Saturday, May 19th. The deliberations of the University of Paris are read, and the doctors give their opinions
On Saturday following, May 19th, before us the said judges in the chapel of the archiepiscopal manor of Rouen, where we were constituted tribunal, there appeared. the venerable lords and masters, Guillaume, abbot of Mortemer, doctors of theology; Nicolas, abbot of Jumièges, Guillaume, abbot of Cormeilles, doctors of canon law; and the abbot of Préaux, the priors of St. Lô and of Longueville, , , Jean Fouchier, , , , , , , , , , doctors of theology; , , , , , , , bachelors of sacred theology; , doctor of canon and civil law; , , licentiates in canon law; , in civil law; , Jean Pinchon, in canon law; , , , in civil law; , licentiate in canon law; and , canons of Rouen; , , , , , Bureau de Cormeilles, , , , ,
, , licentiates in either canon or civil law.
In their presence we the said bishop explained how we had recently received a considerable number of the deliberations and opinions of notable doctors and masters upon the statements and confessions of the said Jeanne; and that from these resolutions we might have proceeded to conclude the judgment of the case, for they were assuredly sufficient. Nevertheless, to show our honor and reverence for our mother the University of Paris, and to obtain a clearer and more detailed elucidation of the matter, to the great peace of our conscience and the edification of all, we had judged it wise to transmit the said statements to our mother the University, and in particular to the Faculties of Theology and Decrees, and to ask the advice of the learned masters of the University, in particular those of these two Faculties. The University, and in particular these two Faculties, burning with no ordinary zeal for the faith, gave us their diligent, mature and solemn counsel upon each of the statements, and addressed them to us in the form of a Public Instrument. Which deliberations contained in the said instrument we ordered to be read aloud, word for word, clearly and publicly, and all the said doctors and masters heard them. And after they had heard the reading of these deliberations of the University and the two Faculties, the said masters gave and expounded to us their opinions, in conformity with those of the said Faculties and University, in addition to the opinions they had already formulated, upon the manner of procedure which we ought henceforth to adopt. We have written below the tenor of these deliberations and of the letters of the University.
First follows the tenor of the letters addressed by the University to Our Lord the King
“To the most excellent, high and mighty prince, the King of France and England, our most feared and sovereign lord. Most excellent prince, our most feared and sovereign lord and father, your royal excellence ought in all things carefully endeavor to keep entire the honor, reverence and glory of the divine Majesty and of His Holy Catholic faith, by the extirpation of errors, false doctrines and all other offenses hostile thereto. In the continuance of this your highness will in all things have effective aid, succor and prosperity through the grace of the Most High, and receive large increase of your high renown. To this end your most noble highness with God’s grace began a most excellent work concerning our holy faith, namely the legal proceedings against this woman known as The Maid, against her scandals, errors and crimes, which are manifest in this entire realm, and the form and manner of which we have repeatedly written to you. With the matter and form of this trial we are acquainted by letters we have received, from the account supplied in your name in our general assembly by our agents the very honorable and most reverend masters, , , masters of theology; who have brought and given us answers on other points with which they were entrusted.
“In truth when we had heard and well considered this account, it appeared to us that in this woman’s trial extreme gravity and a holy and just procedure had been observed, which must be pleasing to all men. Therefore we give most humble thanks, first to the sovereign Majesty, then to your most high nobility, with a humble and loyal affection; and finally to all those who from reverence of God have given their pains, labor and energies to this matter, for the good of our holy faith.
“Further, most dread and sovereign lord, according to the pleasure of your instructions and demands in letters and through these reverend masters, after many assemblies as well as great and mature deliberations among ourselves, we return to your excellence our counsel, conclusions and deliberations on the points, statements and articles which were transmitted and explained to us; and we are always prepared to employ ourselves whole-heartedly in matters so directly concerning our faith, as our profession directly enjoins, and as we have at all times shown to the best of our ability. If anything further remained to be said or expounded by us, these honorable and reverend masters, who now return to your highness and who were present at our deliberations, will be able to set forth, expound and declare all that pertains thereto in accordance with our intention. May it please your magnificence to give faith to all they shall say in our name and receive them with especial recommendation: for in truth they have shown great diligence in the said matters from pure and holy affection, unsparing of their efforts, their persons and their faculties, and careless of the great and threatening dangers particularly on the roads; and indeed through their wisdom, their ordered and discreet prudence this matter has been and shall be conducted to its end, if it please God, with wisdom, holiness and reason.
