ABSTRACT
Speculation on the nature of the miraculous voiced by natural philosophers and preachers did not take place in a philosophical vacuum, but was put to practical use. In the thirteenth century, although the church preferred to stress the virtuous life of the saint, the believers continued to regard the performance of miracles as the surest evidence of sanctity. The effort of contemporary preachers to praise the virtues of the saint failed to dampen the need for more visible signs of the intervention of the sacred among the believers. Beginning with the canonization bulls of Innocent III, an effort was made to harness this popular faith in miracles and the new pilgrimage sites where they had allegedly occurred as a means of mobilizing the believers against the threat of heresy. Innocent attempted to both curb the excesses of popular enthusiasm, and to establish a sound evidential foundation to the belief in miracles; while at the same time he himself expressed a cautious faith in the supernatural.1 Both Waldensians and Cathars had voiced skepticism concerning the Christian cult of saints, and the Jews continued to regard the miracles of such prophets as Moses and Elijah as superior to those of the Christians. Since Satan, as a fallen angel, and his servants the demons and heretics might perform deeds which to the untrained eye of the faithful might appear to be miraculous, it became necessary to apply the highest standards of proof to the alleged miracles of potential saints. After their followers had established cults in their honor, several false saints, such as Ermanno Pungiluppo, Gerard Segarelli and Guglielma of Milan, in the course of a local inquiry, had turned out to be heretics and their recalcitrant followers were persecuted by the Inquisition.2
