Pope Innocent VIII's condemnation of Pico della Mirandola's book of 900 propositions
Pico della Mirandola has captured many imaginations. But what did Innocent VIII's bull of condemnation actually say?
Pico della Mirandola has captured many imaginations. But what did Innocent VIII's bull of condemnation actually say?
(WM Round-Up) – The ongoing disputes over esotericism and hermeticism in Catholic circles have often referred to the famous renaissance figure Pico della Mirandola. Here, possibly for the first time, is an English translation of Pope Innocent VIII’s bull condemning his book of 900 propositions.
Sebastian Morello, whose book stands at the centre of the recent controversy, addressed the topic of Pico in his second response to
:Finally, an historical point which has come up a number of times in this polemic: it has been said that Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, to whom I’ve devoted much attention in my academic writings, “repented of his involvement in the occult”, to quote Davis. It is remarkable to me that someone such as Pico can be described and tossed aside in a few sentences, using a 19th century definition of the ‘occult’ that Pico would not have even recognised. This well illustrates the sheer illiteracy of my interlocutors who have, by this point, wasted a considerable amount of my time. In fact, Pico was an extremely complicated person, and there are differing opinions among historians about the end of his life. True, before his life ended unnaturally early, he burned many of his own books and all of his poems, and he gave away his entire family fortune. He had by that stage resolved to become a monk or friar, which was then prevented by his early death (likely due to his secretary poisoning him).
One can certainly, and with some reason, interpret his final actions as a renunciation of his former views, but he never formally or explicitly renounced those views. There was also never a condemnation of Hermeticism from the Church, but only certain things perceived to be related to Hermeticism, and never named as such in any condemnation. It was precisely because people like Pico were exploring Hermeticism, segregating it into what was of value (and thus could be reconciled with orthodox theology) and what was not of value, that the Church in turn made judgements about aspects related to it. Pico, for example, wrote twelve volumes against divinatory astrology, which influenced decisions concerning this practice over the ensuing centuries.
Readers may now see for themselves what Innocent VIII wrote, in what is said to be the Church’s first universal ban on a book.
SDWr.
CONTENTS
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
LATIN ORIGINAL
EXCERPTS FROM HISTORIANS
Condemnation of Certain Propositions
of Giovanni Pico, Count of Concordia,
Together with a prohibition to print or read them, under penalty of excommunication
(From the Register in the Vatican Archives)
Summary
Introduction
Giovanni Pico proposes nine hundred propositions of ill-sounding character, etc., to be defended
The pope submits them to examination
By Pico’s own admission, certain of them were found to be erroneous, others scandalous, etc.
Pope Innocent therefore condemns the booklet containing them
He forbids their reading, printing, etc., under penalty of anathema
He declares that Giovanni Pico, who submitted them to the judgment of the Apostolic See, has incurred no blame
He wills that faith be placed in the transcriptions1
And that the present letters be published — and that contumacious persons be punished.
Innocent, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for a perpetual memorial of the matter:
Although, by the charge laid upon us—despite our unworthy merits—we are bound by the office of apostolic service to provide for the salvation of the souls of all men whatsoever, yet with a more earnest care we must keep watch over those things which are found to be contrary either to the divine Majesty or to the integrity of the catholic religion and faith, without which it is not possible to please God.
§1. Lately indeed, when our beloved son, the noble man Giovanni Pico, Count of Concordia, had caused nine hundred conclusions pertaining to various fields of learning to be publicly posted, and to be published in diverse public places of the beloved City—wherein we dwell with the Roman Curia—as well as in other parts of the world, offering himself, as is customary, to defend the contents of those same conclusions in public disputations to be held thereupon in the same Curia; and when it was asserted by certain men zealous for the faith that some among those conclusions were contrary to the aforesaid faith, erroneous, scandalous and ill-sounding, and suspected of unsound doctrine, and that as a result the minds of many of the faithful were greatly scandalised, and the divine Majesty, the honour of the Christian religion, and the dignity of the Apostolic See not a little offended—
§ 2. We, then, wishing to safeguard the integrity of the faith and to forestall scandals of this kind, entrusted and commanded our venerable brother John, Bishop of Tournai, master of our household—of whose uprightness of life, learning, and zeal for religion we have the fullest confidence—that, having summoned certain then-designated venerable brothers of ours, bishops, and other professors of sacred theology and of both laws, specially appointed thereto by us and residing in the said Curia, together with the aforesaid Count, he should cause the contents of the said conclusions to be diligently examined and discussed by them; and that they should determine whether any of them, by force of their wording, diverged from the Catholic Faith, or savoured of heresy, or were doubtful and ambiguous, and might easily be drawn to an erroneous understanding in matters of faith; and, once the deceptive entanglement of words had first been unravelled, he should report to us the unanimous determination of the bishops and professors, in order that, being duly informed thereof, we might be able to make provision on the matter as was fitting—just as is set forth more fully in certain of our letters in brief form.