“Finally we humbly beseech your excellent highness to bring this matter as soon and diligently as possible to its conclusion, for in truth the length and delays are perilous, and a great and notable reparation is necessary to bring the people, so scandalized by this woman, back to a true and holy doctrine and belief. To the entire exaltation and integrity of our faith and for the praise of the eternal God who may in His grace maintain your excellency in prosperity until you reach eternal glory. Written at Paris in our solemn assembly, met at St. Bernard, on May 14th, 1431. Your most humble daughter the University of Paris.”
Then follows the tenor of the letters addressed by the University of Paris to Us the said bishop
“To the reverend father and lord in Christ the bishop of Beauvais. The diligent labor of pastoral vigilance is shown to be animated by an immense fervor of most singular charity, my lord and most reverend father, when a most firm righteousness never, in its stable and constant industry, out of pious concern for the public safety, ceases from work on behalf of our holy faith. The virile and famous martial spirit of your most sincere fervor showed its true measure when thanks to your valiant and forceful probity this woman commonly known as The Maid was brought into the hands of your justice by the propitious grace of Christ; by her poison widely discharged the most Christian flock of almost the entire western world seemed infected: the vigilant solicitude of your reverence which is ever at pains to perform the duties of a true pastor did not fail to oppose thereto a public obstacle.
“In our general assembly divers famous doctors of theology, our agents, masters, and elegantly explained to us the form and conduct of the procedures already begun against the grave offenses of this perfidious woman, with certain propositions, articles, letters from our lord the king and from your reverence, credentials and demands. When we had heard their speeches in full we resolved to address our most active gratitude to your highness and reverence who has never displayed indifference when this celebrated work of exalting the divine name is in question, or the integrity and glory of the orthodox faith, and the salutary edification of the faithful people. We approved of this celebrated trial, and of its form, and considered it to be according to the holy canons and to emanate from the most eloquent and experienced minds. And out of respect for our lord the king and our ancient devotion to your reverence we granted all the requests which the said doctors presented to us verbally or in writing, since we desired with all our strength and sincere affection to please you, reverend father.
“On the principal question we took care to hold many most serious consultations and deliberations in which, after the matter had been frequently discussed with all liberty and candor, we decided to have drawn up in writing these deliberations and consultations at which in the end we had unanimously arrived: these the said doctors our agents who return to your reverence will faithfully show you. They will take care also to explain certain other things more fittingly explained at great length and which we more fully declare in our letters to our lord the king of which a copy is enclosed. May your reverence receive with especial recommendation these eminent doctors who have not spared their energies: who, heedless of perils and labors, have not ceased toiling at this matter of faith. To the accomplishment of this most famous task which has not been vainly undertaken we will give our succor and perseverance to your reverence’s tireless zeal until reason shall decide that the divine Majesty has been appeased by a reparation proportionate to the offense, that the truth of our orthodox faith remains stainless, and the iniquitous and scandalous demoralization of the people is past. Then when the Prince of shepherds shall appear he will grant to the pastoral fervor of your reverence a crown of eternal glory. Written at Paris in our general assembly solemnly held at St. Bernard on May 13th, 1431. The Rector and the University of Paris.”
Then follows the deliberation of the University of Paris
“In the name of the Lord, amen. Be it known and patent to all by the tenor of this present public instrument that in the year of the Lord 1431, indiction nine, on the 19th [29th] day of April in the vacancy of the apostolic see our mother the University of Paris was assembled and called together solemnly at St. Bernard in respect of two articles. The first and principal of these articles was to hear the reading of letters and propositions from the most Christian prince our lord the king, from his council and the lord judges, regarding the proceedings in matter of faith against a certain woman of the name of Jeanne commonly called The Maid, and to deliberate thereupon; the second was ordinary, concerning supplications and complaints. These articles were expounded by the venerable and prudent master Pierre de Gouda, master of arts, rector of the University and president of the assembly.
