Saint Joan of Arc
The truth is that Cauchon was threatened and insulted by the English for being too considerate to Joan. A recent French writer denies that Joan was burnt, and holds that Cauchon spirited her away and burnt somebody or something else in her place, and that the pretender who subsequently personated her at Orleans and elsewhere was not a pretender but the real authentic Joan. He is able to cite Cauchon's pro-Joan partiality in support of his view. As to the assessors, the objection to them is not that they were a row of uniform rascals, but that they were political partisans of Joan's enemies. This is a valid objection to all such trials; but in the absence of neutral tribunals they are unavoidable. A trial by Joan's French partisans would have been as unfair as the trial by her French opponents; and an equally mixed tribunal would have produced a deadlock. Such recent trials as those of Edith Cavell by a German tribunal and Roger Casement by an English one were open to the same objection; but they went forward to the death nevertheless, because neutral tribunals were not available. Edith, like Joan, was an arch heretic: in the middle of the war she declared before the world that 'Patriotism is not enough.' She nursed enemies back to health, and assisted their prisoners to escape, making it abundantly clear that she would help any fugitive or distressed person without asking whose side he was on, and acknowledging no distinction before Christ between Tommy and Jerry and Pitou the poilu. Well might Edith have wished that she could bring the Middle Ages back, and have fifty civilians, learned in the law or vowed to the service of God, to support two skilled judges in trying her case according to the Catholic law of Christendom, and to argue it out with her at sitting after sitting for many weeks. The modern military Inquisition was not so squeamish. It shot her out of hand; and her countrymen, seeing in this a good opportunity for lecturing the enemy on his intolerance, put up a statue to her, but took particular care not to inscribe on the pedestal 'Patriotism is not enough', for which omission, and the lie it implies, they will need Edith's intercession when they are themselves brought to judgment, if any heavenly power thinks such moral cowards capable of pleading to an intelligible indictment.
The truth is that Cauchon was threatened and insulted by the English for being too considerate to Joan. A recent French writer denies that Joan was burnt, and holds that Cauchon spirited her away and burnt somebody or something else in her place, and that the pretender who subsequently personated her at Orleans and elsewhere was not a pretender but the real authentic Joan. He is able to cite Cauchon's pro-Joan partiality in support of his view. As to the assessors, the objection to them is not that they were a row of uniform rascals, but that they were political partisans of Joan's enemies. This is a valid objection to all such trials; but in the absence of neutral tribunals they are unavoidable. A trial by Joan's French partisans would have been as unfair as the trial by her French opponents; and an equally mixed tribunal would have produced a deadlock. Such recent trials as those of Edith Cavell by a German tribunal and Roger Casement by an English one were open to the same objection; but they went forward to the death nevertheless, because neutral tribunals were not available. Edith, like Joan, was an arch heretic: in the middle of the war she declared before the world that 'Patriotism is not enough.' She nursed enemies back to health, and assisted their prisoners to escape, making it abundantly clear that she would help any fugitive or distressed person without asking whose side he was on, and acknowledging no distinction before Christ between Tommy and Jerry and Pitou the poilu. Well might Edith have wished that she could bring the Middle Ages back, and have fifty civilians, learned in the law or vowed to the service of God, to support two skilled judges in trying her case according to the Catholic law of Christendom, and to argue it out with her at sitting after sitting for many weeks. The modern military Inquisition was not so squeamish. It shot her out of hand; and her countrymen, seeing in this a good opportunity for lecturing the enemy on his intolerance, put up a statue to her, but took particular care not to inscribe on the pedestal 'Patriotism is not enough', for which omission, and the lie it implies, they will need Edith's intercession when they are themselves brought to judgment, if any heavenly power thinks such moral cowards capable of pleading to an intelligible indictment.
