Gregory IX: Liber I

Rex pacificus pia miseratione disposuit sibi subditos fore pudicos, pacificos et honestos. Sed effrenata cupiditas, sui prodiga, pacis aemula, mater litium, materia iurgiorum, tot quotidie nova litigia generat, ut, nisi iustitia conatus eius sua virtute reprimeret, et quaestiones ipsius implicitas explicaret, ius humani foederis litigatorum abusus exstingueret, et dato libello repudii concordia extra mundi terminos exsularet. Ideoque lex proditur, ut appetitus noxius sub iuris regula limitetur, per quam genus humanum, ut honeste vivat, alterum non laedat, ius suum unicuique tribuat, informatur.

The King of Peace by pious commiseration has ordained that his subjects be modest, peaceable, and honest. But unbridled cupidity, prodigal of itself, a rival of peace, the mother of suits, the matter of wranglings, generates so many new litigations every day, that, unless Justice by its own virtue were to repress its endeavors and to explicate its entangled questions, the abuse of litigants would extinguish the law of the human covenant, and, a bill of repudiation having been given, concord would go into exile beyond the bounds of the world. And so a law is promulgated, that harmful appetite may be limited under the rule of law, through which the human race is informed to live honestly, to harm no other, and to render to each his own right.

Sane diversas constitutiones et decretales epistolas praedecessorum nostrorum, in diversa dispersas volumina, quarum aliquae propter nimiam similitudinem, et quaedam propter contrarietatem, nonnullae etiam propter sui prolixitatem, confusionem inducere videbantur, aliquae vero vagabantur extra volumina supradicta, quae tanquam incertae frequenter in iudiciis vacillabant, ad communem, et maxime studentium, utilitatem per dilectum filium fratrem Raymundum, capellanum et poenitentiarum nostrum, illas in unum volumen resecatis superfluis providimus redigendas, adiicientes constitutiones nostras et decretales epistolas, per quas nonnulla, quae in prioribus erant dubia, declarantur. Volentes igitur, ut hac tantum compilatione universi utantur in iudiciis et in scholis, districtius prohibemus, ne quis praesumat aliam facere absque auctoritate sedis apostolicae speciali.

Indeed, the diverse constitutions and decretal epistles of our predecessors, scattered through diverse volumes—some of which, on account of excessive similarity, and certain others on account of contrariety, and not a few also on account of their prolixity, seemed to induce confusion, while some in truth wandered outside the aforesaid volumes, which, as if uncertain, frequently vacillated in judgments—we have provided, for the common utility, and especially that of students, through our beloved son Brother Raymond, our chaplain and Penitentiary, to be reduced into one volume, the superfluities having been cut away, adding our constitutions and decretal epistles, through which certain things that in the former were doubtful are declared. Wishing therefore that all use only this compilation in courts and in schools, we more strictly prohibit that anyone presume to make another without the special authority of the Apostolic See.

LIBER PRIMUS.

BOOK ONE.

TITULUS I. DE SUMMA TRINITATE ET FIDE CATHOLICA.

TITLE 1. ON THE SUPREME TRINITY AND THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Tractat de trinitate et ipsius operibus; de fide et articulis fidei. § 3. Tractatur hic de sacramentis ecclesiasticis. Abb.

He treats of the Trinity and its works; of faith and the articles of faith. § 3. Here it is treated of the ecclesiastical sacraments. Abb.

Sic.

Thus.

Innocentius III. in concilio generali, cap. I.

Innocent 3. in the general council, CHAPTER 1.

Firmiter credimus et simpliciter confitemur, quod unus solus est verus Deus, aeternus, immensus et incommutabilis, incomprehensibilis, omnipotens et ineffabilis, Pater, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus: tres quidem personae, sed una essentia, substantia seu natura simplex omnino; Pater a nullo, Filius autem a Patre solo, ac Spiritus sanctus pariter ab utroque, absque initio, semper ac sine fine; Pater generans, Filius nascens, et Spiritus sanctus procedens; consubstantiales, et coaequales, et coomnipotentes, et coaeterni; unum universorum principium; creator omnium visibilium et invisibilium, spiritualium et corporalium; qui sua omnipotenti virtute simul ab initio temporis utramque de nihilo condidit creaturam spiritualem et corporalem, angelicam videlicet et mundanam, ac deinde humanam, quasi communem ex spiritu et corpore constitutam. Diabolus enim et alii daemones a Deo quidem natura creati sunt boni; sed ipsi per se facti sunt mali. Homo vero diaboli suggestione peccavit.

We firmly believe and simply confess that there is one only true God, eternal, immense and incommutable, incomprehensible, omnipotent and ineffable, Father, and Son and Holy Spirit: three persons indeed, but one essence, substance or nature altogether simple; the Father from no one, but the Son from the Father alone, and the Holy Spirit likewise from both, without beginning, always and without end; the Father begetting, the Son being born, and the Holy Spirit proceeding; consubstantial, and coequal, and co-omnipotent, and coeternal; one principle of the universe; creator of all things visible and invisible, spiritual and corporeal; who by his omnipotent power at once from the beginning of time out of nothing founded both the spiritual and the corporeal creature, namely the angelic and the mundane, and then the human, as a sort of common one constituted from spirit and body. For the Devil and the other demons were by God created good by nature; but they themselves by themselves became evil. But man sinned at the Devil’s suggestion.

§ 1. Haec sancta trinitas, secundum communem essentiam individua et secundum personales proprietates discreta, primo per Moysen et sanctos Prophetas aliosque famulos suos iuxta ordinatissimam dispositionem temporum doctrinam humano generi tribuit salutarem. § 2. Et tandem unigenitus Dei Filius Iesus Christus, a tota trinitate communiter incarnatus ex Maria semper virgine Spiritus sancti cooperatione conceptus, verus homo factus, ex anima rationali et humana carne compositus, una in duabus naturis persona, viam vitae manifestius demonstravit. Qui quum secundum divinitatem sit immortalis et impassibilis, idem ipse secundum humanitatem factus est passibilis, et mortalis.

§ 1. This holy Trinity, indivisible according to the common essence and discrete according to the personal properties, first through Moses and the holy Prophets and other servants of his, according to the most well-ordered disposition of the times, bestowed upon the human race a salvific doctrine. § 2. And at length the Only-begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, by the whole Trinity in common incarnate, conceived by the cooperation of the Holy Spirit from Mary ever Virgin, made true man, composed of a rational soul and human flesh, one person in two natures, showed more manifestly the way of life. Who, since according to the divinity he is immortal and impassible, this same one according to humanity was made passible and mortal.

Qui etiam pro salute humani generis in ligno crucis passus et mortuus descendit ad inferos, resurrexit a mortuis, et ascendit in coelum; sed descendit in anima et resurrexit in carne, ascenditque pariter in utroque venturus in fine saeculi, iudicaturus vivos et mortuos, et redditurus singulis secundum opera sua, tam reprobis quam electis, qui omnes cum suis propriis resurgent corporibus, quae nunc gestant, ut recipiant secundum opera sua, sive bona fuerint sive mala, illi cum diabolo poenam perpetuam, et isti cum Christo gloriam sempiternam. § 3. Una vero est fidelium universalis ecclesia, extra quam nullus omnino salvatur, in qua idem ipse sacerdos est sacrificium Iesus Christus, cuius corpus et sanguis in sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis et vini veraciter continentur, transsubstantiatis pane in corpus et vino in sanguinem potestate divina, ut at perficiendum mysterium unitatis accipiamus ipsi de suo quod accepit ipse de nostro. Et hoc utique sacramentum nemo potest conficere, nisi sacerdos, qui rite fuerit ordinatus, secundum claves ecclesiae, quas ipse concessit Apostolis eorumque successoribus Iesus Christus.

Who also, for the salvation of the human race, suffered and died on the wood of the cross, descended to the infernal regions, rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven; but he descended in soul and rose in flesh, and ascended likewise in both, being about to come at the end of the age, to judge the living and the dead, and to render to each according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect; who all will rise again with their own bodies, which they now bear, that they may receive according to their works, whether they shall have been good or evil: those, with the devil, perpetual punishment, and these, with Christ, sempiternal glory. § 3. But there is one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all is saved, in which the same Jesus Christ is priest and sacrifice, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine, the bread being transubstantiated into body and the wine into blood by divine power, so that for the perfecting of the mystery of unity we may receive from his own what he himself received from ours. And this sacrament, surely, no one can confect except a priest who has been duly ordained, according to the keys of the Church which Jesus Christ himself granted to the Apostles and to their successors.

