Confession of Baruch, once a Jew, then baptized and now returned
The year of our Lord 1320, the 13th day of the month of July. Since it
has come to the attention of the Reverend Father in Christ, Monsignor Jacques,
bishop of Pamiers by the grace of God, that Baruch of Germany, who was once
a Jew, but abandoned the blindness and perfidy of Judaism and was converted
to the faith of Christ, (receiving the sacrament of baptism in the city
of Toulouse during the persecution of the Shepherds) and that later "like
a dog returning to his vomit" (II Pet. 2,22) he took the opportunity,
while living with the Jews of the city of Pamiers in the Jewish manner,
to return to the sect and rite of the Jews; the aforesaid lord bishop had
him arrested and detained in his prisons.
He caused him to appear in his presence in the Bishop's Chamber of Pamiers,
with the assistance of Brother Gaillard de Pomiès, substitute for
monsignor the inquisitor of Carcassonne, and in the presence of my lord
master Bernard Faissier, magistrate's officer of Pamiers, and of master
David of Troyes, a Jew called to translate Hebrew to Monsignor the bishop,
if there were need. He interrogated him then concerning what had gone before,
after having received from him the vow, taken physically on the law of Moses,
to tell the truth as much concerning himself as charged as concerning others
as witnesses. This done, he told and avowed the following:
This year, one month ago last Thursday (the 10th of June), the "Shepherds"
arrived, with banners flying, coming from Bergerac to Grenada, all the while
threatening to exterminate the Jews. Solomon of Ondes, a Jew, came at that
time to find the bailiff of Grenada, in the company of the Jew Eliazer,
his scribe and asked him, as he recounted it to me later, if he would protect
him from the "Shepherds". The bailiff agreed to do this.
But when there later arrived a whole multitude, he said to Solomon that
he could no longer protect him, but that he should take a boat on the Garonne
and go to Verdun, where was located a much larger fortress of my lord the
king. Solomon then took a boat and prepared to travel down the river to
Verdun. Seeing this and learning of it, the Shepherds arrived with a small
boat and, taking him from the river, they took him to Grenada and said that
he had better be baptized or they would kill him. The bailiff, who was present,
said that if they killed the aforementioned Solomon, they would have to
kill him also. Hearing this, the Jew said that he did not wish that the
bailiff should suffer this for his sake and asked of the Shepherds what
they wished of him. They said to him that it was necessary to be baptized
or to be killed. The said Jew then said that he preferred to be baptized
than to be killed and they baptized him there along with his scribe Eliazer.
The next day the aforesaid Solomon and Eliazer came and found me in Toulouse,
and recounted to me what had happened to them, saying that they had been
baptized, but nevertheless not sincerely, and that, if they could do it,
they would return willingly to Judaism. I told them that I knew Jewish law
very well, but not Christian, and I knew not how best to counsel them, unsure
if they could return to Judaism with impunity, but that I would ask Brother
Raimond of Jumac, assistant to monsignor the inquisitor of Toulouse, in
order to know if this could be done.
I met then with Bonnet, a Jew from Agen, and Brother Raimond and master
Jacques, notary of my lord the inquisitor of Toulouse, and told them the
story of Solomon, asking them if a baptism received, not with desire and
the will to receive it, but only with terror, was valid. Brother Raimond
replied that such a baptism was not valid, and I understood his reply in
this sense. I returned at once to Solomon and Eliazer and told them that
the said Brother Raimond and master Jacques had told me that such a baptism
was not a baptism and that they could confidently return to Judaism.
Later, I heard that Solomon had relinquished his person to the hand of my
lord the Senechal of Toulouse, until he could determine from the Roman Curia
if such a baptism was a baptism.
The baptized Jews who returned to Judaism did so in the following manner,
according to the teaching of the Talmud. They cut the nails of their hands
and feet, shave their hair and wash their entire body in running water,
just as, according to the Law, one purifies a foreign woman when she is
to be married to a Jew. We believe that baptism renders impure those who
The following Sunday, the sub-deputy (subvicarius) of Toulouse, Alodet,
brought to Toulouse 24 wagons full of Shepherds, whom he had arrested for
the massacre of 152 Jews, commited at Castelsarrasin and vicinity. And when
the Shepherds arrived at Chateau-Narbonnais, and 20 wagons had already been
brought into the chateau, the people of Toulouse gathered in a great crowd
nearby. The Shepherds who were in the last wagons gazed at this crowd and
began to call for help against those who were taking them prisoner, saying
they wished to avenge the death of Christ, but instead they were going to
prison. Certain members of the Toulousian mob then broke the ropes which
tied them in the wagons. Thus freed, they jumped from their wagons and began
to cry with the crowd. "To death, to death, let us kill all the Jews!"