§ 3. Afterwards, both the Bishop of Tournai and the bishops, professors of theology, and doctors of both laws who had been convoked by him at our command—after a long and diligent discussion, and a repeated, careful and praiseworthy examination of the said conclusions and their contents, carried out both in the presence and in the absence of the said Count, and at times even in our own presence—reported to us in unanimous agreement that according to both the Count’s own interpretation and that of others:
Certain of the aforesaid conclusions were heretical or savoured of heresy;
Some were scandalous and offensive to devout ears;
Many revived the errors of pagan philosophers long since abolished and forgotten;
Others fostered the perfidy of the Jews;
And not a few propositions which, under a certain disguise of natural philosophy, strive to lend respectability to certain arts that are hostile to the Catholic Faith and injurious to the human race—arts most sharply condemned by their own canons and by the doctrines of the Catholic doctors.
§ 4. We, therefore, who hold the place of our Redeemer upon earth, must direct the attention of unceasing thought towards the guardianship of his flock and the salvation of souls, removing what is harmful and supplying what is profitable. We are bound—being both willing and obliged to provide as duty requires—to ensure that the aforesaid propositions, which sound ill and contrary to the faith, do not damnably corrupt the hearts of the faithful.
And since it would be lengthy and burdensome to insert into the present letters, in detail and individually, all those conclusions and propositions which were doctrinally condemned by them, together with the reasons for their condemnation, we therefore—by the counsel of our venerable brothers, the cardinals of the Holy Roman Church—do, by apostolic authority and the tenor of these presents,2 condemn and reprobate the booklet of the said nine hundred conclusions—notwithstanding that it may contain some which are Catholic and true—because of the admixture therein of the aforementioned damnable assertions.
§ 5. And furthermore, lest the reading of that work be able to perpetuate the scandal which, as we have said, has already been caused, and perhaps hereafter lead to some greater evil, we do—by the said authority and under penalty of excommunication to be incurred ipso facto—forbid all the faithful of Christ henceforth to presume in any way to read, write, or print it, or to cause it to be read, written, or printed, or to listen to it while being read by others. And to those who now possess it in written or printed form, or who may do so in future, we command, by the same authority and under the same penalty, that they burn it within three days from the time they receive notice of these presents.
§ 6. As for the aforesaid Count, who, as he himself affirmed, published and proposed the said conclusions solely for the sake of scholastic disputation and under the correction of the Apostolic See, and who has at length professed that those same conclusions are to be held as they have been judged by us and by the aforesaid professors—whose judgment in this matter, as stated above, we approve by apostolic authority—and also because he has sworn an oath that he will never at any time defend such things, we do by the said authority decree and declare that he has incurred no mark of unfavourable estimation on account of the foregoing.
§ 7. And furthermore, because it would be difficult to carry these presents to each and every city and diocese of the faithful, we will and by apostolic authority decree that a transcript of these same letters, sealed with the seal of some ecclesiastical prelate and signed by the hand of a public notary, shall everywhere be accorded full faith, just as would be given to the original letters themselves, were they to be produced or shown.
§ 8. We command the ordinaries of the places to whom these present letters or their authentic transcripts shall come, that they cause the foregoing to be published throughout their cities and dioceses, in the churches, during the solemn celebration of Masses, so that no one may be able to plead ignorance thereof. And we likewise command both them and the inquisitors of heretical depravity, that if—God forbid—it should come to pass that the said Count, contrary to his confession and oath, or any other persons whatsoever, should in future attempt anything in violation of our mandates of this kind, they shall not neglect to carry out that which, according to the canonical sanctions and the decrees of the holy fathers established against heretics, pertains to their office. Let them restrain the disobedient by ecclesiastical censure, setting aside any appeal.
Notwithstanding if there be granted to any persons, individually or collectively, by Apostolic See, any indult whereby they may not be interdicted, suspended, or excommunicated by apostolic letters not making full, express, and word-for-word mention of such indult.
Let no one therefore, etc.
Given at Rome, at St Peter’s, in the year of the Lord’s Incarnation one thousand four hundred and eighty-seven, on the day before the Nones of August, in the third year of our pontificate.
