Witchcraft-and-the-Gay-Counterculture-1

As Christian intellectuals became more convinced that thesepractices were led by demons, they became less inclined to laughthem off as they had earlier. In 1370, the Inquisition at Milan indicteda woman for being a member of the “society of Diana” (Russell,210). In 1384, an Italian peasant named Sibillia was brought totrial before a secular court (and later before the Inquisition at Milan).She freely admitted that she belonged to a society that went out everyThursday night with “Signora Oriente” and that they “paid homageto her” (Russell, 211). Sibillia said she never confessed these thingsbecause it never occurred to her that they were sinful (Kieckhefer,22). She was reprimanded and sentenced to wear two red crosses aspenance. Six years later in 1390, Sibillia was again before the Inquisition.She admitted to the same practices, saying they went back toher childhood and again insisted they were no sin. Now, however,she admitted that the name of God was not used at the celebrationsfor fear of offending Oriente (Russell, 212). In the same year of1390, Pierina de Bugatis was tried for similar charges before both asecular court and the Inquisition at Milan. At their celebrations, shesaid, people weren’t the only ones who appeared, but also animalsand the souls of the dead. She claimed that she traveled with a groupof women who robbed the houses of the rich, while bypassing thoseof the poor. She also claimed that Signora Oriente ruled their societyas Christ ruled the world (Russell, 213).The manner in which professional historians have reacted tothe trials of Sibillia and Pierina is a good indication of how historyhas been ignored, suppressed, and distorted by straight white maleswith Christian values. As Norman Cohn sees the trials, “somethingthat hitherto has happened only in the minds of silly old women hastaken on an objective material existence” (Cohn, Demons, 217). Asusual, Cohn resorts to sexist and ageist stereotyping, and just ignoresthe evidence. He even rejects other historians on the same grounds.For example, among the many reasons he can’t stand Margaret Murray’sapproach to witchcraft, is that “by the time she turned her attentionto these matters she was nearly sixty” (Cohn, Demons, 109).We find a different kind of prejudice in the historian JeffreyRussell. He admits that the experiences of Sibillia and Pierina were insome sense real, but he can’t bring himself to admit that they were anexample of anything religious. He says what we are dealing with hereand in similar cases is merely “old folk tradition” or at best “strangefertility rites” (Russell, 212-213).To historian Richard Kieckhefer, the practices of Sibilliaand Pierina may be religious, but they could never be consideredpagan. “It would be misleading to speak of them as conscious ordeliberate pagan survivals, since the participants seem to have viewedthemselves as Christians, despite the reservations that churchmenevidently held” (Kieckhefer, 22). Here we have not only a misinterpretationof the evidence, but a complete falsification of it. Where74On April 12, 1229, the Albigensians surrendered, except for a smallgroup holding the fortress of Montsegur. They surrendered in 1243only to be burned en masse. An incident reported by the Catholicwriter Caesarius is indicative of the violence of the invading troops:From the confessions of some of these people, they [the troops]were aware that Catholics were intermingled with the heretics,so they asked the Abbot: ‘Lord, what shall we do? We cannotdistinguish the good from the wicked’. The abbot, as well as others,was afraid that the heretics would pretend to be Catholicsonly in fear of death and after the Christians’ departure wouldreturn to their perfidy. He is reported to have cried: ‘Kill them!The Lord knows those who are his own’. (Wakefield, 197).At the crusade’s end, both sides signed an agreement. Forfeitingone third of his land, the Count of Toulouse swore allegianceto the church and the King of France. In addition, he promised tohunt down any remaining heretics, dismiss all Jews from their jobs,and tear down the fortifications of thirty castles. He also agreed to leta university be built – the University of Toulouse – for the purposeof fighting heresy and propagating Christian values (Wakefield, 127-130). Ironically, Augustus Caesar, twelve hundred years before, hadestablished a university in the same town for combating the teachingsof the Druids (Chadwick, The Druids, 78).Despite the crusade, Catharism and other heresies spread.Between 1227-1235, Pope Gregory IX created a permanent heresyhuntingmachine, the Office of the Holy Inquisition. First created bythe Catholic Church, the Inquisition was later copied by courts inProtestant countries as well. Before the Inquisition was set up, hereticswere tried before secular or bishops’ courts acting independentof one another without any central direction. They rarely went lookingfor heretics, dealing only with cases that were brought to theirattention. With the creation of the Inquisition, all this changed.The Inquisition declared that heresy was a crimen excepta(“an exceptional crime”), which meant that prosecutions were exemptfrom the usual due process of law. According to the rules establishedby the Inquisition, a person was assumed guilty until proveninnocent (see entry under “Inquisition” in Robbins, p. 266). Meresuspicion or common gossip were sufficient to bring a person beforethe Inquisition on such a charge. Witnesses who incriminated theaccused were not publicly identified, and the accused was not giventhe right to cross-examine their testimony. In most cases, the accusedwas denied the right to counsel. In cases where counsel was allowed,a too vigorous defense of the accused could result in the counsel’sbeing indicted for heresy.After 1256, persons accused of heresy were almost alwaystortured until they “confessed.” The torture was severe and could resultin death. Those who did confess were generally tortured furtheruntil they named accomplices. After this, the accused was made to99