I heard this recounted throughout Toulouse, but I was not witness to it
The Shepherds and the crowd then swept through the quarter of the Jews.
I was in my study, when a large number of these people arrived at my house,
shouting "To death, to death, be baptized or we will kill you immediately!"
Seeing the furor of these people, and that they were killing before my eyes
other Jews who refused to be baptized, I replied that I would prefer to
be baptized than to be killed. They grabbed hold of me and brought me immediately
out of the house, without letting me take other clothes or anything that
was there and took me just as I was to the church of St. Stephen. When I
arrived two clerics showed me several corpses of Jews before the church,
saying to me, "If you will not be baptized, you must die, as those
whom you see." I was then struck lightly by several of those helping
and I replied that I would gladly be baptized but that I had a friend, a
Preaching friar, named Brother John of Germany and that I wished him to
be my godfather. I said this, hoping to myself that if I could be turned
over to this Friar, who was a good friend, that I could avoid death without
Then the two clerics brought me out of the church and tried to take me to
the house of the Friars. But when we came out of the church, the mob killed
before my eyes the Jew Asser, from Tarascon in Provence as well as one other
and the people of the crowd of Toulouse asked these clerics if I was baptized;
they said no. I had asked them to say that I was, but they refused. I was
again struck on the head, not to the point of bleeding, but there was a
lump, which healed by itself, without recourse to a doctor, bandage or remedy.
I thought that this blow would knock the eyes out of my head. And seeing
that they were killing the other Jews who did not wish to be baptized, and
since the two clerics said that they could no longer defend me, nor take
me to the house of the Friars, because I would be killed before reaching
the middle of the road, I asked them what I should do in order not to be
killed. They said to me "You can see well enough what is required,
either be baptized or die!" I replied, "Let us go back to the
church. I would rather be baptized than let myself be killed."
We returned at once to the church and when we were there I said to the clerics
to wait a little while to see if my sons would arrive. They waited a little
while and since my sons did not come, they said to me that they could wait
no longer, but that I must be baptized at once or depart from the church
to where they were killing the others.
I said then that I wished to have as godparent the sub-deputy of Toulouse,
because, since he had in his retinue a sergeant by the name of Pierre of
Saverdun, a friend of mine, and I hoped that this Pierre could save me from
death, if he came with the deputy, and prevent my being baptized. But they
said that the deputy could not come, because that day he had brought the
Shepherds from Castelsarrasin and was resting from weariness.
A moment later, the clerics told me once again to come to the stone where
the baptismal fonts were placed. I accepted and pronounced the word "sous-viguier",
meaning by that that the viguier would be my godparent, but also (hoping?)
that if, after the baptism, the viguier would say that a baptism received
under fear of death was not valid, my baptism would not be valid. If, on
the contrary, he said that such a baptism was valid, mine would be.
I willingly approached the stone on which others were baptized, I placed
myself before the curé and he did to me everything that is customarily
done when one is baptized, or so I believe. Nevertheless, before the curé
began to read and perform the baptism, the clerics told me to say to the
curé that it was in good faith that I came to baptism and did what
I did, because if I did not say this, I would be killed. This then is what
I did, although I thought just the opposite.
I was placed in the font where there was water and I was baptized and everything
was performed as is the custom in such cases. They gave me the name of John.
This done, I asked those clerics to accompany me home to see if anything
remained of my belongings. They told me that they would not go there because
they were tired and sweaty; instead, they took me home with them, and I
drank wine with them. Later they accompanied me home to see if anything
remained and we found all my books torn to bits, my money stolen and only
seven pieces of fabric, of which some were pawned and the others mine, among
which there was a silk coverlet. The cleric who had become my godfather
and I put these articles in a sack and carried them away. As we were just
ready to leave we met someone from the Capitole (municipal assembly) of
Toulouse or his retinue whom my said godfather knew, and who was armed for
the protection of the Jews. My "godfather" said to this capitoul
(man from the municipal assembly or its militia) or this man, "This
one here is baptized and a good Christian." This man glanced at me;
I came to him and he said to me on the side "Do you wish to be a good
Jew?" I said yes. He then said to me "Do you have any money?"