“When these letters had been opened and read, and their credentials explained by one of the ambassadors of our lord the king, a member of his council and one of the judges sent to the University, the twelve articles inserted below were read: My lord the rector discovered, proposed and declared that the content of the articles just mentioned was important and difficult, and concerned the orthodox faith, the Christian religion and the holy laws. He said that the task of considering and qualifying these articles concerned especially the venerable Faculties of Theology and Decrees, according to their professions; he added that the University could not deliberate and decide upon the judgment of these matters and articles without the aid of the said Faculties; the decision and judgment of the Faculties would then be submitted to the University, together or separately. After this explanation the rector opened the deliberation on each and every one of the things which had just been set forth in the general assembly of all the masters and doctors here present. Whereupon each Faculty or Nation retired and met separately in the place where it customarily assembled to consider the most difficult matters and tasks; and each of them continued to hold sessions there. After the mature- deliberations of the Faculties and Nations the private decisions of each were made public in accordance with custom and were reported in common. Finally the University through the offices of the lord rector and in conformity with the deliberations of the Faculties and Nations resolved to entrust the decisions of this matter and the qualifying of the said articles to the Faculties of Theology and Decrees, and their deliberations should be reported to the University.
“In the year and indiction aforesaid on the fourteenth day of March, during the vacancy of the apostolic see, the said mother the University of Paris was solemnly assembled at St. Bernard to consider two articles. The chief one was to hear the reading of the deliberations of the venerable Faculties of Theology and Decrees on a matter of faith according to the commission of the University dated April [29th]. After the matter of this article was fully and gravely expounded by the office of the lord rector, the said lord required the Faculties present at the assembly to make known and report their deliberations on this subject, and their judgment on the articles, in the presence of the University. Whereupon the venerable Faculty of Theology through the medium of master Jean de Troies, then vice-dean of the Faculty, answered that on many frequent occasions each of the said Faculties of Theology and Decrees in whole or in special commissions had assembled to judge the matter and qualify the articles. In the end they each after long and mature deliberation had doctrinally reached a decision according to the exact tenor of a certain memorandum which master Jean held in his hands.
In the presence of the University he first displayed and then read it in a clear and loud voice, with the articles already mentioned. The tenor of these articles, judgments and qualifications contained in the said memorandum are given below word for word.”
Here follow the articles concerning the words and deeds of Jeanne commonly known as The Maid
“And firstly this woman says and affirms that in her thirteenth year or thereabouts, etc.”
Here follow the deliberations and conclusions reached by the Holy Faculty of Theology in the University of Paris, in judgment of the articles already transcribed concerning the words and deeds of Jeanne commonly called The Maid: the entire deliberations and conclusions of the said Faculty and all which concerns this matter, the Faculty submits to the judgment of Our Holy Father the Pope and the Holy Council General
“And firstly regarding article the first, the Faculty declares doctrinally that in view of the end, manner and content of the revelations, the quality of her person, the place and other circumstances, these revelations are fictitious, pernicious and misleading lies, or that these are superstitions, proceeding from evil or diabolical spirits, such as Belial, Satan and Behemoth.”
“Regarding article the second, its content appears less the truth than a presumptuous, misleading, pernicious, feigned lie, hostile to the dignity of angels.”
“Regarding article the third, there is no sufficient sign, and the said Jeanne believes lightly and affirms rashly. Moreover, in the comparison she made her belief is evil and she wanders from the faith.”
“Regarding article the fourth, its content is nothing but superstition, divination, presumptuous affirmation and vain boasting.”
“Regarding article the fifth, the said woman is blasphemous towards God, contemptuous of God in His sacraments, unmindful of divine and sacred law and the ecclesiastical sanctions, evil thinking and erring in the faith, foolishly. boastful, and must be suspected of idolatry, and of the execration of herself and her garments; she has imitated the rites of the heathen.”
“Regarding article the sixth, the said woman is treacherous, cunning, cruel, athirst for the spilling of human blood, seditious, inciting to tyranny, and blasphemous of God in her commands and revelations.”
“Regarding article the seventh, the said woman is impious towards her parents, contemptuous of the commandment to honor her father and mother, scandalous, blasphemous towards God; she wanders from the faith and has made rash and presumptuous promises.”
“Regarding article the eighth, we observe a pusillanimity verging on despair and by interpretation on suicide; a rash and presumptuous assertion concerning the remission of a sin; and an erroneous opinion in the said woman concerning man’s free will.”
“Regarding article the ninth, there appears a rash and presumptuous assertion, a pernicious falsehood. She contradicts herself in the preceding article, and holds evil opinions in matters of faith.”
