130 THE FRATICELLI. heresy they would win a triumph that might prove permanent. The situation was so artificial and so untenable that a catastrophe was inevitable, and it might be precipitated by the veriest trifle. In 1321, when the persecution of the Spirituals was at its height, the Dominican inquisitor, Jean de Beaune, whom we have seen as the colleague of Bernard Gui and the jailer of Bernard Delicieux, was engaged at Xarbonne in the trial of one of the pro- scribed sect. To pass judgment he summoned an assembly of ex- perts, among whom was the Franciscan Berenger Talon, teacher in the convent of Xarbonne. One of the errors which he repre- sented the culprit as entertaining was that Christ and the apostles, following the way of perfection, had held no possessions, individu- ally or in common. As this was the universal Franciscan doctrine, we can only regard it as a challenge when he summoned Frere Berenger to give his opinion respecting it. Berenger thereupon replied that it was not heretical, having been defined as orthodox in the decretal Exiit, when the inquisitor hotly demanded that he should recant on the spot. The position was critical, and Beren- ger, to save himself from prosecution, interjected an appeal to the pope. He hastened to Avignon, but found that Jean de Beaune had been before him. He was arrested ; the Dominicans every- where took up the question, and the pope allowed it to be clearly seen that his sympathies were with them. Yet the subject was a dangerous one for disputants, as the bull Exiit had anathematized all who should attempt to gloss or discuss its decisions ; and, as a preliminary to reopening the question, John was obliged, March 26, 1322, to issue a special bull, Quia nonnunquam, wherein he suspended, during his pleasure, the censures pronounced in Exiit qui seminat. Having thus intimated that the Church had erred in its former definition, he proceeded to lay before his prelates and doctors the significant question whether the pertinacious as- sertion that Christ and the apostles possessed nothing individually or in common was a heresy.* The extravagances of the Spirituals had borne their fruit, and there was a reaction against the absurd laudation of poverty which had grown to be a fetich. This bore hard on those who had been
- Nicholans Minorita (Baluz. et Mansi III. 207). — Chron. Glassberger ann.
1321— Wadding, ann. 1321, No. 16-19; ann. 1322, No. 49-50.