§ 4. Sacramentum vero baptismi, quod ad Dei invocationem et individuae trinitatis, videlicet Patris, et Filii et Spiritus sancti, consecratur in aqua, tam parvulis quam adultis in forma ecclesiae a quocunque rite collatum proficit ad salutem. Et si post susceptionem baptismi quisquam prolapsus fuerit in peccatum, per veram potest semper poenitentiam reparari. § 5. Non solum autem virgines et continentes, verum etiam coniugati per fidem rectam et operationem bonam placentes Deo ad aeternam merentur beatitudinem pervenire.

§ 4. The sacrament of baptism, which at the invocation of God and of the undivided Trinity, namely the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, is consecrated in water, when duly conferred by whomever in the form of the Church, avails unto salvation for both little ones and adults. And if, after the reception of baptism, anyone shall have lapsed into sin, he can always be restored through true penance. § 5. Not only, moreover, virgins and those practicing continence, but also the married, by right faith and good works, pleasing God, merit to attain eternal beatitude.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus vera unione, non collectiva seu similitudinaria, sunt una essentia, substantia seu natura; quae substantia non est generans, nec genita, nec procedens; quia illi actus non attribuuntur substantiae, sed personis: nec per hoc in trinitate concluditur quaternitas. Contrarium sentientes ut haeretici sunt censendi, nisi ab errore resipiscant, et correctioni apostolicae sedis se supponant. Abb.

The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, by a true union, not a collective or similitudinary one, are one essence, substance, or nature; and this substance is not generating, nor generated, nor proceeding, because those acts are not attributed to the substance but to the persons; nor by this is a quaternity concluded in the Trinity. Those who think the contrary are to be judged as heretics, unless they recover from their error and subject themselves to the correction of the Apostolic See. Abb.

Siculus.

Sicilian.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Damnamus ergo et reprobamus libellum seu tractatum, quem Abbas Ioachim edidit contra magistrum Petrum Lombardum de unitate seu essentia trinititatis, appellans ipsum haereticum et insanum pro eo, quod in suis dixit sententiis: "Quoniam quaedam summa res est Pater, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus, et illa non est generans, neque genita, neque procedens." Unde asserit, quod ille non tam trinitatem, quam quaternitatem adstruebat in Deo, videlicet tres personas, et illam communem essentiam quasi quartam; manifeste protestans, quod nulla res est, quae sit Pater, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus; nec est essentia, nec substantia, nec natura; quamvis concedat, quod Pater, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus sunt una essentia, una substantia unaque natura. Verum unitatem huiusmodi non veram et propriam, sed quasi collectivam et similitudinariam esse fatetur, quemadmodum dicuntur multi homines unus populus, et multi fideles una ecclesia, iuxta illud: "Multitudinis credentium erat cor unum et anima una," et: "Qui adhaeret Deo, unus spiritus est cum illo." Item: "Qui plantat, et qui rigat, unum sunt," et: "Omnes unum corpus sumus in Christo." Rursus in libro Regum: "Populus meus et populus tuus unum sunt." Ad hanc autem suam sententiam adstruendam illud potissimum verbum inducit, quod Christus de fidelibus inquit in evangelio: "Volo, pater, ut sint unum in nobis, sicut et nos unum sumus, ut sint consummati in unum." Non enim, ut ait, fideles Christi sunt unum, id est quaedam una res, quae communis sit omnibus, sed hoc modo sunt unum, id est una ecclesia, propter catholicae fidei unitatem, et tandem unum regnum, propter unionem indissolubilis caritatis, quemadmodum in canonica Ioannis Apostoli epistola legitur: "Quia tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in coelo, Pater, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt," statimque subiungitur: "et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra: spiritus, aqua et sanguis; et hi tres unum sunt," sicut in quibusdam codicibus invenitur. § 1. Nos autem sacro et universali approbante concilio credimus et confitemur cum Petro, quod una quaedam summa res est, incomprehensibilis quidem et ineffabilis, quae veraciter est Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus: tres simul personae ac sigillatim quaelibet earundem.

We therefore condemn and reprobate the booklet or tractate which Abbot Joachim issued against Master Peter Lombard on the unity or essence of the Trinity, calling him heretical and insane because he said in his Sentences: "Since there is a certain highest thing which is the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and that is not generating, nor generated, nor proceeding." Whence he asserts that that man was establishing not so much a Trinity as a quaternity in God, namely three persons and that common essence as a kind of fourth; plainly protesting that there is no thing which is the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; nor is it an essence, nor a substance, nor a nature; although he grants that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one essence, one substance, and one nature. But he avows that a unity of this sort is not true and proper, but as it were collective and by similitude, just as many men are said to be one people, and many faithful one church, according to this: "The heart of the multitude of believers was one and the soul one," and: "He who cleaves to God is one spirit with him." Likewise: "He who plants and he who waters are one," and: "We all are one body in Christ." Again, in the book of Kings: "My people and your people are one." Moreover, to bolster this his opinion he adduces chiefly that word which Christ says about the faithful in the Gospel: "I will, Father, that they may be one in us, as we also are one, that they may be consummated into one." For, as he says, the faithful of Christ are not one—that is, a certain one thing which is common to all—but are one in this way, that is, one church, on account of the unity of the catholic faith, and at length one kingdom, on account of the union of indissoluble charity, just as it is read in the canonical epistle of the Apostle John: "For there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one," and straightway it is subjoined: "and there are three who give testimony on earth: the spirit and the water and the blood; and these three are one," as is found in certain codices. § 1. We, however, with the sacred and universal council approving, believe and confess with Peter that there is a certain one highest thing, indeed incomprehensible and ineffable, which truly is the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit: three persons together, and severally each of the same.

Et ideo in Deo solummodo trinitas est, non quaternitas, quia quaelibet trium personarum est illa res, videlicet substantia, essentia seu natura divina, quae sola est universorum principium, praeter quod aliud inveniri non potest. Et illa res non est generans, neque genita, nec procedens; sed est Pater, qui generat, et Filius, qui gignitur, et Spiritus sanctus, qui procedit, ut distinctiones sint in personis, et unitas in natura. Licet igitur alius sit Pater, alius Filius, alius Spiritus sanctus, non tamen aliud, sed id, quod est Pater, est Filius, et Spiritus sanctus idem omnino, ut secundum orthodoxam et catholicam fidem consubstantiales esse credantur.

And therefore in God there is only Trinity, not quaternity, because each of the three persons is that reality, namely the divine substance, essence, or nature, which alone is the principle of all things, beyond which nothing else can be found. And that reality is not generating, nor generated, nor proceeding; but it is the Father who generates, and the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds, so that there may be distinctions in the persons and unity in nature. Although therefore the Father is one, the Son another, the Holy Spirit another, nevertheless not another thing; but what the Father is, the Son is, and the Holy Spirit the very same altogether, so that according to the orthodox and catholic faith they may be believed to be consubstantial.

Pater enim ab aeterno Filium generando suam substantiam ei dedit, iuxta quod ipse testatur: "Pater quod dedit mihi, maius omnibus est." Ac dici non potest, quod partem substantiae suae illi dederit, et partem ipse sibi retinuerit, quum substantia Patris indivisibilis sit, utpote simplex omnino. Sed nec dici potest, quod Pater in Filium transtulerit suam substantiam generando, quasi sic dederit eam Filio, quod non retinuerit ipsam sibi; alioquin desiisset esse substantia. Patet ergo, quod sine ulla diminutione, Filius nascendo substantiam Patris accepit, et ita Pater et Filius habent eandem substantiam, et sic eadem res est Pater et Filius, nec non et Spiritus sanctus ab utroque procedens.

For the Father from eternity, by generating the Son, gave his substance to him, according as he himself attests: "The Father—what he has given to me—is greater than all." And it cannot be said that he gave to him a part of his substance, and kept back a part for himself, since the substance of the Father is indivisible, as being altogether simple. Nor can it be said that the Father transferred his substance into the Son by generating, as though he thus gave it to the Son that he did not retain it for himself; otherwise it would have ceased to be substance. It is clear, therefore, that without any diminution the Son, in being born, received the substance of the Father, and thus the Father and the Son have the same substance, and so the same thing is the Father and the Son, and likewise the Holy Spirit proceeding from both.