“Regarding article the tenth, we find rash and presumptuous affirmations, superstitious divination, blasphemy of St. Catherine and St. Margaret, transgression of the commandment to love her neighbor.”
“Regarding article the eleventh, this woman, supposing she has had the revelations and apparitions of which she boasts according to the circumstances of article one, is idolatrous, a caller up of evil spirits, a wanderer from the faith, and makes rash affirmations and unlawful oaths.”
“Regarding article the twelfth, the said woman is schismatic, erroneous in her opinions of the unity and authority of the Church, apostate: and still obstinately persists in her deviation from the faith.”
Here follow the deliberation and doctrinal judgment of the venerable Faculty of Decrees of the University of Paris upon the twelve articles, transcribed and annotated above, concerning the words and deeds of Jeanne commonly called The Maid: the Faculty submits these deliberations and judgments to the decision and judgment of the sovereign Pontiff of the apostolic Holy See and of the Holy Council General.
“If this woman with a sane mind persisted in maintaining the propositions set forth in the twelve articles, and performed the things described therein, the opinion of the Faculty of Law, after a diligent examination, by way of counsel and doctrine, is in charitable speech:
“Firstly, that this woman is schismatic, for schism is an unlawful separation, due to disobedience, from the unity of the Church, and that she separates herself from obedience to the Church Militant, as she has said, etc.”
“That this woman deviates from the faith; contradicts the article of the faith contained in the symbol: Unam Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam: and, as St. Jerome says, he who contradicts this article proves not only that he is ignorant, malicious and not Catholic, but heretical also.”
“That this woman is apostate, for the hair which God gave her for a veil she has had untimely cut off, and also, with the same design has rejected woman’s dress and imitated the costume of men.”
“That this woman is a liar and witch when she says she is sent from God, speaks with angels and saints, and yet justifies herself by no miracle or special evidence of the Scriptures. When the Lord wished to send Moses into Egypt to the sons of Israel he gave them a sign so that they might believe he was sent from God: he changed a rod into a serpent and a serpent into a rod. Likewise, when John the Baptist began his mission he brought a special testimony from the Scriptures when he said: 7 am the voice of one crying in the wilderness. Prepare ye the way of the Lord,’ as Isaiah had foretold.”
“That this woman, in law and in presumption of law, deviates from the faith: for in the first place when she is anathema by the authority of the canon law she remains so long in this condition; in the second place, by declaring that she preferred not to receive the body of Christ, not to confess herself at the time ordained of the Church, rather than assume woman’s dress. She is, moreover, vehemently suspected of heresy and should be diligently examined on the articles of the faith.”
“This woman sins also when she says she is as certain of being received into Paradise as if she were- already partaker of that blessed glory, seeing that on this earthly journey no pilgrim knows if he is worthy of glory or of punishment, which the sovereign judge alone can tell. Consequently if this woman being charitably exhorted and duly admonished by a competent judge, will not willingly return to the unity of the Catholic faith, publicly abjure her error to the good pleasure of this judge, and give fitting satisfaction, she must be abandoned to the discretion of the secular judge to receive the penalty proportionate to her crime.
“After these articles, decisions and qualifications were read, the lord rector clearly and publicly demanded of the venerable Faculties of Theology and Decrees if the deliberations and qualifications which had just been read from the book corresponded to the deliberations and decrees of the said Faculties. Whereupon the Faculties separately answered, the Faculty of Theology through master Jean de Troies, the Faculty of Decrees through the venerable master Guérould Boissel, its dean, that these decisions and qualifications were exactly those which they had given and decreed. Then the lord rector reminded them and declared how the University had commissioned the Faculties of Theology and Decrees to issue these decisions and qualifications; that the University, as had been reported, had undertaken to accept and esteem these decisions emanating from the said Faculties of Decrees and Theology as good, ratified and acceptable. When this was declared in this general form the lord rector opened the discussion of the particular points which had been set forth and declared to the general assembly of all the masters and doctors present. Then each Faculty or Nation retired from the assembly and met in the place where it customarily deliberated on the most difficult cases and matters; where it ordinarily assembled to discuss such points and other difficult concerns of the University and held an habitual session. After a long and mature discussion by the Faculties and Nations, each deliberation was made and repeated in public, according to custom, and the University, through the person of the lord rector, concluded that it esteemed the decisions and qualifications of the Faculties of Theology and Decrees as good, ratified, and acceptable, and held them for its own. In witness of which the circumspect and venerable masters, , and , professors of sacred theology, requested us to deliver and present to each of them one or more public instruments signed by the following notaries.
