c nfessi n , li frere ch pel ins , p ' que li frere on t dite lor confession doit faire l asol u ti on au te le come bien li ’ m a Th a a a mb a Ar t 2 e m o . e se ler . . 54 is ven re isle ding ch pl in ddresses the b rethren Biau s se ig'n ors freres dites v os confessions apres m oi e t ' ua u au o lor o o a a o l asol u ti on e t q nt t it r nt dit c nfessi n , li frere ch pel in d it dire assou dre ou l es om mb a ue b n o e t om i l t s freres ensi c e li se ler q o s it , ensi c e est

m ua sachi és ue a a a a ooi r acost ume a nostre aison . Q r q li frere ch pel in gr nt p de par nostre pere li pape de assoudre les freres tou tes fois selon la qu alité e t l a

u a é la au t T has r a a a of a am a o an q ntit de f e . his eve y ppe r nce s cr ent l c nfession d ab o u o a m o w as o m ommo as s l ti n , except th t the cere ny perf r ed in c n in the se mbla e w as au o z a am m g which never th ri ed with the s cr ent , except in extre e u as ba l or k to do so o w as a mo a necessity , s ch tt e shipwrec ; therwise rt l sin A a a o S u mma A n eli ca o ess o C . C n i 1 . o o ( ngeli de l v si g s . v f M re ver, T m a ou o a am a o to ow n had e pl rs c ld c nfess s cr ent lly nly their priests , while they n o a o F a a Dom a an d Ca m to offi ci ate hesit ti n in inviting r ncisc ns , inic ns , r elites

' a - P r ocessus C r i cu s Sch ottmi tller in their ch pters . yp ( , II . What really w as the ceremony in the chapters is clearly described in the

o o of i au Cau an . 1 1 1 1 1 . A fi a a c nfessi n G r d de x , J , 3 fter the n l pr yer of the preceptor all k nelt e t frater presbyter di ce bat eis : Di catis ista verba qua: di n fi r m n i te n ti u o e go cam : Co te o o po De o etc . sie t c nfessio generaliter fit in

a e t o di ce ban t e t faci e ban t di ctam c o n fe ssi on e m tu n ecclesi ; ipsi in secret ,

o o a su a e t a a o o di c tus u u m u dend pect r f ct c nfessi ne presbyter, sec nd q od fit in

Mi se re atu r ve stri e t ab ol a di cebat . s uci on e m e t re mi ecclesi , etc ssi on e m om u m a o u m ve st rorum tribu at o om n i ote n s e t mi se ri cors D u e t ni pecc t r v bis p e s ,

re ce d e ban t P r océs . 0 Se e a o o o s f (Michelet , , I 39 ls the c nfessi n o Raou l Dau i i bi d 8 and Gui . . Gisi ph n ( , pp 39 , I have dwelt on this point because Professor Pru t z h as confo unded this

a o o a am a o o a hi m to a gener l c nfessi n with s cr ent l c nfessi n , le ding st te that the T em plars confessed to the priest in the chapters (E n tw i ckl u ng u n d Un ter an g g , ma k on . . u u a u of etc , pp 47 In his s bseq ent re r s the f c lties the T emplar priests he h as been somewhat misled through lack of familiarity w ith the a r a a o law a r ther int ic te c n n respecting reserved c ses .

1 : Hosti ensi s A u r ea Summer Li b. v. D e F a n et Remi x . . 8 . l 54 The Absol uti on For mula of the Te mp ars .

A in the Rule for offences of every grade . lm ost the least of these was sco urging on the spot , and Raoul Gisi tells us that many brethren concealed their sins rather than submit to the shame of being stripped to the waist and undergoing l the flage llati on . On the other hand , confession to the priest was secret ; by this time the old penitential can ons b were o solete , and the con fessor had arbitrary discretion to impose as little penance as he saw fit . Besides , the penitent had to be consulted about it , fo r the essence of sacramental penance was its volu ntary character, and if he thought that what was suggested to him was too hard to bear, he co uld refuse to accept it he could elect to make good the b deficiency in p u rgatory, and it ecame a commonplace among the doctors that the con fessor should grant absolu t ion if he could ind uce the sinner to say a single Paternoster a e nanc e As by way of p . zeal diminished in the Order an d w b demoralization gre , the ha it o f capitular con fession seems b to have been wellnigh a andoned , and the formula o f absolution by the preceptor was altered to a pardon for the sins which the breth ren concealed through shame or fear o f ” penance . This d eplorable laxity d id n ot suit the older and r more rigid members of the Order. We hear of Gi aud de F 1 00 Villiers, Visitor of rance , about the year 3 , reproving Calmota the priest , Jean de , for the ease with wh ich he an d T b The the other emplar priests a solved its guilty members . privileges of the Order, he said , were such that the pre

‘ P roces . 8 Michelet , , I 39 .

Ra mun di Su mme Lib I II Ti t - o . H stie nsis A u rea S . y . . xxxiv . 4 .