Quum ergo Veritas pro fidelibus suis orat ad Patrem: "Volo," inquiens, "ut ipsi sint unum in nobis, sicut et nos unum sumus," hoc nomen "unum" pro fidelibus quidem accipitur, ut intelligatur unio caritatis in gratia; pro personis vero divinis, ut attendatur identitatis unitas in natura, quemadmodum alibi Veritas ait: "Estote perfecti, sicut et Pater vester coelestis perfectus est," ac si diceret manifestius: Estote perfecti perfectione gratiae, sicut Pater vester coelestis perfectus est perfectione naturae. Utraque videlicet suo modo: quia inter creatorem et creaturam non potest tanta similitudo notari, quin inter eos maior sit dissimilitudo notanda. § 2. Si quis igitur sententiam vel doctrinam praefati Ioachim in hac parte defendere vel approbare praesumpserit, tanquam haereticus ab omnibus evitetur.

Accordingly, when Truth prays to the Father on behalf of his faithful: "I will," he says, "that they be one in us, just as we are one," this name "one" is taken, for the faithful indeed, so that the union of charity in grace may be understood; but for the divine persons, so that the unity of identity in nature may be observed, just as elsewhere Truth says: "Be perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect," as if he were saying more plainly: Be perfect with the perfection of grace, just as your heavenly Father is perfect with the perfection of nature. Each, namely, in its own mode: because between creator and creature no such likeness can be noted without a greater unlikeness being noted between them. § 2. If anyone, therefore, shall presume to defend or approve the opinion or doctrine of the aforesaid Joachim in this part, let him be avoided by all as a heretic.

In nullo tamen propter hoc Florensi monasterio, cuius ipse Ioachim exstitit institutor, volumus derogari, quoniam ibi et regularis est institutio, et observantia salutaris, maxime quum ipse Ioachim omnia scripta sua nobis assignari mandaverit apostolicae sedis iudicio approbanda seu etiam corrigenda, dictans epistolam, quam propria manu subscripsit, in qua firmiter confitetur, se illam fidem tenere, quam Romana tenet ecclesia, quae disponente Domino cunctorum fidelium mater est et magistra. § 3. Reprobamus etiam et condemnamus perversissimum dogma impii Almarici, cuius mentem sic pater mendacii excaecavit, ut eius doctrina non tam haeretica censenda sit quam insana.

In no way, however, on account of this do we wish to derogate from the Florensian monastery, of which Joachim himself stood forth as founder, since there both a regular institution and a salutary observance are found, especially since Joachim himself commanded that all his writings be assigned to us to be approved by, or even corrected by, the judgment of the Apostolic See, dictating an epistle, which he subscribed with his own hand, in which he firmly confesses that he holds that faith which the Roman Church holds, which, by the Lord’s disposition, is the mother and teacher of all the faithful. § 3. We also reprobate and condemn the most perverse dogma of the impious Almaric, whose mind the father of lies has so blinded that his doctrine is to be judged not so much heretical as insane.

TITULUS II. DE CONSTITUTIONIBUS.

TITLE 2. ON CONSTITUTIONS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Iuris canonici statuta omnes ligant, et eorum ritu tam in pronunciando quam in decidendo iudicia sunt regulanda.

The statutes of canon law bind all, and by their rite judgments are to be regulated both in pronouncing and in deciding.

Ex concilio Meldensi.

From the Council of Meaux.

Canonum statuta [sine praeiudicio] custodiantur ab omnibus, et nemo in actionibus vel iudiciis ecclesiasticis suo sensu, sed eorum auctoritate ducatur.

Let the statutes of the canons [without prejudice] be kept by all, and let no one in ecclesiastical actions or judgments be led by his own sense, but by their authority.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Constitutio respicit futura, et non praeterita.

A constitution looks to the future, and not to the past.

Gregorius in Registro.

Gregory in the Register.

Cognoscentes, [qualis fraternitatem vestram zelus pro Christianis mancipiis, quae Iudaei de Galliarum finibus emunt, accenderit, adeo nobis sollicitudinem vestram placuisse signamus, ut inhibendo eos ab huiusmodi negotiatione nostra etiam deliberatio iudicaret. Sed Basilio Hebraeo cum aliis Iudaeis veniente comperimus, hanc illis a diversis iudicibus reipublicae emptionem iniungi, atque evenire, ut inter paganos et Christiani pariter comparentur. Unde necesse fuit, ita causa cauta ordinatione disponi, ut nec mandantes frustrari, nec hi, qui contra coluntatem suam se inquiunt obedire, aliqua sustineant iniuste suspendia.

Learning, [what sort of zeal for Christian mancipia, which the Jews buy from the borders of the Gauls, has inflamed your fraternity, we signify that your solicitude has so pleased us that our deliberation also would judge to inhibit them from commerce of this kind. But when Basil the Hebrew came with other Jews, we learned that this purchase is enjoined upon them by various judges of the republic, and that it comes to pass that among pagans and Christians alike they are procured. Whence it was necessary that the matter be arranged by a cautious ordination, so that neither the commanders be frustrated, nor those who say that they obey against their will endure any unjust penalties.

Proinde fraternitas vestra hoc vigilanti sollicitudine observari ac cusodiri provideat, ut revertentibus eis a praefata provincia Christiana mancipia, quae ab ipsis adduci contigerit, aut mandatoribus contradantur, aut certe Christianis emptoribus intra diem quadragesimum venundentur, et transacto hoc dierum numero nullus apud eos quolibet modo remaneat. Si autem quaedam ex iisdem mancipiis talem aegritudinem fortassis incurrerint, ut intra statutos dies vendi non valeant, adhibenda sollicitudo est, ut, dum saluti fuerint pristinae restituta, similiter omnibus modis distrahantur, quia] Rem quae culpa caret, in damnum vocari non convenit. Quoties vero novum quid statuitur, ita solet futuris formam imponere, ut multis dispendiis praeterita non commendet; [Si qua apud eos mancipia de emptione anni praeteriti remanserunt, vel a vobis nuper ablata sunt, dum apud vos sunt posita, ea habeant alienandi licentiam,] ne detrimentum ante prohibitionem possint ignorantes incurrere, quod eos postmodum dignum est vetitos sustinere.

Accordingly let your fraternity provide with vigilant solicitude that this be observed and guarded, that, as they return from the aforesaid province, the Christian slaves which it has happened are brought by them be either handed over to the mandators, or certainly be sold to Christian buyers within the fortieth day, and, this number of days having elapsed, let none in any way remain with them. If, however, certain of these same slaves should perhaps incur such a sickness that they cannot be sold within the appointed days, solicitude must be applied, that, when they shall have been restored to their former health, likewise in every way they be sold off, because] A Thing which is free from fault ought not to be called into loss. But whenever something new is established, it is wont so to impose a form for the future that it does not commend the past with many losses; [If any slaves among them have remained from the purchase of the past year, or have been lately taken away by you, while they are placed with you, let them have the license of alienating them,] lest, being ignorant, they be able to incur detriment before the prohibition, which it is fitting that afterward, once forbidden, they should bear.

[Nunciatum etc.]

[It has been reported, etc.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Potestas legem condendi et mutandi est penes vicarium Christi. Et quod de uno connexorum statuitur, ad aliud connexum extenditur. Abbas Sicul.

The power of enacting and changing law is with the vicar of Christ. And what is statuted concerning one of the connexes is extended to another connected one. Abbot Sicul.

Augustinus super illud epist. ad Hebraeos:

Augustine on that passage of the Epistle to the Hebrews:

"Translato sacerdotio necesse est ut legis translatio fiat." Quia enim simul et ab eodem, et sub eadem sponsione utraque data sunt, quod de uno dicitur necesse est ut de altero intelligatur.

"With the priesthood translated, it is necessary that a translation of the law be made." Because, since both were given at the same time and by the same one, and under the same surety, what is said of the one must needs be understood of the other.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Omne prohibitum a lege peccatum est, et omne illud, quod sequitur ex eo. Hoc d.

Every thing prohibited by the law is a sin, and every thing which follows from it. This is said.

Idem super epist. ad Romanos.

The same on the Epistle to the Romans.

"Nam concupiscentiam nesciebam, etc." Hoc enim elegit Apostolus generale, unde omnia mala oriuntur. Bona est ergo lex, quae, dum hoc prohibet, omnia mala prohibet.

"For I did not know concupiscence, etc." For the Apostle chose this as something general, whence all evils arise. Good, therefore, is the law, which, while it forbids this, forbids all evils.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Constitutiones decretorum singularibus sunt opinionibus praeferendae.

Constitutions of the decrees are to be preferred to particular opinions.

Hieronymus in Parabolas.

