Was Joan Of Arc A Heretic?

Was Joan of Arc a Heretic?
The Hundred Years’ War provided a backdrop for the power struggle between the French Prince, Charles VII of France and the English King, Henry VI of England for the French throne (Barlow, Andrews and Pickering 2018, p.3). Initially, the English had the upper hand however towards the end of the war, the French were victorious; riding the English from most of France (Cantor 1999, p.233). This was largely due to the leadership of Joan of Arc who believed that she was the recipient of visions from Christian Saints. They would go on tell her to dress as a man and fight for Charles VII to be crowned the rightful king of the French throne and to reclaim France from Henry VI of England who ruled northern France (Barlow, Andrews
The English were humiliated by Joan’s victories against them; a rural farm girl rendering the great English army powerless, they were determined to exact their ‘revenge’ on her. By charging and executing Joan for heresy and witchcraft, the English were ensuring that their reputations would remain intact and that Joan would no longer pose a treat for the throne. Through linking Joan’s leadership abilities to witchcraft and ultimately undermining her success; the English would be able to exploit the publics’ fear of the supernatural and would be able to recover from the humility of being defeated by a girl. And so, these incentives alone would push the English to find any piece of ‘incriminating’ evidence to send Joan to “…suffer a painful public death,”, “…lay[ing] out enormous amounts of money to guarantee that she was burnt,”, all too eager to “…light the fire under her feet when she was finally executed.” (Nash-Marshall 1999, p.22). Despite inquisitorial trials having to be based upon a diffamatio - charges that were established well before the trails was to begin, the basis of Joan’s trial was solely to be based upon her interrogation alone, “…without anyone, including the accused herself, knowing what charge was being brought against her.”; showing just how much the English wanted to prosecute Joan, seeing as they called a trial with no real
First was when she went to the French prince, Charles, to convince him to reclaim the whole of France, second was during her trial with the English and the third was in 1456 when a “…papal commission reversed the verdict…” of the English inquisition, 25 years after her execution (Lackland 1999, p.264). Out of all 3 investigations, Joan was only ever deemed a heretic once; when she was on trial against the English inquisition. If indeed, Joan was the “…sorceress, diviner, false prophetess, [and] conjurer of evil spirits…” (Trial ex. 1) that her Promoter, Jean D’Estivet, accused her of being; how was she declared an actual saint in 1920 (Lackland 1999, p.264)? This, I believe, is the most significant evidence in proving that the English’s trial was driven solely on the basis of political gain rather than religious merit; as being condemned as a heretic and being canonized as a saint could not be further