Heresy of the Free Spirit

← Encyclopedia

A soul brought wholly into God, the teaching ran, arrives where command no longer reaches it. Nothing in such a soul remains that the law was written to restrain; it owes obedience to no precept, because it has become what every precept was trying to produce. Fasting, prayer, and reverence at the elevation of the Host belong to those still laboring toward God; the soul that has arrived is past them. To the bishops and inquisitors of the Latin West, that last step — from union to license — was the moment a mystic crossed out of sanctity into the worst kind of error, and the name they fixed to it was the Heresy of the Free Spirit.

The phrase covers a body of teaching the Church condemned across the later Middle Ages, between roughly the late thirteenth century and the fifteenth. It had no founder, no creed, and no visible institution. It took shape instead in the documents of its prosecution — inquisitorial registers, episcopal sentences, and the decrees of a council — so that the heresy and the record of its suppression are, to an uncomfortable degree, the same thing. What survives in volume is the prosecution. The prosecuted are harder to recover, since most are known only in the words of those condemning them.

Ad nostrum and the checklist of error

The category’s sharpest legal formulation is the decree Ad nostrum qui desideranter, drawn up at the Council of Vienne, which sat under Clement V from October 1311 into May 1312 (the constitution was promulgated within the Clementinae by John XXII in 1317). The council met for the suppression of the Templars and the reform of religious life; among its acts it enrolled into canon law a description of an “abominable sect” of “malignant men known as beghards and beguines,” lay men and women of the towns of Germany and the Low Countries who lived a religious life without vows or an approved rule. To this sect the decree assigned eight errors. A person can reach in this life a perfection beyond which no further growth in grace is possible, becoming incapable of sin. The perfected need neither fast nor pray, because the body’s appetites have been wholly subjected to the spirit. Those in this “spirit of liberty” stand under no human obedience and no ecclesiastical precept. They can attain final beatitude here as fully as in the life to come. Every intellectual nature is blessed in itself and needs no light of glory to see God. The practice of the virtues belongs to the imperfect, and the perfect soul has no further use for them. Acts the flesh inclines to are not sinful when nature draws the soul to them. And one need not rise at the elevation of the Host nor show the sacrament reverence, since to dwell on such things would draw the perfected soul down from the heights of its contemplation.

The decree was paired with a second, Cum de quibusdam mulieribus, which declared the beguine status itself “perpetually prohibited and completely abolished” — a blow aimed at unenclosed religious women who answered to no abbess and wrote, sometimes, in languages the schools did not control. Read together, the two constitutions criminalized both a form of life and a way of speaking about God. The eight articles in particular outlived their occasion. For the next two centuries they functioned as a template: a suspect’s answers were measured against the list, and a sufficient match returned a verdict. The genius and the danger of such a checklist is that it can find what it contains. Standardized questions, distributed across distant tribunals, elicit standardized answers, and the resulting uniformity reads back as evidence that a single organized movement was abroad — which is precisely the inference the modern study of the heresy has had to test.

Cohn against Lerner: was there a sect at all

Whether any coordinated movement ever answered to the name is the central scholarly question about the Free Spirit, and the answer has moved. An older account took the documents largely at their word. Norman Cohn, in The Pursuit of the Millennium (1957; revised 1970), set the Brethren of the Free Spirit beside flagellants, Anabaptists, and Ranters as a recurring European underground — a current of mystical anarchism whose adepts, persuaded of their own perfection, claimed a self-deifying freedom that dissolved property, chastity, and law alike. Cohn’s chapters on the Free Spirit were read far outside medieval studies; in the 1960s they were taken up as a long genealogy of antinomian revolt.

The reading that displaced his is Robert E. Lerner’s The Heresy of the Free Spirit in the Later Middle Ages (University of California Press, 1972; revised, Notre Dame, 1991), cataloged by the press here. Building on Herbert Grundmann’s work on the medieval religious movements, Lerner reread the registers and concluded that no coherent, organized sect of the kind Cohn described had existed. What the sources record is a spectrum of voluntary poverty and quietist contemplation among scattered mystics, eccentrics, and devout laypeople — heterogeneous, uncoordinated, and for the most part neither libertine nor revolutionary. The unity belonged to the prosecutors. Alarmed authorities, working from a shared list of errors, assembled “the Free Spirit” as a category and then read the language of union that turned up under interrogation as a license for vice. On this account the documented uniformity of the heresy is an artifact of the documents’ production: inquisitors could manufacture the appearance of a sect by the very instrument they used to hunt it.

The dispute is not merely about one medieval heresy. It is a case study in how the record of persecution can constitute its own object — how a charge, repeated across tribunals and codified in canon law, can call into apparent existence the thing it claims to find. Most current work follows Lerner’s skepticism while granting that the language the inquisitors fastened on was genuinely circulating, in books and in preaching, and that some who spoke it meant something every bit as radical as the decree feared.

Marguerite Porete and the annihilated soul

One figure stands partly clear of that fog, because she left a book that can still be read. Marguerite Porete, a beguine from Hainaut, was burned in the Place de Grève in Paris on 1 June 1310, the year before the Council of Vienne sat — the only medieval woman whose major theological work survives in full despite her execution as a heretic. The book is Le Mirouer des simples âmes anienties — The Mirror of Simple Souls — a long allegorical dialogue in Old French among Love, Reason, and the Soul. A bishop of Cambrai had already condemned it and burned a copy in her presence at Valenciennes, warning her not to circulate it; she circulated it anyway, even sending it to a bishop for approval, and was finally handed to the inquisitor William Humbert, confessor to Philip IV, who was at that moment also prosecuting the Templars. She refused to swear the inquisitor’s oath, refused to answer, and refused absolution; she was condemned without ever being examined in person, on articles extracted from her book by a commission of Paris masters.