Jerome on the Parables.

"Ne innitaris prudentiae tuae." Prudentiae suae inititur, qui ea, quae sibi agenda vel dicenda videntur, Patrum decretis praeponit.

"Do not lean upon your own prudence." He leans upon his own prudence who prefers to the decrees of the Fathers those things which seem to himself to be done or to be said.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Non valet constitutio collegii in damnum aliquorum et commodum aliorum, cessante rationabili causa. Vel sic: Absque rationabili causa non potest maior pars capituli tollere consuetudinem, utilitatem privatam nutriendo.

The constitution of a college is not valid for the damage of some and the advantage of others, a reasonable cause being absent. Or thus: Without a reasonable cause the greater part of the chapter cannot remove a custom, nurturing private utility.

Innocentius III. Senonensi Archiepiscopo et Episcopo Trecensi.

Innocent 3. To the Archbishop of Sens and the Bishop of Troyes.

Quum omnes unum corpus simus in christo, singuli autem alter alterius membra, non debent maiores minoribus, aut seniores iunioribus invidere, sed omnes, qui in una ecclesia uni Domino famulantur, pari gaudeant libertate, quum pondus et pondus, mensura et mensura utrumque abominabile sit apud Deum, et evangelicus paterfamilias pari mercede primos vineae suae operarios remuneraverit et extremos. Verum Ad audientiam nostram pervenit, quod dilecti filii Trecenses canonici propriis inhiantes commodis, et aliorum profectibus invidentes novum fecerunt in Trecensi ecclesia constitutum, ut eis tam in praesentia sua, quam in absentia reditus suos ex integro percepturis, qui in eadem ecclesia post illam constitutionem fuerunt vel de cetero fuerint instituti, reditus ex ea in absentia non percipiant, sed tunc solum, quum in ea fuerint residentes; quum secundum Trecensis ecclesiae consuetudinem omnes in hoc consueverunt esse pares. Statuerunt etiam, ut, quum singulis praebendis annexae sint vineae, ipsis suas, dum vixerint, possidentibus, vineae decedentium ad successores non transeant, sed proventus earum inter singulos dividantur.

Since we are all one body in Christ, but individually members one of another, the greater ought not to envy the lesser, nor the elders the juniors; rather, all who in one church serve one Lord should rejoice in equal liberty, since double weight and double measure—weight and weight, measure and measure—are both abominable before God, and the evangelical paterfamilias rewarded with equal wage both the first and the last laborers in his vineyard. But it has come to our audience that the beloved sons, the canons of Troyes, gaping after their own advantages and envying the advancements of others, have made a new constitution in the church of Troyes: namely, that while they themselves are to receive their revenues in full both in their presence and in their absence, those who in the same church have been, after that constitution, or shall hereafter be, instituted are not to receive revenues from it in their absence, but only when they shall be resident there; whereas, according to the custom of the church of Troyes, all were wont to be equal in this. They also decreed that, although vineyards are annexed to the several prebends—each holding his own so long as he lives—the vineyards of the deceased do not pass to their successors, but the proceeds thereof are to be divided among the individuals.

Quum igitur quod quisque iuris in alterum statuit ipse debeat uti eo, et sapientis dicat auctoritas: "Patere legem, quam tu ipse tuleris:" fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus antiquos canonicos iunioribus, et iuniores in perceptione fructuum tam praebendarum quam vinearum coaequetis antiquis, secundum priorem consuetudinem usque ad tempus praedictae constitutionis servatam, vel secundum rationabilem institutionem in posterum observandam, illos per districtionem ecclesiasticam percellentes, si qui duxerint renitendum. [Nullis literis etc. Dat.

Since therefore that which each establishes of law with respect to another he himself ought to use, and the authority of the wise says: "Endure the law which you yourself have borne:" we command to your fraternity by apostolic writings, to the effect that you make the elder canons equal to the juniors, and the juniors equal to the elders, in the receipt of the fruits both of prebends and of vineyards, according to the prior custom maintained up to the time of the aforesaid constitution, or according to a reasonable institution to be observed in future, striking them by ecclesiastical distraint, if any should deem it fit to resist. [With no letters, etc. Given.

etc. 1198.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Constitutio laicorum ecclesiam seu eius bona non adstringit.

The constitution of laymen does not bind the church or its goods.

Idem Tridentino Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Trent.

Quae in ecclesiarum et ecclesiasticorum virorum praeiudicium attentantur, firmitatem sortiri non debent, sed ad ecclesiarum indemnitatem debent potius infirmari. Sane pervenit ad audientiam nostram, quad cives Tervisini et Coneglanenses constituendi sibi, et utinam sibi tantum, iurisdictionem temere usurpantes, impietatem palliant sub nomine pietatis, et, dum quibusdam ex alieno gratiam exhibere nituntur, ecclesiis sunt et viris ecclesiasticis onerosi. constituerunt siquidem, sicut accepimus, ut, si quis se ad inopiam vergere probabiliter allegaverit, alienandi feudum, quod ab ecclesia vel aliis tenet, per officiales ad hoc a Tervisinis civibus et Coneglanensibus deputatos, liberam habeat facultatem, nec emptor priori teneatur domino respondere, nisi tantummodo in sexta parte pretii, quam ipsi, si recipere voluerit exhibebit, ex quo ecclesiastica non modicum iura laeduntur.

Things which are attempted to the prejudice of churches and ecclesiastical men ought not to obtain firmness, but ought rather to be invalidated for the indemnity of the churches. Indeed it has come to our hearing, that the citizens of Treviso and of Conegliano, establishing for themselves—and would that it were only for themselves—usurping rashly jurisdiction, cloak impiety under the name of piety, and, while they strive to show favor to certain persons out of another’s property, they are burdensome to churches and ecclesiastical men. For they have decreed, as we have received, that, if anyone shall have plausibly alleged himself to be verging toward indigence, he may have free faculty of alienating the fief which he holds from the church or from others, through officials deputed to this by the citizens of Treviso and of Conegliano; nor is the buyer bound to answer to the prior lord, except only in a sixth part of the price, which he will tender to him if he shall wish to receive it; whence ecclesiastical rights are not a little injured.

Volentes igitur ecclesiarum indemnitati consulere, et huiusmodi gravaminibus providere, constitutionem huiusmodi et venditiones feudorum ecclesiasticorum, factas sine legitimo ecclesiasticarum personarum assensu, occasione constitutionis, imo verius destitutionis vel destructionis istius, praesentium auctoritate cassamus et, vires decernimus non habere. [Nulli ergo etc. Dat.

Willing therefore to consult for the indemnity of the churches, and to provide against such gravamina (burdens), we annul by the authority of these presents such a constitution and the sales of ecclesiastical fiefs made without the lawful assent of ecclesiastical persons, under pretext of that constitution—nay more truly of the destitution or destruction of it—and we decree that they have no force. [Therefore let no one, etc. Given.]

Lat. X. Kal. Apr.

At the Lateran, on the 10th day before the Kalends of April.

1199.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Dignitas sublata de ecclesia per statutum capituli, confirmatum per Papam, ulterius non censetur vocare, nisi per contrarium actum statutum fuerit revocatum.

A dignity removed from the church by a statute of the chapter, confirmed by the Pope, is not thereafter deemed to be vacant, unless by a contrary act the statute shall have been revoked.

Idem.

The same.

Quum accessissent ad apostolicam sedem dilecti filii archidiaconus Tullensis et G. Tullensis capituli procurator venerabilem fratrem nostrum Hugonem Hostiensem episcopum eisdem concessimus auditorem, in cuius praesentia archidiaconus proposuit memoratus, quod, quum olim quidam Tullenses canonici nostris auribus intimassent, quod primiceriatus et scholastria in Tullensi ecclesia tanto tempore vacavisset, quod ad manus nostras illius personatus esset donatio devoluta, dilectis filiis Altaesilvae et Belliprati abbatibus, et Columbae monasterii decano dedimus in mandatis, ut super hoc inquirerent veritatem, et, si personatus illos tanto tempore vacavisse constaret, quod iuxta Lateranensis statuta concilii ad nos ipsorum esset devoluta donatia, ipsi personas idoneas de Tullensi ecclesia vel aliunde in ipsis personatibus instituerent vice nostra, et eosdem facerent ab illis pacifice possideri. [Ipsi vero iudices mandatum apostolicum exsequentes, partes ad suam praesentiam citaverunt, et die statuta dictis magistro W. et F. comparentibus coram ipsis, Ioannes presbyter cum Tullensis capituli literis ipsorum se conspecui praesentavit, in quibus idem se capitulum excusabat, quod ad locum ab eisdem iudicibus constitutum sine rerum et personarum discrimine propter ducem Lotharingiae, qui eos diffidaverat, accedere non valebant, et hoc ipsum dictus presbyter proprio volens iuramento firmare, locum, ad quem Tullenses canonici possint tute accedere, postulavit. Quumque super hoc inter dictos magistrum et presbyterum fuisset aliquamdiu litigatum, demum idem presbyter, requisitus praestare iuramentum, quod prius obtulerat, recusavit, et vocem appellationis emittens, literas capituli praesentavit, in quibus ad appellandum solummodo procurator exstiterat constitutus.