"No, but take this" I said and gave him the sack into which we
had put what I just mentioned. He took it away freely, saying to me "Fear
not, say that you are a Christian and comport yourself like you are."
When we left the house, we met again, my godfather and I, ten capitouls
accompanied by many armed sergeants. One of these capitouls called me to
him and said to me in a low voice, "Are you a Jew?" and I said
yes, in a low voice, so that the cleric could not hear me. The capitoul
told him to go and leave me there, and he returned me to the sergeant, ordering
him to guard me with his life as he guarded his very self, and to do this
on part of the Capitole, the sub-deputy, and the senechal. The sergeant
took me by the hand. When we were close to the municipal building (or Capitole)
I said that I was a Jew, but when we were in other streets and someone asked
the sergeant if I was a Jew, he replied that I was baptized and a Christian,
as I had asked him to do.
And the murder and pillage of the Jews lasted until the evening of that
night. In the evening, I said to the sergeant to go to the sub-deputy of
Toulouse, in order to ask him if a baptism received under fear of death
was valid or not. When we arrived at his house, he was dining and the sergeant
said for me, "Here is a Jew who wishes to be baptized by you, my lord
sub-deputy". He replied "We are dining, come to the table."
Since I did not wish to eat, I looked around me and I saw Pierre of Saverdun.
I took him aside and told him that I did not wish to be baptized, and to
tell the sub-deputy not to force me to receive baptism, because, as I said
to him, such a baptism was not valid.
Pierre then told the sergeant to leave and said he would guard me and he
gave me another sergeant with whom I went to walk in the Chateau Narbonnais.
When the sub-deputy was finished dining, we returned to his house. He said
to me then "Do you wish to be baptized now, or wait until tomorrow?"
But Pierre of Saverdun took him aside and spoke to him. I do not know what
he said, but the sub-deputy said "Indeed, I will not baptize this Jew
by force, nor anyone else!" I deduced from this that the baptism I
had received was nonexistent, because when I was being baptized I had thought
to myself that if the sub-deputy thought this was a valid baptism, I would
believe myself baptized and if not, then not.
This done, I took counsel with Pierre of Saverdun to see if I should stay
at Chateau Narbonnais or to go elsewhere. Since the said Pierre told me
that the Jews who remained in Chateau Nabonnais were either baptized or
killed we decided that I would leave Toulouse. The foresaid Pierre gave
me three esterlins and came with me to the juncture of the road that goes
right to Montgiscard, telling me to go quickly and to speak German while
I hastened to Montgiscard. When I arrived there, as I passed by the square,
an armed crowd fell on me demanding to know if I were Jew or Christian.
I demanded of them who they were. They replied "Shepherds! If you are
a Jew we will kill you, if you will not be baptized.!" I replied that
I was not a Jew and they told me then that they were going to put me in
prison. I said "Do you have the power to throw people into prison?"
They said yes, because they had there the bailiff of the region and his
men. Thinking then that I would suffer no ill-consequences, I told them
that I was a Jew and they took me to a house where there were master Bendit
Loup and Bonne, his daughter and many other Jews with whom I passed that
night and the following day. The following night, we went with the men of
the bailiff to Mazères and from Mazères to Pamiers.
-----Were you made a Jew again, in Pamiers or elsewhere according to the
aforementioned mode of rejudaising?
No. When someone is perfectly and voluntarily baptized and wishes to return
to Judaism, one performs the above-mentioned rite of purification, according
to the teaching of the Talmud, because he is considered to be soiled. But
when he was not perfectly baptized or he was forced to receive baptism,
he is not made a Jew again in the aforementioned manner, because we think
that such a baptism is nonexistent.
-----Have you said to other persons baptized by the fear of death that they
were not baptized and they they could return to Judaism with impunity and
No, except for that which I have already mentioned concerning Solomon and
-----Have you told one or any Jews to receive baptism solely to escape death
and return to Judaism?
----- Have you ever assisted at the rejudaising of a baptized Jew?
-----Do you know any baptized Jew who was returned to Judaism?
This deposition was made the year and day above, in the presence of the
foresaid and myself Guillaume Peyre-Barthe, notary of my said bishop, who
wrote and received this.
After this, in the same year as above the 14th of the same moth (July 14,
1320), the said Baruch appeared for questioning in the episcopal Chamber
before my said lord bishop and the deposition which he had made the preceding
day was read to him in the vulgar tongue. He was asked by my lord the bishop
if he wished to persist and if he wished to add, correct or change anything.
