In the latter half of the sixteenth century the Roman Inquisition developed criteria to prosecute a series of operative arts, including various forms of divination and magic. Its officials had little interest in alchemy. During that period the Roman Inquisition tried few people for practising alchemy, and it was rarely discussed in official documents. Justifications for prosecuting alchemists did exist, however. In his influential handbook, Directorium inquisitorum, the fourteenth-century inquisitor Nicholas Eymerich had developed a clear rationale for the investigation and prosecution of alchemists as heretics. His position was endorsed in the 1570s by Francisco Peña in his commentary on Eymerich’s handbook. In this article I explore the reasons why alchemy held this ambiguous status. I argue that members of the Dominican Order developed two traditions of thinking about alchemy from Aquinas’s thought. The first, and closest to Aquinas’s own belief, held that alchemy was a natural art that posed no danger to the Christian faith. The second, developed by Eymerich from a selective reading of Aquinas’s writings, indicated specific circumstances in which alchemists could be investigated. The Roman Inquisition’s response to alchemy vacillated between the positions advocated by Aquinas and Eymerich.

中文翻译：

---

在阿奎那和艾默里希之间：罗马宗教裁判所在炼金术审查中使用多米尼加思想

在 16 世纪下半叶，罗马宗教裁判所制定了起诉一系列操作艺术的标准，包括各种形式的占卜和魔法。它的官员对炼金术几乎没有兴趣。那个时期罗马宗教裁判所试炼炼金术的人很少，官方文件也很少讨论。然而，起诉炼金术士的理由确实存在。在其颇具影响力的手册 Directorium inquisitorum 中，14 世纪的审判官 Nicholas Eymerich 为调查和起诉炼金术士作为异教徒提出了明确的理由。1570 年代，弗朗西斯科·佩纳 (Francisco Peña) 在对艾默里奇 (Eymerich) 手册的评论中赞同他的立场。在本文中，我将探讨炼金术为何处于这种模棱两可的地位。我认为多米尼加教团的成员从阿奎那的思想中发展出两种关于炼金术的传统。第一个，也是最接近阿奎那自己信仰的，认为炼金术是一种自然艺术，不会对基督教信仰构成威胁。第二个是 Eymerich 根据对阿奎那著作的选择性阅读而发展起来的，表明了可以调查炼金术士的特定情况。罗马宗教裁判所对炼金术的反应在阿奎那和艾默里奇所主张的立场之间摇摆不定。