When the beloved sons, the archdeacon of Toul and G., procurator of the chapter of Toul, had come to the apostolic see, we granted to them as auditor our venerable brother Hugh of Ostia, bishop; in whose presence the aforesaid archdeacon proposed that, whereas formerly certain canons of Toul had intimated to our ears that the primicerate and the scholasticate in the church of Toul had stood vacant for so long a time that the donation of that personate had devolved to our hands, we gave in mandates to the beloved sons, the abbots of Altaesilva and Bellepratum, and the dean of the monastery of Columba, that they should inquire the truth on this, and, if it should be established that those personates had been vacant for so long a time that according to the statutes of the Lateran council the donation of them had devolved to us, they themselves should institute suitable persons from the church of Toul or elsewhere in the said personates in our stead, and should cause the same to be peacefully possessed by them. [The judges themselves, however, executing the apostolic mandate, summoned the parties to their presence, and on the day appointed the aforesaid Master W. and F. appearing before them, John the priest presented himself to their sight with letters of the chapter of Toul, in which the chapter excused itself, that they were not able to approach the place appointed by the same judges without peril to goods and persons on account of the duke of Lorraine, who had defied them; and the said priest, wishing to confirm this very point by his own oath, requested a place to which the canons of Toul might safely come. And when for some time there had been litigation on this between the aforesaid master and the priest, at length that same priest, when required to render the oath which he had previously offered, refused, and, emitting the voice of an appeal, he presented letters of the chapter, in which a procurator had been constituted for the sole purpose of appealing.

Verum iudices supradicti excusationes ab ipso sacerdote propositas et appellationem interpositam frustratorias reputantes, de prudentum virorum consilio receperunt testes, quos dicti magister et F. inducere voluerunt, diem aliam apud S. Aprum saepedicto cappitulo praefigentes, qui quum nec ea die curassent in iudicio comparere, iudices ipsi attestationibus solenniter publicatis, quum constitisset eisdem, quod tamdiu primiceriatus in Tullensi ecclesia vacavisset, ut eius ad nos donatio pertineret, ipsum vice nostra supradicto S. archidiacono contulerunt, quam concessionem idem archidiaconus petiit auctoritate apostolica confirmari. Dictus vero G. capituli procurator ex adverso respondit, quod huiusmodi concessio et processus iudicum praedictorum debebant merito retractari, utpote qui post appellationem ad nos pro diversis gravaminibus legitime interpositam processerunt; prima siquidem citatione capitulum ipsum edicto peremtorio evocarunt, et quum postmodum ad eorum praesentiam proprium nuncium capitulum destinasset, licet ipse nuncius, allegando, quod ad praefixum locum propter viarum discrimina et insidias capitales capitulum accedere non poterat, vel sufficientes transmittere responsales, sollicite postularet locum tutum partibus assignari, excusationem tamen huiusmodi dicti iudices admittere contempserunt, propter quod idem nuncius, sicut in mandatis acceperat, ad appellationis praesidium convolavit. Praeterea dictus procurator adiecit, quod eorundem iudicum processus ex ea causa iudicandus erat invalidus, quoniam ad sententiae calculum processerunt lite minime contestata, contra quod fuit ex parte archidiaconi replicatum, quoniam appellationi huiusmodi non fuit aliquatenus deferendum, quum non ex causis legitimis, sed frustratorie duntaxat fuerit appellatum.

But the aforesaid judges, accounting the excuses put forward by the priest himself and the appeal interposed as frustratory, on the counsel of prudent men received the witnesses whom the said master and F. were willing to produce, appointing another day at St. Aper for the oft-mentioned chapter; and since on that day too they did not take care to appear in court, the judges themselves, the attestations having been solemnly published, when it had been established for them that the primiceriatus in the Church of Toul had stood vacant for so long that the grant of it pertained to us, bestowed it in our stead upon the above-named S., the archdeacon, which grant the same archdeacon sought to have confirmed by apostolic authority. But the said G., the chapter’s procurator, answered on the other side that this kind of grant and the proceedings of the aforesaid judges ought deservedly to be retracted, seeing that they proceeded after an appeal to us had been lawfully interposed for various grievances; for at the first citation they summoned the chapter itself by a peremptory edict, and when thereafter the chapter had sent its own messenger to their presence, although that messenger, alleging that by reason of the dangers of the roads and deadly ambushes the chapter could not come to the appointed place, nor send sufficient representatives, carefully requested that a safe place be assigned to the parties, nevertheless the said judges disdained to admit such an excuse, wherefore the same messenger, as he had received in his mandate, fled to the protection of an appeal. Moreover, the said procurator added that the proceedings of those same judges ought on this account to be judged invalid, because they proceeded to the reckoning of sentence with the suit by no means contested; against which it was replied on the part of the archdeacon that no deference at all was to be paid to an appeal of this kind, since it had been made not for legitimate causes, but merely in a frustratory manner.

Quum enim capitulum fuisset citationibus legitimis evocatum, simplicem nuncium, et non responsalem idoneum destinavit, qui, quum excusiationem capituli allegasset, et super ea obtulisset proprium iuramentum, postmodum illud praestare noluit requisitus. Quum igitur excusatio ab eodem nuncio proposita delusoria merito videtur, appellatio super ea interposita fuit merito respuenda, maxime quum idem nuncius literas capituli praesentaverit, in quibus continebantur expresse, quod ad provocandum tantummodo fuerat destinatus. Sed nec illud nocere posse pars eadem respondit, quod lite non contestata dicti iudices processerunt, quum non causae cognitio, sed inquisitio veritatis solummodo ipsis fuerit demandata, propter quod in inquisitione ipsa non fuerat iudiciarii ordinis solennitas observanda.

Since indeed the chapter had been called by legitimate citations, it dispatched a simple messenger, and not a suitable respondent, who, when he had alleged the chapter’s excuse, and had offered his own oath upon it, afterwards, when required, refused to render it. Since therefore the excuse proposed by the same messenger appears deservedly delusory, the appeal interposed upon it was deservedly to be rejected, especially since the same messenger had presented letters of the chapter, in which it was contained expressly that he had been sent for the sole purpose of appealing. But the same party replied that neither could it be harmful that the said judges proceeded with the suit not having been contested, since not the cognition of the cause, but solely the inquisition of the truth had been entrusted to them, on account of which, in that inquisition, the solemnity of judicial order was not to be observed.

Ad haec capituli pars respondit, quia, quamvis in quibusdam inquisitionibus omnimoda iuris solennitas non servetur, in inquisitione tamen huiusmodi servari debuit ordo iuris, quoniam, quum possessionum et redituum, olim ad primiceriatum spectantium, quidam sint pacifici possessores, eisdem sine iuris ordine non debebant nec poterant spoliari. Praeterea etsi dicti iudices potuerint sine causae cognitione procedere, solenniter tamen de causa cognoscere potius elegerunt, Tullenses canonicos tanquam partem ad suum iudicium evocando.] Fuit insuper ex parte capituli allegatum, quod rescriptum ad praedictos iudices impetratum exstiterit per falsam suggestionem obtentum. Quum enim de communi assensu et unanimi voluntate canonicorum Tullensium fuerit constitutum, ne primiceriatus dignitas esset ulterius in ecclesia memorata, inter canonicos ipsos primiceriatus proventibus et possessionibus distributis, et eadem institutio a bonae memoriae Alexandro P. praedecessore nostro fuerit postmodum confirmata: propter quod evidenter apparet, quod primiceriatus ipse tanto tempore non vacaverit, sicut nobis fuerat falsa insinuatione suggestum.