The Mirror’s doctrine is adnientement — annihilation. The soul, drawn far enough into divine love, is brought back to the being it has in God before it has any being of its own, and in that return it “takes leave of the Virtues” (prent congié des Vertuz), wills nothing of its own, and cares nothing for the consolations of God or his gifts. Read by her judges, this was the Free Spirit exactly: a soul claiming to be past the virtues and past the law. Read within the tradition of apophatic theology, the same sentences sit close to teaching the Church did not burn — to the emptying of self so that God may act unimpeded, which the apophatic mystics inherited from Pseudo-Dionysius and a Neoplatonist account of return to the One. Porete is precise rather than libertine: the annihilated soul does not despise the virtues but has become Love, which does not need to be commanded to its own works; the distinction between desiring and disdaining the sacraments has fallen away because the will whose office is to desire has been given over wholly to God. Two of the eight errors of Ad nostrum — that the perfect soul dismisses the virtues, and that it need not rise for the Host — are very nearly transcriptions of her condemned propositions. Robert Lerner called the decree the heresy’s birth certificate; the Mirror supplied much of the wording on the certificate.

The line between sanctioned and forbidden annihilation

The vocabulary that damned Porete was not hers alone, and this is what makes the boundary so unstable. Meister Eckhart held his second Paris regency in 1311–1313, beginning months after her death, in the same Dominican house from which her prosecution had been directed; his German sermons turn on abegescheidenheit (detachment), gelâzenheit (releasement), the soul’s uncreated grunt, and a poverty so complete it wants nothing, knows nothing, has nothing — a formula that runs strikingly close to a passage in the Mirror. In 1329 the bull In agro dominico condemned twenty-eight Eckhartian propositions. His disciple Johannes Tauler preached the same ground of the soul to the Rhineland devout and was never condemned at all. The beguine mystics of the generation before Porete — Hadewijch in Brabant, Mechthild of Magdeburg in Saxony — wrote of a love that overwhelms the self in language no less extreme, and they too escaped the charge. The same annihilation-language could be sanctity or heresy depending on who spoke it, where, in what tongue, and whether an institution had reason to read it as a threat. Eckhart, Tauler, and the beguines shared Porete’s idiom; they were not condemned as Free Spirits. The distinction was drawn by authority, and not always consistently — a learned Latin sermon by a Dominican master fared differently from a French book by a laywoman without vows.

What the Church was guarding against can be stated as a single structural worry. If union with God is total, the moral law — written for souls still apart from God — appears to lose its purchase, and the perfected may seem licensed to do as they please. Orthodox mysticism met this by insisting that the emptied soul is filled with God’s own willing, so that it does spontaneously what the law commands and could not will otherwise; the heresy, as the inquisitors framed it, was the inference that the perfected soul may therefore grant the body whatever it asks. Between those two readings of the same experience lies the entire history of the charge. The Free Spirit is, in the end, the name a tradition gave to the second reading — the point at which it ruled that this particular step had gone too far.

Sources and scholarship

The canonical primary text of the category is Ad nostrum, surviving in the Clementinae, book V, title III, chapter 3; the standard edition is Emil Friedberg’s Corpus Iuris Canonici, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1879–81), long in the public domain and digitized through several scholarly libraries. The inquisitorial and chronicle record of the Porete trial is gathered in Paul Fredericq, Corpus documentorum inquisitionis haereticae pravitatis Neerlandicae, 5 vols. (Ghent–The Hague, 1889–1906), with the sentence against the Hainaut beguine Margaretha Porete in volume II. Henry Charles Lea’s A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, 3 vols. (1887–88), treats the beguines and the Free Spirit at length in its second volume and remains a usable nineteenth-century synthesis. The two interpretive poles of modern study are Norman Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium (1957; rev. 1970), and Robert E. Lerner, The Heresy of the Free Spirit in the Later Middle Ages (Notre Dame Press reissue), whose deflationary account has shaped the field since 1972. On Porete specifically, Sean L. Field’s The Beguine, the Angel, and the Inquisitor (Notre Dame, 2012) reconstructs the trial in full; Bernard McGinn’s The Flowering of Mysticism: Men and Women in the New Mysticism, 1200–1350 (Crossroad, 1998; Open Library record), volume III of The Presence of God, situates the whole beguine corpus theologically; and Amy Hollywood’s The Soul as Virgin Wife (1995) reads Mechthild, Porete, and Eckhart together. The Mirror itself was identified as Porete’s only in 1946, by Romana Guarnieri, after six centuries of anonymous circulation.

The Free Spirit also frames a comparative question that recurs wherever a mysticism presses union to its limit. The Latin Quietists of the seventeenth century — Molinos, Madame Guyon, Fénelon — were condemned for a doctrine of pure passive love that the Catharist dualists, a wholly different and earlier heresy, never approached; later still, the Jewish messianic movements of Sabbateanism and Frankism turned a kabbalistic logic of redemption into the open transvaluation of the commandment, holding that the law is fulfilled through its annulment. None of these is the medieval heresy, and none descends from it. They are independent arrivals at the same edge: the place where a Christian mysticism, or any tradition that teaches the self can be wholly remade in God, must decide whether the remade self stands over the law or under it. Quietists, certain antinomian strands of later Protestantism, and some readings of nondual mysticism return to that edge again and again. The Free Spirit names the moment the Latin Church looked at the step past it and ruled that no soul, however far into God, was permitted to take it.

→ In the library: The Cloud of Unknowing (Underhill, 1912)

→ Related: Gnosis · Neoplatonism · Middle Ages · Beguine Mysticism · Meister Eckhart · Johannes Tauler · Apophatic Theology · Christian Mysticism · Mysticism · Heresy · Quietism · Catharism · Sabbateanism · Frankism