“This was done at Paris in the place, year, indiction, day and month aforesaid, in the presence of the venerable and discreet lords and masters, namely, for the instrument of April 29th: Pierre de Dyerré, professor of sacred theology; Guérould Boissel, doctor of decrees; Henri Thiboust, master of arts and medicine; Jean Barrey, Gerolf de Holle, and Richard Abesseur, master of arts; Jean Vacheret, principal beadle of the venerable Faculty of Theology, and Boémond de Lutrea, principal beadle of the [French] Nation; for the instrument of May 14th, there were present Jean Soquet, Jean Gravestain, professors of theology; the said Guérould Boissel; Simon de La Mare, master of arts and medicine; André Pelé, Guillaume Estocart, Jacques Nourisseur, Jean Trophard and Martin Berech, masters of arts, and a great number of doctors and masters of each Faculty, with the beadles Jean Vacheret and Boémond de Lutrea, witnesses specially called and summoned.
“And I, Jean Bourrillet, called François, priest, master of arts, licentiate in decrees and bachelor of theology, notary public by imperial and apostolic authority, with the venerable master Michel Hébert, priest of the diocese of Rouen, master of arts, notary and secretary of our Mother the University of Paris by imperial and apostolic authority, I declare that I was present at all which was said, expounded, discussed, deliberated and resolved in the assemblies of the University. In witness whereof I have put my habitual seal to this present document, as I have been summoned and called to do, in testimony of its faith and truth.”
“And I, Michel Hébert, priest of the diocese of Rouen, master of arts, notary and secretary of the University of Paris by pontifical and imperial authority, having been present with master Jean Bourrillet at all which was said, set forth, and discussed in the University, as has been declared above, I certify I have seen and heard these things. Therefore I have put my habitual sign to this present document, written with my own hand, and signed below in witness of its faith and truth, as I have been summoned and called to do.”
Deliberation of the doctors and masters of Rouen who gave their opinion in conformity with the University of Paris
Then master, treasurer and canon of the cathedral of Rouen where he lived, doctor of canon and civil law, gave his opinion that the case had been notably and solemnly debated; that it should be concluded and defined in the presence of the parties; and unless Jeanne returned to the way of truth and salvation, she should be deemed a heretic. He adhered to the decision of the University of Paris.
Master, licentiate in canon law, arch. deacon of Eu, canon of the church of Rouen, gave an opinion similar to master ‘s, adding that one day would be sufficient to conclude, pronounce the sentence, and abandon Jeanne to the secular justice.
The reverend father in Christ, Gilles, lord abbot of Ste. Trinité de Fécamp, doctor of sacred theology, gave the following opinion: on a fixed day the Promoter should ask her if she wished to say anything more; then she should be admonished. Afterwards if she would not retract and return to the way of truth, she should be considered a heretic, sentence must be pronounced and Jeanne given over to secular justice.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, archdeacon of Évreux, declared that those who have not fully considered the matter are bound to accept the opinion of the University of Paris. For his own part he accepted it, and in respect of the rest agreed with the abbot of Fécamp
The reverend father in Christ, Guillaume, lord abbot of Cormeilles, doctor of decrees, followed the University of Paris.
Master, licentiate in law and bachelor of decrees, archdeacon of Petit-Caux and canon of Rouen, in view of the admonitions addressed to Jeanne, adheres to the opinion of the University of Paris. Regarding the procedure, he said one day was sufficient to conclude and pronounce the sentence.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, thought Jeanne should be once more admonished; and if after this she did not return to the path of truth, he agreed to the opinion of the University of Paris.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, held to the opinion he had given with other doctors, masters and bachelors, on April 9th; he added that Jeanne should be once more admonished and be informed of the deliberation of the University of Paris.
The lord Pierre, prior of Longueville-Giffard, doctor of sacred theology, gave a similar opinion. Master Jean Pinchon, licentiate in canon law, archdeacon of Jouy and canon of Paris, adhered to the opinion of master.