Remi s 8 B ona e n tu S ummce Lib D e P a m. ct . . v rae Con essi on al . v . s g 5 f : — ca I v Parti c S o u N e mause nsi s an n . 1 2 8 B a a 1 0 p. . . iii . yn d s 4 ( rd in . VII . 9 — D e on essi on — Z Caie tani O usc . T a . C e . . e rola P r ax i s Sacr p r ct V. f Q 3 , . i e t P a n t n . c . . . xxv Q 9, a o Su mmer P W m A a . . . i Me br 2 Art lex nder H les , h wever ( Q xv ii . , . argu es against the current theory that the penitent c an elect between accepting a ua a an d ak a u a o deq te pen nce t ing his ch nces in p rg t ry . 3 Attame n de omnibu s illis que obmi tte re tis nobis dicere ob verecundiam car ob m um u i o n os faci mus o u am uam nis vel et j st cie rdinis , v bis ind lgenci q i us e be mu — o o f a au P r o s oss m e t d s. C o u C d p nfessi n Gir d de x (Michelet , , I . b f R au T m Se e a o o of Raou i i d . . o a e ls th se l Gisi ( , p en d de re bl y m Masa a of P e de B o . and of u s I L (p . ierr l is (p G ille de y ( ,

6 The Absol uti on For mula o the Tem la 5 f p rs . same monastery this had been found to lead to m uch u n profitable wandering to Rome of those who should be strictly confi ned to their religious duties , and an exception had been made by which abbots were empo w ered to absolve m n T for such cases occu rring between their o ks . The em plars asked to have this privilege extended to them , and H onorius granted that the chaplain of the principal house in each province should have this power— a faculty which in 1 2 65 was extended for ten years by Clement I V . to all the chap ’ m lains o f the Order . In this li ited sense the chaplains had greater power than bishops or archbishops , but even this is contradicted by a subsequent article of the Rule which as serts that a chaplain cannot absolve a brother for the h om i n cide of a Christian , for striking a brother and drawi g blood , for violence to an ecclesiastic , and for entering the Order by simony or by d eny ing the possession o f holy orders— for all m these the culprit ust go for absolution to the bishop , arch “ r A bishop o patriarch of the country . pparently the t e m po r

m . ary privilege granted by Cle ent IV was not renewed , and m m F b this is confir ed by the state ent of J ohn of rei urg , that m T i f a Te plar o f one diocese strikes a emplar of another, the two bishops m ust meet together to absolve him , or on e ’ m ust delegate his power to the o ther. In practice it would m see , however, that the chaplain had no hesitation in exert t h e ing powers granted by the bull of Honorius I I I . , for the Rule recites a precedent in point which likewise shows that the distinction between the for u m pce n i tentie and the f or u m ud i ci ale j had become fully recognized . When the con ven t at f was J a fa , two o f the brethren quarrelled and one th rew

m . The Mo n llo the other fro his horse Marshal , H ugo de , m asse bled a chapter ; the culprit begged for pardon , an d was sent o ut o f the chapter with the chaplain who absolved him r T quar il av o it bien le pooi . hen they returned to the h chapter where the chaplain reported the absolution . T e m pen itent was ade to beg for pardon again , and was sent o ut

P u z E n tw ck u 8 i l n . 282 2 . r t , g , etc . , pp , 9 9 Ré le Art 2 2 — g , . 7 3 .

oh . Frib r mer on essar am Lib 1 11 Ti t u e n . m . . s S u C . J g f xxxiii . Q . 47 . m The Absol ut i on For mula of the Te plars . 5 7

hi m again , and finally the sentence was to deprive of the vest hi m ments of the Order and imprison in chains , and he was ’ - A d uly sent to Chateau Pelerin . nother case would seem to sho w that the chaplains even presu med to absolve for

t he violence to clerics in general , in spite of Lateran “ He rman t c oman d ou r canon . When brother was de la " A - boverie at cre , two clerics robbed the dove cote ; he m warned the to desist , but they persisted ; he set a m m a watch , caught the in the act , and had the be ten

F o r o soundly, one being wounded in the head . this vi la tion of clerical i mm unity they appealed to the papal

m t o t he . legate , and legate co plained the Master He at o nce h ad the assail ants absolved and then m ade them beg

m m o pardon in the chapter, which conde ned the to l se the vestments and be sent in irons to Cyprus por ce que la “ ba e u r e i t e st o t trop laide .

F ro m all this it would appear that the accusati o n in the bull Faci ens miser i cor dia m was true of the Temple during the first century of its existence , and that , relying upon its

a a a m a privileges and the p p l f vor, it was less pro pt th n other mon astic bodies in modifying its pri mitive customs to suit the progressive chan ges in the doctrine and practice of the w Church . To ards the close of its career, with increasing

am corruption , the laxity of the sacr ental confessional was found greatly more attractive than the rigo r of the Rule as

a an d en forced in the ch pters , peccant brethren no longer con fessed their sins to their associates , but discharged their consciences in the three a uricular co nfessions yea rly which m had become a m at ter of prescription . Co plaints and ac c u sat i on s t m a t were s ill ade in the ch pters , and when , hey a n R could be proved they were punished ccordi g to the ule , but this was t h e for um ex te r n u m an d not as o f old t h e for u m i n ter n u m m a a n a . Then the for ul of bsolutio gr nted by the Master underwent a fundamental alteration : in place o f be m ing an absolution for sins confessed , it beca e a pardon for

A rt . 593 .

Ri /e Art 1 g , . 59 . The Absol uti on For mula o the 58 f Templars .

sins not con fessed . Such a pardon could be in n o sense sacramental ; it only affected the relation s between the him culprit and the Order , and not between an d God . What may have been the admissions which Clement V . states that de Molay made prio r to his arrest we have n o means of knowing, but we may conjectu re that he asserted the origi n al power of absolution as expressed in the Rule, and that m it might be e ployed , at least in preceptories where there m were no chaplains . It is i possible that the curia could be ignorant of the practice of the Templars and of the Teuton ic " nights , which we have seen was the subj ect of discussion among canonists , and the embodiment of the charge as we

' see it i n the bull Faci e ns mi ser i cor d zam betrays a conscious ness o f the fli msi n e ss of the graver accusations in the eager ness with which one was bro ught forward based upon theo logical subtilties that at the time were still und er debate by the schoolmen .