To these things the party of the chapter replied that, although in certain inquisitions the full solemnity of law is not observed, nevertheless in an inquisition of this kind the order of law ought to have been observed, since, as there are certain pacific possessors of the possessions and revenues formerly pertaining to the primiceriatus, they neither ought nor could be despoiled of the same without the order of law. Moreover, even if the said judges could have proceeded without cognition of the cause, nevertheless they chose rather to know the cause solemnly, summoning the canons of Toul as a party to their judgment.] It was further alleged on the part of the chapter that the rescript to the aforesaid judges had been obtained (impetrated) by a false suggestion. For since by the common assent and unanimous will of the canons of Toul it had been established that the dignity of the primiceriatus should no longer be in the aforesaid church, the proceeds and possessions of the primiceriatus having been distributed among the canons themselves, and the same institution was afterwards confirmed by Alexander P., of good memory, our predecessor: wherefore it plainly appears that the primiceriatus itself had not been vacant for so long a time as had been suggested to us by false insinuation.

[Contra quod pars archidiaconi sic respondit, quod, quum illa dignitas ad publicam et communem Tullensis ecclesiae honestatem ibidem fuerat instituta, absque sedis apostolicae auctoritate in eadem ecclesia non poterat aboleri. Confirmatio quoque super tam illicita constitutione obtenta firmare non potuit quod erat invalidum ipso iure. Praeterea iidem canonici post haec omnia Terricum archidiaconum in primicerium communiter elegerunt, qui fuit postmodum auctoritate apostolica confirmatus, propter quod non solum confirmationi obtentae tacite renunciasse videntur, sed etiam institutionem propriam revocasse.

[Against which the archdeacon’s party thus responded, that, since that dignity had been instituted there for the public and common honor of the Church of Toul, it could not be abolished in the same church without the authority of the Apostolic See. Likewise, a confirmation obtained upon so unlawful a constitution could not make firm what was invalid by the law itself. Moreover, the same canons, after all these things, collectively elected Terricus the archdeacon as primicerius, who was afterwards confirmed by apostolic authority, wherefore they seem not only to have tacitly renounced the confirmation obtained, but also to have revoked their own institution.

Sed ad haec pars capituli replicavit, quia quod de ipso T. factum est eis praeiudicare non potest, qui non per electionem canonicam, sed per intrusionem potius sibi prilmiceriatus officium usurpavit.] Quocirca discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, inquisita diligentius veritate, si vobis constiterit, Tullenses canonicos, ne ulterius in Tullensi ecclesia primiceriatus esset officium, communiter statuisse, ac statutum ipsum auctoritate sedis apostolicae fuisse postmodum, sicut dicitur, confirmatum, vos illud faciatis in suo robore permanere, nisi postea dicti canonici contravenerint, aliquem videlicet in primicerium eligendo. [Si vero consueverit etc. Dat.

But to these things the chapter’s party replied that what was done concerning T. cannot prejudice them, he who did not by canonical election, but rather by intrusion, usurped for himself the office of the primiceriatus.] Wherefore, by apostolic letters we command to your discretion that, the truth having been more diligently inquired, if it has become clear to you that the Tullensian canons have jointly decreed that there should no longer be in the church of Toul the office of the primiceriatus, and that that statute itself was afterwards, as it is said, confirmed by the authority of the Apostolic See, you cause it to remain in its own force, unless afterward the said canons have contravened, namely by electing someone as primicerius. [If indeed it shall have been customary etc. Given.

Rom. ap. S. Petr. Kal.

Rome, at St. Peter’s, on the Kalends.

Febr. Ao. IX. 1207.]

Feb. Year 9 1207.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Non obstante certo canonicorum numero, etiam per Papam confirmato, providendum est receptis ultra numerum de superexcrescentibus fructibus; maxime si voluntarie per canonicos fuerint recepti.

Notwithstanding a fixed number of canons, even confirmed by the Pope, provision is to be made for those received beyond the number out of the superabundant revenues; especially if they have been voluntarily received by the canons.

Idem Clugiensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Clugy.

Quum Martinus Ferrariensis canonicus, F. W., B. et G., canonicorum Ferrariensium, et magister G., Ferrariensis capituli procuratores ad sedem apostolicam accessissent, super quaestione, quam de praebendis et reditibus habebant ad invicem, dilectum filium nostrum S. Mariae in Cosmedin diaconum cardinalem eis concessimus auditorem, coram quo Dictus M. pro se ac quatuor sociis suis proposuit, quod Ferrarienses canonici, ut eo amplius suos reditus augmentarent, quo proventus ecclesiae, qui dividi consueverant inter plures, in usus cederent paucorum, quatuordecim praebendas tantum, praeter id, quod mensae communiter deputarunt, in eadem ecclesia contra antiquam consuetudinem statuerunt. Postmodum vero, contra constitutionem ipsam voluntarie venientes, dictos quinque in canonicos receperunt, nullis praebendis assignatis eisdem. Et licet eorum reditus non modicum fuerint argumentati, nondum tamen eis voluerunt ex superexcrescentibus reditibus providere.

When Martinus, a canon of Ferrara, and F. W., B., and G., proctors of the chapter of Ferrara, and Master G., had come to the apostolic see, concerning the question which they had with each other about prebends and revenues, we granted to them as auditor our beloved son, the cardinal deacon of St. Mary in Cosmedin, before whom the said M., for himself and his four associates, set forth that the canons of Ferrara, in order the more to augment their revenues, so that the proceeds of the church, which had been accustomed to be divided among many, might pass to the use of a few, established only fourteen prebends in the same church, besides that which they deputed to the common table, contrary to ancient custom. Afterwards, however, voluntarily coming against that very constitution, they received the said five as canons, with no prebends assigned to the same. And although their revenues had been not a little augmented, nevertheless they were not yet willing to provide for them out of the surplus revenues.

Verum ex adverso fuit propositum, quod olim de communi tam canonicorum, quam tunc Ferrariensis episcopi voluntate quatuordecim praebendarum numero in Ferrariensi ecclesia provida deliberatione instituto et apostolicae protectionis praesidio roborato, [tandem], quum una in eadem ecclesia praebenda vacasset, ad multam quorundam instantiam duos ad eam, et postmodum ad preces venerabilis fratris nostri Ferrariensis episcopi dictum M. et quendam alium sine praeiudicio dictae constitutionis in canonicos receperunt ita, quod ipsi canonici de canonia nihil perciperent, donec primi duo essent praebendas integre assecuti. Quumque per canonicorum industriam fuerit procuratum, ut ex possessionibus, quas [eadem] ecclesia tempore longo possedit, plures eis reditus solverentur, superexcrescentes reditus communi mensae, quae minus sufficiens fuerat, communiter deputaverunt, quos dicti quinque sibi postmodum petierunt contra capituli constitutionem in beneficium assignari. Quia vero super his plena nobis, sicut idem cardinalis asseruit, exhiberi non poterat certitudo, causam ipsam tuo duximus examini committendam.

But on the contrary it was proposed that formerly, by the common will both of the canons and then of the bishop of Ferrara, the number of fourteen prebends in the Ferrara church having been established by prudent deliberation and strengthened by the safeguard of apostolic protection, [at length], when one prebend in the same church had fallen vacant, at the pressing instance of certain persons they received two to it, and afterwards, at the prayers of our venerable brother the bishop of Ferrara, they received the said M. and a certain other as canons without prejudice to the said constitution, such that those canons should receive nothing from the canonry until the first two had fully obtained the prebends. And when, through the industry of the canons, it had been procured that from the possessions which the [same] church had held for a long time more revenues should be paid to them, the superexcrescent revenues they jointly deputed to the common table, which had been less sufficient, which the said five afterwards sought to have assigned to themselves in benefice against the constitution of the chapter. But because concerning these matters full certainty could not, as the same cardinal asserted, be exhibited to us, we have deemed that the case itself should be committed to your examination.

Mandamus, quatenus, quum in constitutione praedicta et confirmatione sedis apostolicae vel fuerit vel esse debuerit, sicut consuevit, expressum: "nisi in tantum excrescerent ecclesiae facultates, quod pluribus possent sufficere competenter," et quum iidem canonici in derogationem suae constitutionis ad vacaturas praebendas quatuor receperunt ultra numerum constitutum, ab antiquis canonicis praebendas cum integritate percipientibus consuetas, superexcrescentes reditus praedictis canonicis appellatione remota facias assignari, ita tamen, quod, si ex eis pares potuerint cum aliis sortiri praebendas, quod superfuerit in communes canonicorum usus, sicut prius statuerant, sive aliter, prout melius videbitur, convertatur, revocatis in irritum omnibus, quaecunque ab alterutra partium in praeiudicium alterius post motam quaestionem coram episcopo Ferrariensi circa praebendas vel possessiones fuerint innovata. [Nullis literis etc. Dat.