Master Pasquier de Vaulx, doctor of decrees, canon of the churches of Paris and Rouen, accepted the opinion of the University of Paris.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, canon of the churches of Rouen and Besançon, accepted the opinion of the University, and in respect of the subsequent procedure referred to us the judges. Master , licentiate in canon and civil law, canon of the church of Rouen, said that if Jeanne would not obey after being warned he followed the opinion of the University of Paris.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, canon of the church of Rouen, thought that the trial could be concluded and sentence pronounced on the same day; for the rest, he held to the result of his deliberations on April 9th with the other doctors and bachelors.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, thought Jeanne should once more be charitably admonished, and if she did not obey, he accepted the opinion of the University of Paris.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, declared that for the salvation of her body and soul Jeanne should be charitably admonished before the lord judges concluded; if, after these warnings she did not return to the Church she would be obstinate and heretical. For the conclusion he referred to ourselves the judges.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, held to the opinion he gave recently with other doctors and masters on April 9th, and accepted the deliberation of the Faculty of Theology; he added that Jeanne should be charitably admonished on a day chosen for that purpose.
The religious brother Martin Ladvenu, held to the opinion of master.
The religious brother Thomas Amouret did likewise.
The venerable and discreet advocates of the archiepiscopal court of Rouen, licentiates in canon and civil law, or both, namely, master, , , , , Bureau de Cormeilles, , , , , , and Jean Le Tavernier, declared that if Jeanne would not obey after she had been admonished to return to the way of truth and salvation nor submit to the Church, she should be proceeded against according to the deliberations of the Faculty of Decrees.
The reverend father in Christ the religious Guillaume, lord abbot of Mortemer, professor of sacred theology, declared that Jeanne should be once more charitably admonished; if she would not obey the proceedings should be continued, and he accepted the deliberation of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Paris.
The religious master, professor of sacred theology, gave an opinion similar to that of the lord abbot of Mortemer.
The religious master Jean Fouchier, doctor of sacred theology, gave an opinion like that of the lord abbot of Mortemer.
Master, licentiate in canon law, canon of Rouen, thought that Jeanne should be once more charitably admonished and if she would not obey, the proceedings should be continued.
Master, canon of the church of Rouen, bachelor of theology, accepted the opinion of the University of Paris.
Master, bachelor of sacred theology, adhered to the opinion he lately gave us in the tenor of the letter signed by his hand. He added that Jeanne should be admonished again, in private and in public, before the people: if she would not return to the way of truth and salvation, he referred to the judges for the subsequent procedure.
Master, bachelor of theology, was of the same opinion as Master . Master , bachelor of sacred theology, gave an opinion according to the deliberation of the University.
Master, bachelor of sacred theology, considered that Jeanne should again be charitably admonished, and if after this warning she would not obey the Church she must be deemed a heretic.
The religious person brotheradhered to the opinion he gave with others on April 9th, adding that Jeanne should be charitably admonished, and that if she would not obey the Church after this warning he referred to us her judges for the method of the subsequent procedure.
Master, doctor of sacred theology, adhered to the opinion he gave with other doctors on April 9th, adding that on a certain fixed day Jeanne should be charitably admonished and be informed of the peril she incurred by refusing to obey and submit to the Church; if then she persisted in her disobedience the proceedings should be continued.
Master, bachelor of sacred theology, canon of the churches of Laon and Thérouanne, adhered to the decisions reached with other doctors on April 9th. On other points he was of the same opinion as the said , and added that if Jeanne refused to obey the Church after this warning she should be considered a heretic.
Master, canon of the churches of Chartres and of Rouen, master of arts, gave an opinion similar to that of the said .
Master, licentiate in law, canon of the church of Rouen, considered that Jeanne must on a certain day be charitably admonished, and if she persisted in her disobedience her trial must be concluded and the sentence pronounced.
The religious master Bertrand du Chesne, doctor of law, superior of the deanery of Lihons-en-Santerre, of the Cluny order, held the opinion of the Faculty of Decrees in the University of Paris.
Master Guillaume Erart, doctor of theology, sacristan and canon of the church of Langres, followed the opinion of the chapter of the cathedral of Rouen and of the University of Paris.
Whereupon we the aforesaid judges, thanking the reverend fathers, lords and masters, declared that we should once more charitably admonish the said Jeanne to return to the way of truth, for the salvation of her body and soul, and that we should proceed further to the conclusion of the case and the setting of a day for pronouncing sentence according to their good deliberation and salutary counsel.