rennes17 a écrit:
Here is one example of Sauniere's poverty - a letter from Noubel, a furniture shop at Carcassonne dated 7 January 1914:
On looking at your account, I see that you still owe me 6,037 francs, not counting interest, for furniture delivered, for the most part, in 1908. As we must bring this to an end, I have to ask you if you are in a position to settle your account. In the event that you are not able to pay me the full amount, I shall have to ask you to give me a lien on your goods. This will not cause you any inconvenience, and I shall feel much happier. In these circumstances, you will be able to gain some time by just paying the interest."
Well his income for 1914 was 8473,40. Everyone agrees that however he got his money up to 1909 this source disappeared from 1910 onwards.
From here on his monthly income appeared to be constant. But since the charge of Mass selling was dropped it wasn't from this where he got his money. But to even suggest that Sauniere could make these levels of income from selling masses is the theory of an idiot. Especially since the church found no evidence of him selling masses, if he had been selling at this level it would have been impossible to keep that secret.
In 1908 Sauniere's own accounts say he bought furniture from Maison Noubel in Carcassonne to the value of 7 045,95 F. So where your figure has come from is anyone's guess but we have seen that you can make things up in order to make a point. It's a very understanding person that waits six years for payment.
According to HIS records his annual income started to increase dramatically from 1898, immediately after the murder of Gellis actually. His income reached a peak in 1901 when it reached 25004,70 F for the year. In March 1901 he withdraw 20000 F. The reason for this massive (for the day) withdrawal has never been explained.
Jan-Feb 1905 sees again a large shift of money, it is about this time when the authorities started getting interested in him and trumped up the charge that it must ALL be coming from mass selling solely on the grounds that it couldn't have come from anywhere else. That Sauniere sold masses isn't disputed, what you are trying to gloss over Smith is the fact this was not illegal up to a certain level.
The only reason he was bought to trial was his levels of income and expenditure and this was found to have NOT come from Mass selling and the charge was dropped. Sauniere however refused to tell the Bishop from where he was getting his money and it was this that had got him suspended but he had already resigned at this point.
Sauniere carried on saying mass in a small chapel at the back of the Presbytery and all of the villagers went here rather than to the church and the newly appointed Cure who had to walk from Couiza every day and preached to an empty church.
Sauniere was suspended whilst he was a priest because of his fervant Royalist tendencies and was exiled to Perpignon for a while, but he was reinstated.
To suggest that Sauniere made enough to built the Villa Bethania, the shade gardens and the Tour Magdala solely from selling masses is the suggestions of a section of desperate idiots.
Your only objection to Nicolas Mazet's research is that you can't deal with his conclusions which is pathetic.