He replied that he persisted in it and wished to persist in it, except he
added that when Solomon and Eliazer, the baptized Jews, came from Grenada
to Toulouse to see him, as he has said in his deposition, they found along
with him Salvat, a Jew from Tarascon in Provence. He added also that when
he said to Solomon and Eliazer that the baptism received by them was not
a baptism, and that they could return to Judaism, he also said the following
to them - since such a baptism was not a baptism, they could return to Judaism.
He added that the massacre of Jews which took place that day in Toulouse,
as he had testified, was of about 115 persons.
-----When you put yourself before this cure and he proceeded with the ceremony
of baptism, or when you were placed in the baptismal fonts, and during the
act itself of baptism, did you protest in word or in deed or show a contrary
will to being baptized, by resisting in any way?
No. I feared that I would be assasinated if I did or said anything, and
my godfathers told me to say before the curé that it was in good
faith that I came to baptism, and that in not doing so, I would be killed.
I believe that the curé understood this, and concerning this I rely
on his testimony and ask you to interrogate him, if he believes that I would
have been assassinated if I had protested or resisted, in word or in deed.
-----According to your Law, or the Talmud, or according to your own opinion,
do you think that a Jew, who believes that one can only be saved in observing
the Jewish Law, and not the sect of the Christians or pagans, should let
himself be killed rather than convert to these sects in which he believes
it is not possible to be saved?
If, without the command of a prince, someone wished to kill me or another
Jew unless we converted to Christianity or paganism and we were persuaded
that one can only be saved in Judaism, it would be better to convert to
these than to let oneself be killed. In effect, this concerns a fleeting
and transitory situation and one can eventually repent and return to Judaism.
But if the situation comes by the order of the prince, that the Jews must
be killed or baptised (or converted to paganism) then the Jew should rather
let himself be killed than convert to Christianity or paganism, because
the order of a prince lasts a long time.
-----Is it a greater sin for a Jew who believes that he can only be saved
in Judaism to let himself be baptized in order not to be killed, than to
let himself be killed to avoid baptism?
It is a greater sin to let himself be baptized, for such a Jew, than to
let himself be killed.
-----Does a Jew, believing salvation is only possible in Judaism, who lets
himself be killed rather than convert to paganism, sin in any manner?
No, on the contrary, he does well.
-----If you believe that a Jew who lets himself be killed because he does
not wish to convert to Christianity or paganism does not sin, but on the
contrary does well, why did you prefer to be baptized than killed?
I do not believe that my baptism was a perfect baptism, because it was unexpected
and also because in my heart I thought that if the sub-deputy of Toulouse
ratified it, it would be a baptism, if no, no. Also because I thought that
I could repent of having received it, and it was for this that I preferred
baptism to death.
-----Do you wish to live in the future as a Jew or as a Christian?
I wish to live as a Jew and not as a Christian, because it does not seem
to me that I am a Christian.
-----When you were baptized, did you consider this baptism valid, or did
you wish that it were?
I never believed that it was valid; I only received it in hopes that the
time and day would soon pass.
Witnesses my lord Pierre du Verdier, archdeacon of Majorca, master David,
Jew, and myself Guillaume Peyre-Barthe, aforementioned notary, who has received
and written that which precedes.
And thereafter the said lord bishop exhorted the said master Baruch and
asked him -- granted that the baptism, which, according to his account,
was not received by force nor under an absolute constraint, obliged him
according to law and reason to observe and believe the Christian faith,
and that the necessity which had pushed him towards the faith had led him
not toward the worse, but toward the better, to believe and observe in the
future the Christian faith, -- granting this, he can rest assured that if
he obstinately persists in his Judaism, he will be tried according to the
law as if he were an impenitent heretic.
Then the said master Baruch replied:
Since I am ignorant of what the Christians believe and why they believe
it, and since on the contrary I know my Law, and why the Jews believe what
they believe, and since our faith is established by the Law and the Prophets,
which I have studied as a doctor for 25 years, if no one can demonstrate
to me by my Law and the Prophets that the faith of the Christians is in
agreement with them, then I do not wish to believe or observe Christianity,
and I prefer to die than to leave Judaism, the more so since I am no small
authority for the Jews of these regions. But if my lord the bishop or some
else proves to me and shows according to the Law and the Prophets that that
which the Christian believe and observe is in concord with the Law and the
Prophets, and that the sect and the rite of the Jews, in our epoch, are
no longer salutary I am ready to leave the sect and the rite of the Jews
and to pass to the faith and belief of the Christians.
