Were the Knights Templar Guilty of Heresy?
The question of whether the Knights Templar were actually guilty of the charges of heresy brought against them in 1307 is one of the most debated questions in medieval history. The charges — denial of Christ, spitting on the cross, worship of a head called Baphomet, and obscene kisses at initiation — were, on their face, serious and well-attested. But the confessions that supported the charges were extracted under torture, and most brothers retracted their confessions when the torture stopped. The Chinon Parchment of 1308 even absolved the Order’s leaders of the charge of heresy.
This article examines the charges and the modern historiographical debate. It is a companion to The Trial and Suppression of the Knights Templar and to The Trial of Jacques de Molay.
The Charges
The charges brought against the Templars in 1307 were extensive and serious. They included:
- Denial of Christ: According to the confessions, the candidate was required, at the ceremony of initiation, to deny Christ three times. In the standard form, the candidate was asked: “Do you believe in the Lord Christ?” to which the correct answer was: “I do not believe.”
- Spitting on the cross: According to the same confessions, the candidate was required to spit on the cross, usually a small crucifix placed near the altar. The spitting was usually done on the ground, or on the floor of the church, and not on the cross itself.
- Worship of a head called Baphomet: According to some confessions, a head, sometimes described as a skull and sometimes as a figure with three faces, was shown to the candidate, and the candidate was required to venerate it. The head was often called Baphomet.
- Obscene kisses: According to the confessions, the candidate was required to kiss the Grand Master, or the preceptor of the house, on the mouth, the navel, and the buttocks.
- Homosexual practices: The Templars were also accused of homosexual practices.
- Secret initiation rituals: The Order was accused of having a secret initiation ritual that involved the renunciation of the Catholic faith.
The charges are examined in detail in Templar Initiation and the Charges of Secret Rites.
The Confessions
The first round of interrogations, conducted in France in October and November 1307, produced a wave of confessions. The most dramatic was the confession of the Grand Master Jacques de Molay, made on October 24, 1307, who admitted to the charges of denying Christ and spitting on the cross.
The confessions were extracted under severe torture. The methods used included the rack, the strappado (a form of suspension with weights on the feet), the application of fire, and other methods. The most common method was the “question” (a French term for judicial torture), which could be applied for hours at a time.
When the torture stopped, most of the brothers retracted their confessions. The retraction was a common pattern, and it was noted by the trial judges.
The Chinon Parchment
The most important piece of evidence in the Order’s favor was the Chinon Parchment of August 1308, in which Pope Clement V personally absolved the leaders of the Order of the charge of heresy and restored them to the sacraments of the Church.
The Chinon Parchment. See The Chinon Parchment. The parchment was, in effect, the papacy’s judgment that the leaders of the Templars were not heretics.
The Bull Vox in Excelso
Despite the Chinon Parchment, the Order was suppressed by the bull Vox in Excelso of March 22, 1312. The bull suppressed the Order by special apostolic decree, not by a formal heresy conviction. The bull’s careful legal language — “not by way of definitive sentence” but “by way of apostolic provision” — was a deliberate strategy to avoid endorsing the trial’s findings.
The bull. See The Papal Suppression: Vox in Excelso.
The Modern Historiographical Debate
The question of the Order’s guilt has been debated by historians for centuries. The most important modern scholars include:
- Pierre Dupuy (1582–1651), one of the first modern historians to study the trial, argued in his 1654 Histoire de l’Ordre Militaire des Templiers that the Templars were innocent and that the charges were fabricated.
- Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall (1774–1856), an Austrian historian, argued in his 1818 work Mysterium Baphometis revelatum that the Templars were guilty of the charges.
- Georges Lizerand (1877–1958), a French historian, edited the Dossier de l’affaire des Templiers (1923), the standard modern edition of the trial documents, and argued that the Order was largely innocent of the charges.
- Malcolm Barber (1943–2017), an English historian, argued in his 1978 book The Trial of the Templars that the Order was innocent and that the confessions were extracted by torture.
- Alain Demurger (1939–2020), a French historian, argued in his Jacques de Molay: Le dernier templier (2002, English 2004) and Les Templiers: Une chevalerie chrétienne au Moyen Âge (2005, English The Templars: A New History, 2005) that the Order was innocent.
- Helen Nicholson, a historian at Cardiff University, has argued that the Order was innocent of the specific charges but that some brothers may have engaged in unorthodox behaviour that was exaggerated by the trial.
The most widely accepted modern view is that the Order was innocent of the specific charges of heresy, and that the confessions were extracted by torture. The suppression of the Order was the result of political pressure from Philip IV of France and of the papacy’s reluctance to confront him.
The Political Context
The political context of the trial is crucial to understanding the question of the Order’s guilt. King Philip IV of France (r. 1285–1314) was the principal force behind the suppression. Philip was deeply in debt to the Templars, and he saw the suppression as a way to seize the Order’s French assets. He also saw the destruction of the Order as a way to break the power of a powerful independent institution within his kingdom.
The political context is examined in The Trial and Suppression of the Knights Templar and in Who Was Philip IV of France?.
The Chinon Parchment Reconsidered
The discovery of the Chinon Parchment in the Vatican Secret Archives in 2001 was a major event in the modern debate. The parchment had been overlooked by previous historians, and its discovery confirmed that Pope Clement V had personally absolved the leaders of the Order of the charge of heresy.
The discovery of the parchment is a major argument in favor of the Order’s innocence. The pope’s decision to absolve the leaders suggests that the papacy itself did not believe the charges of heresy.
Conclusion
The question of whether the Knights Templar were guilty of heresy is one of the most debated questions in medieval history. The most widely accepted modern view is that the Order was innocent of the specific charges of heresy, and that the confessions were extracted by torture. The suppression of the Order was the result of political pressure from Philip IV of France and of the papacy’s reluctance to confront him. The story of the trial. See The Trial and Suppression of the Knights Templar.