Dated: 4 August 1487, in the third year of our pontificate.
Original available here. Base translation made with AI, each line checked by a human.
In our concern not to suggest that Pico himself was the subject of this condemnation, this piece was originally titled “Pope Innocent VIII's condemnation of Pico della Mirandola's 900 propositions.” However, the reader kindly pointed out that this was misleading, because it was Pico's book which was condemned, rather than all 900 propositions. For this reason, we have amended the title and thank him for his comments.
Damnatio nonnullarum propositionum
Ioannis Pici, comitis Concordiae,
cum inhibitione illas imprimendi ac legendi, sub poena excomunicationis.
Ex Regest. In Archiv. Vatic.
SUMMARIUM
Exordium
Ioannes Picus noningentas propositiones male sonantes etc. substinendas proponit ;
Eas exaimini subiicit Pontifex;
Ipsius Pici confessione, nonnullae erroneae, scandalosae aliquae etc. repertae sunt.
Libellum itaque eas continentem damnat Innocentius;
Eorumdem lectionem, impressionem etc. interdicit sub poena anathematis.
Ioannem vero Picum, qui eas iudicio Sedis Apost. submisit, nullam malam notam incurrisse declarant
Transumptis fidem vult adhiberi
Praesentesque literas publicari; — Et in contumaces animadverti.
Innocentius episcopus servus servorum Dei, ad futuram rei memoriam.
Etsi ex iniuncto nobis, licet insufficientibus meritis, desuper apostolicae servitutis officio, hominum quorumlibet animarum saluti consulere teneamur, propensiori tamen cura ad ea invigilare debemus, quae, vel divinae Maiestati aut integritati catholicae religionis et fidei, sine qua Deo placere non possumus, comperiuntur adversa.
§ 1. Nuper siquidem, cum dilectus filius nobilis vir Ioannes Picus, Concordiae comes, noningentas conclusiones variarum facultatum sonantes publice affigi, et in diversis locis publicis almae Urbis, in qua cum Romana Curia residemus et aliis mundi partibus publicari fecisset, offerens se, ut moris est, contenta in illis, in publicis desuper habendis disputationibus in eadem Curia substentare, et a nonnullis zelum fidei habentibus assereretur nonnullas ex eisdem conclusionibus praefatae fidei contrarias, erroneas, scandalosas et malesonantes, ac de non sana doctrina suspectas esse, et exinde multorum fidelium mentes plurimum scandalizari, et divinam Maiestatem, ac religionis christianae decus, Apostolicaeque Sedis honorem non parum laedi.
§ 2. Nos tunc integritati fidei consulere, et scandalis huiusmodi obviare volentes, venerabili fratri Ioanni episc. Tornacen., domus nostrae magistro, de cuius morum integritate, literarum scientia et zelo religionis plurimum confidimus, commisimus et mandavimus ut, vocatis nonnullis tunc expressis venerabilibus fratribus nostris episcopis et aliis sacrae theologiae ac utriusque iuris professoribus, ad id a nobis specialiter nominatis, in dicta Curia degentibus, ac praefato comite, contenta in dictis conclusionibus per eos mature examinari et discuti faceret; et an aliquae ex illis, ex vi verborum, a fide catholica dissonare, aut haeresim sapere, seu dubias et ancipites esse, et ad erroneum sensum in fide trahi facile posse comperirentur; et explicato prius quid captiosa verborum congeries protenderet, concordem episcoporum et professorum determinationem nobis referret, ut, habita huiusmodi relatione fideli, desuper opportune providere possemus, prout in quibusdam literis nostris in forma brevis plenius continetur.
§ 3. Postmodum vero tam Tornacen., quam per eum convocati de nostro mandato episcopi, theologiae professores ac utriusque iuris doctores praefati, post diutinam et diligentem discussionem, et saepius, tum praesente, tum absente dicto comite, reiteratum, nonnunquam etiam in nostra praesentia, accuratum et laudabile examen dictarum conclusionum et contentorum in eis, nobis concorditer retulerunt nonnullas ex conclusionibus praedictis, tam secundum propriam eiusdem comitis quam aliorum opinionem, haereticas aut haeresim sapientes, aliquas scandalosas piarumque aurium offensivas, plerasque etiam renovantes errores gentilium philosophorum iam dudum abolitos et obsoletos, ac alias perfidiam Iudaeorum foventes; nec non complures, quae, sub quodam fuco philosophiae naturalis, honestare nituntur artes quasdam fidei catholicae et humano generi inimicas, a suis canonibus et doctrinis catholicorum doctorum acerrime damnatas propositiones.