The lord bishop promised to do this, he said, with the help of God. Then,
in the presence of the aforesaid master David the Jew, and several Jews
newly baptized, in this case attempting to translate to my lord the bishop
the word of Baruch and of the Law and also what my lord said to master Baruch,
who did not understand fully the vulgar tongue of this country, began the
discussion of the articles of the Christian faith against the Jew Baruch,
who resisted all that my lord bishop said to him in favor of Christianity
with all his might, citing the Old Testament.
And in the first case the dispute concerned the trinity of persons, the
unity of the divine essence, and the proper names of the persons and their
procession; this dispute lasted nearly two weeks and in this dispute Baruch
was entirely defeated. Having nothing more to say, he confessed that there
is a trinity in the divine persons and a unity in the essence or nature
divine. And, he said, he believed it because he was vanquished by the authority
of the holy Scripture of the Law and the Prophets. He confessed also that
Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the proper names of the divine persons according
to the Scriptures and he confessed the processions of persons.
Then the dispute passed to the demonstration of the fact that the messiah
or Christ promised in the Law and the Prophets should be God and man, seeing
that one unique person should be composed of divinity and of true humanity
and should be truly God and man. This dispute last close to 8 days. Having
nothing further to say against this according to the Scriptures, this Jew,
astonished never to have found this before in the Scriptures (because they
say that their Messiah must come as a man pure and simple, like other men),
confessed to believe this article according to the divine Scriptures.
Then the dispute passed to the demonstration of the fact that the Messiah
promised in the Law had already come, which was the most difficult, and
this dispute lasted three weeks and more, but the Jew, beaten, finished
by consenting to this. After this it was very easy to show him by the Law
and the Prophets that Christ was conceived and born of the Virgin, that
he had suffered death for us and our salvation, that he descended to hell
and awoke the third day, was ascended to heaven and will come again to judge
the living and the dead and to reveal to him the sacraments of the Church
and their power to remit sins and confer grace, and although he resisted
a bit on the sacrament of the Mass, he ended by consenting to it. But it
was difficult to demonstrate to him the immortality of the human body after
the Resurrection and the fact that these bodies will have no further need
of nourishment or other necessities of this life, in which generation and
corruption will cease, and that the bodies of the damned can remain in the
eternal fire and not be consumed, although they can endure an intolerable
suffering. To all this he finished by consenting.
He demanded lastly why the legal obligations of the Old Testament were not
observed by Christians, since they hold to all the rest of the faith and
belief of the Prophets and it was shown to him by the Law and the Prophets
that at the coming of Christ they were obliged to cease.
He remained in this belief for about 15 days, saying that in the future
he would no longer be called Baruch, but John, not a Jew, but a Christian,
but that he wished to instruct himself more by reading alone the books of
the Law and the Prophets. Then it came to the attention of my said lord
bishop that he had begun to falter in the Christian faith and that he said
to certain persons that he did not believe what the Christian faith said,
for which reason he was interrogated again by the bishop. After this last
interrogation, my said lord bishop gave him again further lessons, giving
him the solution to those points that gave him doubt, which he said he found
in reading by himself in the books of the Law and the Prophets. And he said
that he wished absolutely to be Christian and to abjure Judaism.
After this, the same year, the 16th of August, the said Baruch was brought
into the presence of my lord bishop in the episcopal Chamber of Pamiers
and appeared for questioning, with Brother Gaillard assisting my lord the
-----According to your deposition, have I instructed you and have I proven
to you by the Old Testament that contained within the divine being there
is a Trinity of persons, towit the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,
and a unity of divinity and that these qualities are compatible?
Yes, but I seem to have found some contrary arguments in the Old Testament.
-----Since I instructed you and demonstrated to you the Trinity of divine
persons and the unity of their essence, have you said to one or any persons
that it seems to you true, according to the scriptures of the Old Testament,
that there is a Trinity of persons and unity of essence, and when you said
this, did you believe it in your heart?
Yes, at that moment, but later I read and studied in the Old Testament and
I found several contradictions, which now give me doubt.
---- How long have you remained in the belief of the Trinity of persons
and unity of the essence of the divine beings?