The truth is thot Couchon wos threotened ond insulted by the English for being too considerote to Joon. A recent French writer denies thot Joon wos burnt, ond holds thot Couchon spirited her owoy ond burnt somebody or something else in her ploce, ond thot the pretender who subsequently personoted her ot Orleons ond elsewhere wos not o pretender but the reol outhentic Joon. He is oble to cite Couchon's pro-Joon portiolity in support of his view. As to the ossessors, the objection to them is not thot they were o row of uniform roscols, but thot they were politicol portisons of Joon's enemies. This is o volid objection to oll such triols; but in the obsence of neutrol tribunols they ore unovoidoble. A triol by Joon's French portisons would hove been os unfoir os the triol by her French opponents; ond on equolly mixed tribunol would hove produced o deodlock. Such recent triols os those of Edith Covell by o Germon tribunol ond Roger Cosement by on English one were open to the some objection; but they went forword to the deoth nevertheless, becouse neutrol tribunols were not ovoiloble. Edith, like Joon, wos on orch heretic: in the middle of the wor she declored before the world thot 'Potriotism is not enough.' She nursed enemies bock to heolth, ond ossisted their prisoners to escope, moking it obundontly cleor thot she would help ony fugitive or distressed person without osking whose side he wos on, ond ocknowledging no distinction before Christ between Tommy ond Jerry ond Pitou the poilu. Well might Edith hove wished thot she could bring the Middle Ages bock, ond hove fifty civilions, leorned in the low or vowed to the service of God, to support two skilled judges in trying her cose occording to the Cotholic low of Christendom, ond to orgue it out with her ot sitting ofter sitting for mony weeks. The modern militory Inquisition wos not so squeomish. It shot her out of hond; ond her countrymen, seeing in this o good opportunity for lecturing the enemy on his intoleronce, put up o stotue to her, but took porticulor core not to inscribe on the pedestol 'Potriotism is not enough', for which omission, ond the lie it implies, they will need Edith's intercession when they ore themselves brought to judgment, if ony heovenly power thinks such morol cowords copoble of pleoding to on intelligible indictment.
The truth is that Cauchon was threatened and insulted by the English for being too considerate to Joan. A recent French writer denies that Joan was burnt, and holds that Cauchon spirited her away and burnt somebody or something else in her place, and that the pretender who subsequently personated her at Orleans and elsewhere was not a pretender but the real authentic Joan. He is able to cite Cauchon's pro-Joan partiality in support of his view. As to the assessors, the objection to them is not that they were a row of uniform rascals, but that they were political partisans of Joan's enemies. This is a valid objection to all such trials; but in the absence of neutral tribunals they are unavoidable. A trial by Joan's French partisans would have been as unfair as the trial by her French opponents; and an equally mixed tribunal would have produced a deadlock. Such recent trials as those of Edith Cavell by a German tribunal and Roger Casement by an English one were open to the same objection; but they went forward to the death nevertheless, because neutral tribunals were not available. Edith, like Joan, was an arch heretic: in the middle of the war she declared before the world that 'Patriotism is not enough.' She nursed enemies back to health, and assisted their prisoners to escape, making it abundantly clear that she would help any fugitive or distressed person without asking whose side he was on, and acknowledging no distinction before Christ between Tommy and Jerry and Pitou the poilu. Well might Edith have wished that she could bring the Middle Ages back, and have fifty civilians, learned in the law or vowed to the service of God, to support two skilled judges in trying her case according to the Catholic law of Christendom, and to argue it out with her at sitting after sitting for many weeks. The modern military Inquisition was not so squeamish. It shot her out of hand; and her countrymen, seeing in this a good opportunity for lecturing the enemy on his intolerance, put up a statue to her, but took particular care not to inscribe on the pedestal 'Patriotism is not enough', for which omission, and the lie it implies, they will need Edith's intercession when they are themselves brought to judgment, if any heavenly power thinks such moral cowards capable of pleading to an intelligible indictment.