§ 4. Nos igitur, qui Redemptoris nostri locum tenemus in terris, circa gregis sui custodiam et animarum salutem iugis cogitationis attentione intendere, submovendo noxia et profutura ministrando, debemus, ne propositiones praedictae male et contra fidem sonantes corda fidelium damnabiliter corrumpant, providere volentes, ut debemus; et quoniam prolixum et operosum esset in specie et singillatim praesentibus inserere omnes illas conclusiones et propositiones per eos magistraliter damnatas cum causis damnationis earum; idcirco, de consilio venerabilium fratrum nostrorum S. R. E. cardinalium, libellum noningentarum conclusionum praedictarum, quamvis aliquas contineat catholicas et veras, propter admixtionem tamen praedictarum damnabilium assertionum, auctoritate apostolica, praesentium tenore damnamus et reprobamus.
§ 5. Et insuper, ne illius lectio continuare valeat scandalum, ut praemisimus, generatum, et in futurum ad aliud forsan maius inducat, sub excommunicationis poena ipso facto incurrenda, omnibus christifidelibus, ne illum de caetero legere, scribere aut imprimere, seu legi, scribi aut imprimi facere, vel aliis legentibus audire quoquo modo praesumant, dicta auctoritate inhibemus; et illum descriptum vel impressum nunc et pro tempore habentibus, ut illum comburere, infra triduum a die habitae notitiae praesentium, sub eadem poena, dicta auctoritate mandamus.
§ 6. Praefatum autem comitem, qui vero antedictas conclusiones gratia tantum scholasticae disceptationis et sub Apostolicae Sedis correctione, ut asserebat, publicavit et posuit; et tandem easdem tales esse habendas professus est, quales iudicantur per nos et professores praedictos, quorum iudicium in hac parte, ut praemittitur, auctoritate apostolica approbamus; et etiam quia iureiurando promisit nullo tempore se talia defensurum, nullam ob praemissa incurrisse sinistrae aestimationis notam praefata auctoritate decernimus et declaramus.
§ 7. Et insuper, quia difficile foret praesentes literas ad singulas civitates et dioeceses fidelium deferre, volumus et apostolica auctoritate decernimus quod earumdem literarum transumpto, sigillo alicuius praelati ecclesiastici munito, et manu publici notarii subscripto, plena ubique fides adhibeatur, prout adhiberetur ipsis originalibus literis, si forent exhibitae vel ostensae.
§ 8. Mandantes locorum ordinariis, ad quorum notitiam praesentes literae seu transumpta authentica pervenerint, ut praemissa per eorum civitates et dioeceses in ecclesiis intra missarum solemnia faciant publicari, ne quispiam valeat de eis ignorantiam allegare, et tam eis quam haereticae pravitatis inquisitoribus, ut si, quod absit, contingat eumdem comitem, contra eius confessionem et iuramentum, aliquid in posterum attentari, et alios quoscumque mandatis nostris huiusmodi non obtemperare, quae, iuxta canonicas sanctiones et sanctorum Patrum decreta in haereticos statuta, eorum incumbunt officio, exequi non omittant. Contradictores per censuram ecclesiasticam, appellatione postposita, compescendo. Non obstantibus si aliquibus communiter vel divisim a Sede Apostolica indultum existat quod interdici, suspendi vel excommunicari non possint per literas apostolicas non facientes plenam et expressam ac de verbo ad verbum de indulto huiusmodi mentionem.
Nulli ergo etc.
Datum Romae apud Sanctum Petrum, anno Incarnationis dominicae millesimo quadringentesimo octuagesimo septimo, pridie nonas augusti, pontificatus nostri anno III.
Dat. die 4 augusti 1487, pontif. anno III.
Excerpts from historians
Fr Reuben Parsons gives the following account:
In 1487 Pope Innocent VIII condemned certain propositions defended by the celebrated John Pico della Mirandola. When only twenty-three years old, this philosopher and theologian had drawn from theology, physics, mathematics, magic, and cabalistics, a series of nine hundred propositions, which he offered to defend in Rome (y. 1486), “with all respect to the authority of the Church.”
Some of these theses were very unorthodox, but the young disputant protested that he presented them only “for the sake of scholastic disputation, and subject to the correction of the Apostolic See.” About four hundred of the propositions were taken from Latin, Egyptian, Arabic, and Chaldaic philosophers; the others were opinions of his own.