For eight days, I have read and studied the scriptures of the Old Testament,
without finding the contrary. This is why I believed it during that time,
but later, I found a contradiction in the scriptures and I doubted and I
doubt even now.
-----What are the scriptures of the Old Testament which caused you to doubt
that there is a Trinity in the divine persons?
I. The authority which is found in the fifth book of the Law "Hear
O Israel, the Lord your God is one" (Deut. 6,4). "Audi Israel,
dominus Deus tuus Deus unus est." I deduced from this authority that
it in fact denies the Trinity of persons. By the fact that it says "the
Lord God", the unity of essence or nature is established, and by the
fact that it says "is one", is established the singularity or
unity of person.
II. And another passage of the same book (Deut. 32,39), "Ru atha qui
havi hahavi hu veu Helohim ymmazi havi hamitz vehayie" a citation of
which is translated "Veiatz ara que yeu yeu so, e no y a Dieu ammy,
i ye aucire e ye vuire fare." "See now that I, even I am he and
there is no god beside me!" I deduce from this passage, where it says
"Ego, ego sum", that it excludes the plurality of persons, by
repeating two times the pronoun Ego, which is made explicit furthermore
in the following proposition, "Non est Deus mecum." "There
is no god beside Me."
III. The passage at the beginning of the same Book (Deut. 4.35), "Atha
horessa lazahat qui Adonay hu Habeloim veu hotz milnedo", which I translate
"Tu garda per saber que Adonay es Habelhoum, mes plus ses lu ses lu."
"Ut scires quoniam Dominus ipse est Deus, et non est preter Deum."
Unto thee it was showed, that thou mightest know that the Lord he is God;
there is none else beside him." I deduce from this that since the Christians
say that within the divine being there is a Father and Son, two distinct
persons, they said that by the word Adonay one understands the Father, but
by the word Eloim one understands the Son, and because in the divine scriptures
one often meets these two words separately and sometimes one next to the
other, that therefore they say that God the Father is distinct as a person
from the Son. But their opinion is disproved by this text, since here is
said "Adonay ehu Heloim" and that "hu" means the same
thing as "himself." Therefore the Father is entirely the same
thing as the Son, and I have thus concluded that the Father is not distinct
from the Son according to person.
IV. -- There occurs often in the books of Moses "Ego sum Adonay"
when they talk of God and not "Ego sum Adonay Heloim", that which
would be the case if the Father and the Son were one God, it seems.
V. -- Isaiah says (Is. 44,6) "Tho amar Adonay mehelet vogoalo Adonay
Sabaoth anu risson vahami Haharon humibalazai heu Heloim" which translates
"Hec dicit Dominus Rex Israel et redemptor eiuis, Dominus ego primus
et ego novissimus, et absque me non est Deus.""Behold what the
Lord King of Israel, its redeemer, the Lord, says - I am the first and I
am the last, and beyond me there is no God." This caused me to deny
that the Son was distinct from the Father and to think that he is the same
person as the Father, because in Hebrew there is in the first proposition
"Adonay Sabaoth", by which one understands the Father and then
in the second he says "I am the first and I am the last " and
adds "beyond me there is no God", as if he were saying that what
one designated by "Eloim" is none other than "Adonay Sabaoth",
and that therefore the Son is the same thing as the Father.
VI. -- In the third book of Kings (III (I) Kings 18, 39) after the sacrifice
of Elijah, the people say "Adonay hu Ayheloim, Adonay hu Habeloim."
"Dominus ipse est Deus, dominus ipse est Deus." (The Lord is God,
the Lord is God". I deduce from this -- since the people did not say
"Adonay Heloim", but "Adonay hu Heloim", they meant
that there were not a Father and Son in the divine being , or they would
say "Adonay Heloim". By placing "hu" between the two,
he does not distinguish the persons of Adonay and of Heloym, that is to
say the Father and the Son. Therefore there is one sole person of Father
For the moment, I do not recall the other passages that made me doubt the
unity or the plurality of the persons of the Father and Son.
-----Have you cited these passages in the discussion that you had previously
Yes, for the most part, and my lord the bishop gave me the solution to them,
but I do not recall it.