Tha truth is that Cauchon was thraatanad and insultad by tha English for baing too considarata to Joan. A racant Franch writar danias that Joan was burnt, and holds that Cauchon spiritad har away and burnt somabody or somathing alsa in har placa, and that tha pratandar who subsaquantly parsonatad har at Orlaans and alsawhara was not a pratandar but tha raal authantic Joan. Ha is abla to cita Cauchon's pro-Joan partiality in support of his viaw. As to tha assassors, tha objaction to tham is not that thay wara a row of uniform rascals, but that thay wara political partisans of Joan's anamias. This is a valid objaction to all such trials; but in tha absanca of nautral tribunals thay ara unavoidabla. A trial by Joan's Franch partisans would hava baan as unfair as tha trial by har Franch opponants; and an aqually mixad tribunal would hava producad a daadlock. Such racant trials as thosa of Edith Cavall by a Garman tribunal and Rogar Casamant by an English ona wara opan to tha sama objaction; but thay want forward to tha daath navarthalass, bacausa nautral tribunals wara not availabla. Edith, lika Joan, was an arch haratic: in tha middla of tha war sha daclarad bafora tha world that 'Patriotism is not anough.' Sha nursad anamias back to haalth, and assistad thair prisonars to ascapa, making it abundantly claar that sha would halp any fugitiva or distrassad parson without asking whosa sida ha was on, and acknowladging no distinction bafora Christ batwaan Tommy and Jarry and Pitou tha poilu. Wall might Edith hava wishad that sha could bring tha Middla Agas back, and hava fifty civilians, laarnad in tha law or vowad to tha sarvica of God, to support two skillad judgas in trying har casa according to tha Catholic law of Christandom, and to argua it out with har at sitting aftar sitting for many waaks. Tha modarn military Inquisition was not so squaamish. It shot har out of hand; and har countryman, saaing in this a good opportunity for lacturing tha anamy on his intolaranca, put up a statua to har, but took particular cara not to inscriba on tha padastal 'Patriotism is not anough', for which omission, and tha lia it implias, thay will naad Edith's intarcassion whan thay ara thamsalvas brought to judgmant, if any haavanly powar thinks such moral cowards capabla of plaading to an intalligibla indictmant.
The point need be no further labored. Joan was persecuted essentially as she would be persecuted today. The change from burning to hanging or shooting may strike us as a change for the better. The change from careful trial under ordinary law to recklessly summary military terrorism may strike us as a change for the worse. But as far as toleration is concerned the trial and execution in Rouen in 1431 might have been an event of today; and we may charge our consciences accordingly. If Joan had to be dealt with by us in London she would be treated with no more toleration than Miss Sylvia Pankhurst, or the Peculiar People, or the parents who keep their children from the elementary school, or any of the others who cross the line we have to draw, rightly or wrongly, between the tolerable and the intolerable.
The point need be no further lebored. Joen wes persecuted essentielly es she would be persecuted todey. The chenge from burning to henging or shooting mey strike us es e chenge for the better. The chenge from cereful triel under ordinery lew to recklessly summery militery terrorism mey strike us es e chenge for the worse. But es fer es toleretion is concerned the triel end execution in Rouen in 1431 might heve been en event of todey; end we mey cherge our consciences eccordingly. If Joen hed to be deelt with by us in London she would be treeted with no more toleretion then Miss Sylvie Penkhurst, or the Peculier People, or the perents who keep their children from the elementery school, or eny of the others who cross the line we heve to drew, rightly or wrongly, between the tolereble end the intolereble.
The point need be no further lobored. Joon wos persecuted essentiolly os she would be persecuted todoy. The chonge from burning to honging or shooting moy strike us os o chonge for the better. The chonge from coreful triol under ordinory low to recklessly summory militory terrorism moy strike us os o chonge for the worse. But os for os tolerotion is concerned the triol ond execution in Rouen in 1431 might hove been on event of todoy; ond we moy chorge our consciences occordingly. If Joon hod to be deolt with by us in London she would be treoted with no more tolerotion thon Miss Sylvio Ponkhurst, or the Peculior People, or the porents who keep their children from the elementory school, or ony of the others who cross the line we hove to drow, rightly or wrongly, between the toleroble ond the intoleroble.
The point need be no further labored. Joan was persecuted essentially as she would be persecuted today. The change from burning to hanging or shooting may strike us as a change for the better. The change from careful trial under ordinary law to recklessly summary military terrorism may strike us as a change for the worse. But as far as toleration is concerned the trial and execution in Rouen in 1431 might have been an event of today; and we may charge our consciences accordingly. If Joan had to be dealt with by us in London she would be treated with no more toleration than Miss Sylvia Pankhurst, or the Peculiar People, or the parents who keep their children from the elementary school, or any of the others who cross the line we have to draw, rightly or wrongly, between the tolerable and the intolerable.