We command, to the extent that, since in the aforesaid constitution and in the confirmation of the Apostolic See it was, or ought to have been, as is customary, expressed: "unless the faculties of the church should increase to such an extent that they could competently suffice for more," and since the same canons, in derogation of their constitution, received to the vacant prebends four beyond the established number—the prebends customary for the ancient canons who receive their prebends with integrity—you are to cause the superexcrescent revenues to be assigned to the aforesaid canons, appeal removed, yet in such manner that, if by means of them they are able to obtain equal prebends with the others, what shall remain over be converted to the common uses of the canons, as they had previously decreed, or otherwise, as shall seem better, with all things revoked into nullity, whatever by either of the parties, to the prejudice of the other, after the question was set in motion before the bishop of Ferrara concerning prebends or possessions, shall have been innovated. [No letters etc. Given.]

Rom. ap. S. Petr. XII.

Rome. At St. Peter’s. 12.

Kal. Mai. 1198.]

Kalends of May, 1198.]

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Statutum generale laicorum ad ecclesias vel ecclesiasticas personas, vel earum bona in earum praeiudicium non extenditur; nec speciale, etiamsi earum commodum et favorem concernat. Hoc dicit quoad intellectum. Abbas Siculus.

A general statute of laymen does not extend to churches or ecclesiastical persons, or their goods, to their prejudice; nor does a special one, even if it concerns their advantage and favor. He says this as regards the understanding. The Sicilian Abbot.

Idem Abbati et Conventui sancti Silvestri.

The same to the Abbot and Convent of Saint Sylvester.

Ecclesia sanctae Mariae in Via lata contra I. de Atteia qui quasdam possessiones ipsius dicebatur contra iustitiam detinere, movit tempore B. Carosomi dicti senatoris sub L. iudice quaestionem. In ipso autem iudicio praefato I. de Atteia syndicus monasterii vestri adstitit, et ab eo testes producti quidam de monachis exstiterunt. Iudex vero, auditis rationibus partium, pro eodem Ioanne absolutionis sententiam promulgavit; a cuius sententia pars altera vocem appellationis emisit.

The Church of Saint Mary on the Via Lata, against J. of Atteia, who was said to be detaining certain possessions of the same against justice, moved a suit in the time of B. Carosomus, called “senator,” under L., judge. But in that very trial aforesaid, the said J. of Atteia, syndic of your monastery, appeared, and among the witnesses produced by him there were certain of the monks. The judge, however, after the reasons of the parties had been heard, in favor of that same John promulgated a sentence of absolution; from which sentence the other party emitted the voice of appeal.

Super hac igitur quaestione suborta, proponente parte victrice, quod non potuerit appellari, quum dictus L. non ut iudex, sed tanquam arbiter fuisset electus, victa e contrario asserente, quoniam, quum arbitrio fuerit contradictum, quod partes non nisi metu poenae constringit, quae in praemisso arbitrio non fuerat comprehensa, merito potuit appellari, et fortius, si iudicium exstitisset. De hoc igitur ad iam dictum B. Carosomi quaestione perlata, causam appellationis S. primicerio iudicum delegavit, in cuius praesentia partibas constitutis, dictus Ioannes de Atteia proposuit, se conveniendum non esse, quum non possideret id, quod pars altera requirebat, sed monasterium S. Silvestri possideret rem petitam. Dictus autem B. Carosomi, quoniam statutum quoddam emiserat, a populo Romano approbatum pariter et acceptum, quod, si quis post litem contestatam rem a se petitam transferret in alium, daretur possessio petitori, et alter fieret de possessore petitor, et idem I. post litem contestatam, rem ipsam in monasterium transferre praesumsit, possessionem rei petitae assignavit ecclesiae memoratae.

Upon this question having therefore arisen, the victorious party alleging that it could not have been appealed, since the said L. had been chosen not as a judge but as an arbiter, the defeated, on the contrary, asserting that, since the arbitrium had been contradicted—which binds the parties only by fear of a penalty, which had not been included in the aforesaid arbitrium—it could rightly be appealed, and even more strongly, if it had been a judgment. Therefore, the question having been carried to the already said B. Carosomi, he delegated the cause of the appeal to S., the primicerius of the judges, in whose presence, the parties being constituted, the said John of Atteia proposed that he ought not to be convened, since he did not possess that which the other party required, but the monastery of St. Silvester possessed the thing sought. But the said B. Carosomi, since he had issued a certain statute, equally approved and accepted by the Roman people, to the effect that, if anyone, after the suit had been contested, should transfer to another the thing demanded from him, possession would be given to the petitioner, and the other would become from possessor petitioner; and since the same John, after the suit had been contested, presumed to transfer the thing itself into the monastery, he assigned possession of the thing sought to the aforesaid church.

Verum quoniam dictus I. de possessionibus ipsis monasterio S. Silvestri annuam reddiderat pensionem, adiecit, ut hoc ipsum ab ecclesia S. Mariae fieret, donec de proprietate fundi cognosceretur; sed solutio, quae fieret [pensionis], ecclesiae S. Mariae in Via lata in iure suo penitus non noceret. [Hanc autem possessionem ecclesia S. Mariae usque ad tempora Ioannis Petri Leonis, senatoris Urbis, inconcusse possedit, qui, supplicatione monasterii vestri clementer admissa, R. iudici causam commisit eandem, qui auditis hinc inde propositis pro monasterio ipso sententiam promulgavit, renovans quod praefatus B. Carosomi statuerat contra ipsum. Per quam sane sententiam quoniam ecclesia S. Mariae se laesam enormiter querebatur, et ipsa senatori supplicavit praedicto, qui causam commisit R. iudici cognoscendam.

However, since the said I., from those very possessions, had rendered to the monastery of St. Sylvester an annual pension, he added that this same should be done by the church of St. Mary, until the ownership of the estate should be determined; but the payment that should be made [of the pension] should in no wise harm the church of St. Mary in Via lata in its right. [But this possession the church of St. Mary possessed unshaken up to the times of John Peter Leo, senator of the City, who, the supplication of your monastery having been kindly admitted, entrusted that same cause to the judge R., who, having heard what was set forth on this side and on that, promulgated a sentence for the monastery itself, renewing what the aforesaid B. Carosomi had established against it. By which sentence indeed, since the church of St. Mary complained that it was enormously injured, it too supplicated the aforesaid senator, who committed the cause to the judge R. to be examined.]

Et quoniam eius iurisdictio erat in proximo desitura, supplicatum fuit ob eandem causam successoribus eius senatoribus iam electis, et ab eis causa ipsa eidem iudici delegata. Iudex vero ex veteris et novorum pariter senatorum delegatione cognoscens, quod a iam dicto B. statutum fuerat approbans, ecclesiae S. Mariae possessionem restituit antedictam. Et quum novem consiliarios haberet senatus, per octo ipsorum exsecutioni fuit sententia demandata; sed unus ex iis, qui et nepos erat abbatis S. Silvestri, quorundam senatorum favore suffultus, ecclesiae S. Mariae possessionem violenter ablatam monasterio tribuit nominato.

And since his jurisdiction was about shortly to cease, petition was made for the same cause to his successors, the senators already elected, and by them the cause itself was delegated to the same judge. The judge indeed, by delegation of the former and likewise the new senators, taking cognizance and approving what had been statuted by the already-mentioned B., restored to the church of St. Mary the aforesaid possession. And since the senate had nine counselors, by eight of them the sentence was committed to execution; but one of these, who was also the nephew of the abbot of St. Sylvester, supported by the favor of certain senators, granted to the named monastery the possession of the church of St. Mary, violently taken away.

Ex hoc ergo rixa crescente usque ad armorum strepitum est processum. Ne vero deterius quid contingeret, bonae memoriae C. Papa praedecessor noster totum negotium ad suam sollicitudinem revocavit. Et quoniam tempus colligendorum fructuum imminebat, fructus praecepit apud colonos in sequestro deponi, circa quos si qua partium violentiam inferre praesumeret, causae suae dispendium pateretur, venerabilibus fratribus nostris G. Portuensi, et I. nunc Albanensi, tunc vero Tusculanensi episcopis tituli S. Clementis, et dilecto filio nostro G. S. Angeli diacono cardinali causam committens eandem.