After this, the same year, the 25th of September, the aforementioned
John appeared for questioning in the Chamber of the bishop of Pamiers before
my said lord bishop assisted by Brother Gaillard de Pomiès, in the
presence of the venerable lords Pierre du Verdier, archdeacon of Majorca
and canon of Narbonne, Germain de Castelnau, archdeacon of Pamiers, Jacques
Albenon, monastic prior of Pamiers, Hugues Artand, prior of Pradières,
and many other canons of the said church of Pamiers, as well as religious
persons -- the prior of Sainte-Marie de Carmel with three of his companions,
the prior of the Augustinians, the sub-prior of the Preachers and four Minors,
the consuls of Pamiers and many other burgesses of the city, namely Bernard
Faissier, official of Pamiers, Hughes de Bilhères, appellate judge
of Pamiers, master Guillaume de Saint-Julien of Pamiers and Jean Bausitz,
judge of Pamiers, jurists and also me, the notary signed below. All his
preceding confession was read to him and explained in the vulgar tongue,
which he acknowledged to be true and said that he wished to persist in.
He was also asked if he had been instructed by my lord the bishop in the
Christian faith, in all the articles of faith and the sacraments of the
Church separately and one by one, and the same concerning the authorities
of the Old Testament, and he was asked if he believed in his heart the truth
of what the sacrosanct Roman Church teaches and preaches concerning these
articles of faith, the sacraments, and the cessation of the legal obligations
of the Old Testament, if he believed that this doctrine of the Church was
in accordance with the Law and the Prophets of the Old Testament. He replied
that he believed and confessed orally that the Catholic faith was true,
as well as all the articles of faith and all the sacraments of the Church,
and that that which the Church preaches and teaches concerning these articles
of faith, the sacramanets and the cessation of the legal obligations is
in accordance with the Law and the Prophets of the Old Testament. He said
that he believed this faith with his heart, promised to believe and teach
it in the future, and said that he believed that it had been for the good
of his soul that the persecution that had caused him to be baptized had
happened, that he had not been brought to believe the Catholic faith by
the fear of death or of torture, by the violence of the dungeon, by threats,
terrors, flatteries or promises, but by the divine Scriptures which were
put forward to him by my lord the bishop.
Because of this he abjured willingly the Jewish perfidy, its superstition
and the ceremonies of the Jewish Law and all other heresy. He swore as well
"I, Baruch, appearing for questioning before you, Reverend father in
Christ my lord Jacques, by the grace of God bishop of Pamiers, abjure entirely
all heresy against the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Roman
Church, and all beliefs of heretics, of whatever sect condemned by the Roman
Church and especially the sect to which I held, and all complicity, aid,
defense and company of heretics, under pain of what is rightfully due in
the case of a relapse into judicially abjured heresy;
Item I swear and promise to pursue according to my power the heretics of
whatever sect condemned by the Roman Church and especially the sect to which
I held, and the believers, deceivers, aiders and abetters of these heretics,
including those whom I know or believe to be in flight by reason of heresy,
and against any one of them, to have them arrested and deported according
to my power to my said lord bishop or to the inquisitors of the heretical
deviation at all time and in whatever places that I know the existence of
the above said or any one of them.
Item I swear and promise to hold, preserve and defend the Catholic faith
that the Holy Roman Church preaches and observes.
Item I swear and promise to obey and to defer to the orders of the Church,
of my lord the bishop and the inquisitors, and to appear on the day or days
fixed by them or their replacements, at all times and in whatever place
that I receive the order or request on their part, by messenger or by letter
or by other means, to never flee nor to absent myself knowingly or in a
spirit of contumaciousness and to receive and accomplish according to my
power the punishment and the penance that they have judged fit to impose
on me. And to this end, I pledge my person and all my worldly goods.
After this, the 3rd of December in the same year, the aforesaid master
John appeared before my said lord bishop and Brother Gaillard de Pomiès
in the episcopal chamber of Pamiers, renouncing and concluding in the present
affair, demanded mercy and non-judgment, praying and asking the said lords
to act with mercy. And the said lords bishop and Brother Gaillard proceeded
to pronounce the sentence in the following terms "Let it be known to
all, etc." See the sentence in the Book of sentence on heretical deviaton.
Written the year and date above, before the witnesses listed below, and
myself master Guillaume Peyre-Barthe, notary of my said lord bishop, who
have received and written all of this.
And I, Rainaud Jabbaud, sworn to the business of the Inquisition, by the
mandate of the abovesaid lord bishop, have faithfully corrected the above
confession against the original.
Baruch's sentence does not survive. The bishop acting with Gaillard de Pomiès,
without the inquisitor, could have imposed a maximum sentence of the wearing
of the yellow cross.
Return to Jacques Fournier Home