No one appeared to attack the theses, although Pico guaranteed all expenses of travel, etc. But the learned were irritated by his daring, and they presented to the Pope thirteen of the propositions as heretical, and after mature examination they were condemned. Pico defended them in several publications; and while, says Cantû, "we cannot derive a very clear notion of his meaning from his scholastic jargon, his task may be regarded as an attempt to reconcile Plato with Aristotle, and Pagan theology with the Mosaic and Christian.”
In his Heptameron, Pico says: “Moses and the Prophets, Christ and the Apostles, Pythagoras and Plutarch, and in general, all the priests and philosophers of the ancient world, veiled their knowledge under images, because the crowd could not appreciate the truth, and understood what the words by no means indicated. It is certain that Moses, in his enumeration of the six days, did not speak of the creation of the visible world... Christ confided, in secrecy, certain truths to His disciples, and the knowledge of these truths is the great foundation of our faith;" and this knowledge can be acquired, insisted Pico, only by means of the Cabala.
“Who does not see,” asks Canti, “whither such eclecticism leads? If it was applauded by the Academies and by the Medicean court, where such things were fashionable, it could not please Rome; and although Pico repeatedly protested his submission to the Church, he really substituted himself for the Church when he defined and explained dogma by means of Hebrew or the Cabala.” Innocent VIII said of Pico: “Let him write poetry; that is more consonant with his talent;” and although the Pontiff protected him from molestation, he would not withdraw his condemnation of the propositions.3
Fernarnd Morret, in a work described as “masterful” by Charles Coulombe in his foreword to Morello’s book, writes:
Giovanni Pico, of the princes of Mirandola and Concordia, was a precocious scholar who, at the early age of ten years, won renown as an orator and a poet, was admitted to the University of Bologna at the age of fourteen, and at the age of twenty-three challenged all the scholars of the world to a public discussion of 900 theses de omni re scibili. Pico was an adventurous scholar, dreaming of a revival of religion by a more critical study of the sacred texts and a more attentive comparison with ancient religions; he was also a daring thinker, affirming that sin, limited in time, can never merit eternal punishment, that Christ did not descend into hell save in a virtual manner, and that no science can better prove the divinity of Christ than magic.
By a brief dated August 4th, I486, Innocent VIII condemned the 900 theses of Pico della Mirandola. The young scholar humbly submitted. A few years later he died, at the age of thirty-one, in one of his villas near Florence, at the very moment when, by the influence of Savonarola, he was disabused of the world's vanities and of human knowledge and was thinking of entering the Order of St. Dominic.4
Mourret also includes the following footnote:
Pico della Mirandola, shortly before his death, addressed Alexander VI in a memoir containing an exposition of his personal views as to the condemned propositions. The Pope, in a special brief, assured him that he had never been judged guilty of personal or formal heresy.
It has sometimes been maintained that Alexander VI thus contradicted his predecessor and approved the famous theses. (See Il Rosmini for 1889.) But this is a mistake. Alexander's brief exculpated Pico only from formal heresy, that is, personal and imputable, and approved only the ideas set forth in the memoir.
Cf. Trippi in Il papato, XXI, pp. 37 sqq., and Pastor, V, 344.
HELP KEEP THE WM REVIEW ONLINE WITH WM+!
As we expand The WM Review we would like to keep providing free articles for everyone.
Our work takes a lot of time and effort to produce. If you have benefitted from it please do consider supporting us financially.
A subscription gets you access to our exclusive WM+ material, and helps ensure that we can keep writing and sharing free material for all.
(We make our WM+ material freely available to clergy, priests and seminarians upon request. Please subscribe and reply to the email if this applies to you.)
Subscribe to WM+ now to make sure you always receive our material. Thank you!
Read Next:
Observations on the Influence of the Occult in Traditional Catholic Discourse
Follow on Twitter, YouTube and Telegram:
In other words, He decrees that full credence be given to certified copies of the document.
In legal and ecclesiastical documents, "these presents" (from Latin praesentes) refers to the document itself—that is, the current letter, decree, or instrument being issued. The phrase “these presents” functions as a formal way of saying “this document” or “this present writing,” and is used particularly in the expression “by these presents” (Latin: tenore praesentium), meaning “by the authority and content of this document.” It is a standard formula in papal and royal chancery language.
Fernand Mourret, History of the Catholic Church, Vol. V, pp 271
Thank you for posting this very important information, a bulwark against Morello's 'refutations' of the numerous well-grounded complaints about his position on matters that impinge un the purity of the Catholic Faith. The shallowness and arrogance of his response is underscored by his complaint that people are wasting his time.