第94章 THE EXAMINATION IN PRISON.LENT,(7)

And there was a great deliverance to come：but not of this kind.The voices of God--how can we deny it？--are often，though in a loftier sense，like those fantastic voices that keep the word of promise to the ear but break it to the heart.They promised her a great victory：and she had it，and also the fullest deliverance：but only by the stake and the fire，which were not less dreadful to Jeanne than to any other girl of her age.They did not speak to deceive her，but she was deceived；they kept their promise，but not as she understood it.

"These all died in faith，not having received the promises，but having seen them afar off，and were persuaded of them，and embraced them."Jeanne too was persuaded of them，but was not to receive them--except in the other way.

On the afternoon of the same day (it was still Lent，and Jeanne fasted，whatever our priests may have done)，she was again closely questioned on the subject，this time，of Franquet d'Arras，who，as has been above narrated，was taken by her in the course of some indiscriminate fighting in the north.She was asked if it was not mortal sin to take a man as prisoner of war and then give him up to be executed.There was evidently no perception of similarities in the minds of the judges，for this was precisely what had been done in the case of Jeanne herself；but even she does not seem to have been struck by the fact.Their object，apparently，was by proving that she was in a state of sin，to prove also that her voices were of no authority，as being unable to discover so simple a principle as this.

When they spoke to her of "one named Franquet d'Arras，who was executed at Lagny，"she answered that she consented to his death，as he deserved it，for he had confessed to being a murderer，a thief，and a traitor.She said that his trial lasted fifteen days，the Bailli de Senlis and the law officers of Lagny being the judges；and she added that she had wished to have Franquet，to exchange him for a man of Paris，Seigneur de Lours (corrected，innkeeper at the sign of l'Ours)；but when she heard that this man was dead，and when the Bailli told her that she would go very much against justice if she set Franquet free，she said to the Bailli："Since my man is dead whom I wished to deliver，do with this one whatever justice demands."Asked，if she took the money or allowed it to be taken by him who had taken Franquet，she answered，that she was not a money changer or a treasurer of France，to deal with money.

She was then reminded that having assaulted Paris on a holy day，having taken the horse of Monseigneur de Senlis，having thrown herself down from the tower of Beaurevoir，having consented to the death of Franquet d'Arras，and being still dressed in the costume of a man，did she not think that she must be in a state of mortal sin？She answered to the first question about Paris："I do not think I was guilty of mortal sin，and if I have sinned it is to God that I would make it known，and in confession to God by the priest."To the second question，concerning the horse of Senlis，she answered，that she believed firmly that there was not mortal sin in this，seeing it was valued，and the Bishop had due notice of it，and at all events it was sent back to the Seigneur de la Trémouille to give it back to Monseigneur de Senlis.The said horse was of no use to her；and，on the other hand，she did not wish to keep it because she heard that the Bishop was displeased that his horse should have been taken.And as for the tower of Beaurevoir："I did it not to destroy myself，but in the hope of saving myself and of going to the aid of the good people who were in need."But after having done it，she had confessed her sin，and asked pardon of our Lord，and had pardon of Him.And she allowed that it was not right to have made that leap，but that she did wrong.

The next day an important question was introduced，the only one as yet which Jeanne does not seem to have been able to answer with understanding.On points of fact or in respect to her visions she was always quite clear，but questions concerning the Church were beyond her knowledge.It is only indeed after some time has elapsed that we perceive why such a question was introduced.