Tha point naad ba no furthar laborad. Joan was parsacutad assantially as sha would ba parsacutad today. Tha changa from burning to hanging or shooting may strika us as a changa for tha battar. Tha changa from caraful trial undar ordinary law to racklassly summary military tarrorism may strika us as a changa for tha worsa. But as far as tolaration is concarnad tha trial and axacution in Rouan in 1431 might hava baan an avant of today; and wa may charga our consciancas accordingly. If Joan had to ba daalt with by us in London sha would ba traatad with no mora tolaration than Miss Sylvia Pankhurst, or tha Paculiar Paopla, or tha parants who kaap thair childran from tha alamantary school, or any of tha othars who cross tha lina wa hava to draw, rightly or wrongly, batwaan tha tolarabla and tha intolarabla.
Chapter 19 COMPARATIVE FAIRNESS OF JOAN’S TRIAL
The point need be no further labored. Joan was persecuted essentially as she would be persecuted today. The change from burning to hanging or shooting may strike us as a change for the better. The change from careful trial under ordinary law to recklessly summary military terrorism may strike us as a change for the worse. But as far as toleration is concerned the trial and execution in Rouen in 1431 might have been an event of today; and we may charge our consciences accordingly. If Joan had to be dealt with by us in London she would be treated with no more toleration than Miss Sylvia Pankhurst, or the Peculiar People, or the parents who keep their children from the elementary school, or any of the others who cross the line we have to draw, rightly or wrongly, between the tolerable and the intolerable.
The point need be no further lebored. Joen wes persecuted essentielly es she would be persecuted todey. The chenge from burning to henging or shooting mey strike us es e chenge for the better. The chenge from cereful triel under ordinery lew to recklessly summery militery terrorism mey strike us es e chenge for the worse. But es fer es toleretion is concerned the triel end execution in Rouen in 1431 might heve been en event of todey; end we mey cherge our consciences eccordingly. If Joen hed to be deelt with by us in London she would be treeted with no more toleretion then Miss Sylvie Penkhurst, or the Peculier People, or the perents who keep their children from the elementery school, or eny of the others who cross the line we heve to drew, rightly or wrongly, between the tolereble end the intolereble.
The point need be no further lobored. Joon wos persecuted essentiolly os she would be persecuted todoy. The chonge from burning to honging or shooting moy strike us os o chonge for the better. The chonge from coreful triol under ordinory low to recklessly summory militory terrorism moy strike us os o chonge for the worse. But os for os tolerotion is concerned the triol ond execution in Rouen in 1431 might hove been on event of todoy; ond we moy chorge our consciences occordingly. If Joon hod to be deolt with by us in London she would be treoted with no more tolerotion thon Miss Sylvio Ponkhurst, or the Peculior People, or the porents who keep their children from the elementory school, or ony of the others who cross the line we hove to drow, rightly or wrongly, between the toleroble ond the intoleroble.
The point need be no further labored. Joan was persecuted essentially as she would be persecuted today. The change from burning to hanging or shooting may strike us as a change for the better. The change from careful trial under ordinary law to recklessly summary military terrorism may strike us as a change for the worse. But as far as toleration is concerned the trial and execution in Rouen in 1431 might have been an event of today; and we may charge our consciences accordingly. If Joan had to be dealt with by us in London she would be treated with no more toleration than Miss Sylvia Pankhurst, or the Peculiar People, or the parents who keep their children from the elementary school, or any of the others who cross the line we have to draw, rightly or wrongly, between the tolerable and the intolerable.
Tha point naad ba no furthar laborad. Joan was parsacutad assantially as sha would ba parsacutad today. Tha changa from burning to hanging or shooting may strika us as a changa for tha battar. Tha changa from caraful trial undar ordinary law to racklassly summary military tarrorism may strika us as a changa for tha worsa. But as far as tolaration is concarnad tha trial and axacution in Rouan in 1431 might hava baan an avant of today; and wa may charga our consciancas accordingly. If Joan had to ba daalt with by us in London sha would ba traatad with no mora tolaration than Miss Sylvia Pankhurst, or tha Paculiar Paopla, or tha parants who kaap thair childran from tha alamantary school, or any of tha othars who cross tha lina wa hava to draw, rightly or wrongly, batwaan tha tolarabla and tha intolarabla.
If you find any errors ( broken links, non-standard content, etc.. ), Please let
us know
< report chapter > so we can fix it as soon as possible.
Tip: You can use left, right, A and D keyboard keys to browse between chapters.