From this, therefore, with the brawl increasing up to the clatter of arms, it was proceeded. Lest indeed something worse should befall, of good memory Pope C., our predecessor, recalled the whole business to his own solicitude. And since the time of gathering the fruits was impending, he ordered the fruits to be deposited in sequestration with the tenants, and that, if any of the parties should presume to inflict violence concerning them, he should suffer detriment to his cause, committing the same cause to our venerable brothers G., of Portus, and I., now of Albano, but then indeed of Tusculum, bishops of the title of St. Clement, and to our beloved son G., cardinal deacon of St. Angel.

In quorum praesentia partibus constitutis, pro ecclesia S. Mariae fuit contra monasterium vestrum obiectum, quod violentiam pars vestra commiserat in fructibus sequestrandis. Et quum super hoc testes fuissent utrimque producti, quia violentia liquido probata non fuit, et in dimidio ruglo hordei dicebatur admissa, abbate nihilominus prohibente, ne delictum personae redundaret in damnum ecclesiae, facta hordei restitutione provisum est, ut ad quaestionem possessionis fieret in causa processus, de qua coram eisdem productis testibus et attestationibus publicatis fuit diutius disceptatum. Consequenter vero post decessum praefati praedecessoris nostri partibus in nostra praesentia constitutis, ecclesia etc.

In whose presence, the parties having been set, on behalf of the church of St. Mary it was objected against your monastery that your side had committed violence in the sequestration of the fruits. And when on this point witnesses had been produced on both sides, since the violence was not clearly proven, and it was said to have been committed in respect of half a ruglo of barley, the abbot nevertheless forbidding it, lest the offense of a person should redound to the detriment of the church, with restitution of the barley made, it was provided that process in the cause should proceed to the question of possession; concerning which, before those same men, with witnesses produced and the attestations published, there was a more protracted disputation. Consequently, after the death of our aforesaid predecessor, the parties being set in our presence, the church etc.

(cf. c. 4. ut lite pend. II. 16.) Et quoniam alii senatorum sententiam pro monasterio, alii latam pro ecclesia processu temporis confirmarant: nos etc. (cf. c. 4. cit.) Quum ergo nobis constiterit, et ex ipsa confessione partium tenuerimus, quod unus consiliariorum contra sententiam de voluntate octo exsecutioni mandatam de fa3RvLCBxdWlhIGRlIGl1cmUgbm9uIHBvdGVyYXQsIHZlbmllbnMsIGVjY2xlc2lhbSBpcHNh m possessione sua spoliaverit violenter, et nihilominus attendentes, quod etiam iniusto possessori violenter eiecto restitutionis sit beneficio succurrendum, spoliatam ecclesiam in eo statu decrevimus reponendam, in quo fuerat tempore violentiae perpetratae.

(cf. c. 4. as while the suit is pending, 2. 16.) And since some of the senators had, in the course of time, confirmed the sentence for the monastery, others that pronounced for the church: we, etc. (cf. c. 4. cited.) When therefore it had been established for us, and from the very confession of the parties we had gathered, that one of the counselors, contrary to the sentence, by the will of the eight, the execution having been mandated, because he could not do so by law, coming in, violently despoiled the church of its possession; and nonetheless considering that even to an unjust possessor, when violently cast out, aid must be afforded by the benefit of restitution, we decreed that the despoiled church be replaced in that condition in which it had been at the time when the violence was perpetrated.

Verum quoniam (etc. cf. c. 4. cit.)] Et quia saepefatum monasterium vestrum se querebatur a praemisso B. Carosomi contra iustitiam spoliatum, et ipsum per officium nostrum restitui suppliciter postulabat, quod statutum eius nullius valoris exstiterit multipliciter asseverans. [Saepefatus enim B., quum se ipsum intruserit in senatoriam dignitatem, nec apostolicae sedis favorem habuerit, ad quam institutio pertinet senatorum, statutum non potuit emittere, quod valeret.

But since (etc. cf. c. 4. cit.)] And because your oft‑said monastery complained that it had been despoiled contrary to justice by the aforesaid B. of Carosomo, and was humbly petitioning through our office that it be restored, repeatedly asserting that his statute had been of no value. [For the oft‑said B., since he had intruded himself into the senatorial dignity, and had not had the favor of the Apostolic See, to which the institution of senators pertains, could not issue a statute that would be valid.

Qui etiamsi fuisset legitime institutus, ipsius statutum, quamvis sibi subiectos, ecclesias tamen nullatenus obligaret, praesertim quum iuri civili esset adversum, quod aliam poenam litigiosas res transferentibus statuit imponendam, illa distinctione inter contrahentes adhibita, ut, si quis sciens ad donationes, venditiones seu alios contractus accesserit, non solum redimere rem compellatur, sed etiam pretium eius amittat, non ut lucro cedat alienanti, a quo etiam alia tanta quantitas est fisci iuribus inferenda. Sin autem ignorans rem litigiosam emerit vel per aliam speciem contractus acceperit, tunc alienatione rei facta irrita pretium eius cum alia tertia parte recipiet, instrumentis etiam nullam vim obtinentibus, quae super contractibus huiusmodi statuuntur. Verum eos, qui dotis nomine, vel ante nuptias donationis, transactionis vel divisionis rerum hereditariarum factae, vel per legati vel fideicommissi causam huiusmodi dederint vel acceperint, a praemissis poenis eadem constitutio excipit nominatim.

Which, even if he had been legitimately instituted, his statute, although binding those subject to him, would nonetheless in no way bind churches, especially since it was adverse to civil law, which has established that a different penalty is to be imposed upon those who transfer litigious things, with that distinction applied between the contracting parties, that, if anyone knowingly has entered into donations, sales, or other contracts, he is compelled not only to redeem the thing, but also to lose its price—not that it should yield as profit to the alienator, by whom also another like amount is to be paid to the rights of the fisc. But if, however, being ignorant, he has bought a litigious thing or has received it through another species of contract, then, the alienation of the thing having been made void, he will receive back its price with another third part, the instruments also obtaining no force which are drawn up concerning contracts of this kind. But those who, in the name of a dowry, or a donation before nuptials, or a transaction or division of hereditary goods having been made, or by the cause of a legacy or fideicommissum, have given or received things of this kind, that same constitution expressly exempts by name from the aforesaid penalties.

Quodsi etiam obligare posset ecclesias, monasterium in illa constitutione nequaquam inciderat, quum antedictus I. nullam in illud penitus possessionem transtulisset, qui tanquam colonus terras illas tenuerat, et eas non suo, sed monasterii nomine possidebat. Quod etiamsi fecisset, quoniam prius conventus a monasterio quam ab ecclesia fuerat, et per arbitrium et nihilominus iure transactionis, per quam citra poenam litigiosi contractus res potest in alium lite contestata transferri, res restituit antedictas, in statutum praemissum nullatenus incidisset. Quin potius, etsi contra illud fecisset statutum, quoniam nec conventum, nec confessum in iudicio vel convictum possessione sua monasterium fuerat spoliatum, instanter eam sibi restitui postulabat, quam ex nulla, vel saltem iniusta causa pars altera detinebat.

But even if he could also bind the churches, the monastery by no means fell under that constitution, since the aforesaid I. had transferred no possession at all into it, he who had held those lands as a colonus (tenant), and possessed them not in his own name, but in the name of the monastery. Which even if he had done, since he had first been convened by the monastery rather than by the church, and by arbitration and nonetheless by the law (right) of transaction (transactio), through which, without the penalty of a litigious contract, a thing can be transferred to another while the suit is under contestation, he restored the aforesaid things, he would in no way have fallen under the aforesaid statute. Nay rather, even if he had acted against that statute, since the monastery had been despoiled of its possession neither after being convened, nor confessing in judgment, nor convicted, it urgently demanded that it be restored to itself, which the other party was detaining from no cause, or at least from an unjust cause.

Has autem rationes oeconomus S. Mariae nitebatur multifariam infirmare. Quamvis enim dictus B. circa praelationis suae primordia gratiam sedis apostolicae non habuerit, quia tamen ab ea fuit tempore procedente receptus, et ratihabitio retrotrahitur, perinde habendus erat, tanquam ab initio legitime fuerit institutus; qui tanquam alienus iudex non poterat a monasterio evitari, quum nec novum sit nec insolitum, quod, ubi clerici sunt actor et reus, causas civiles in Urbe coram iudicibus, per sedem apostolicam institutis, ex delegatione senatorum ab ea iurisdictionem habentium prosequantur. Unde nec in alieno foro intelliguntur, sed in proprio Romani Pontificis litigare, cuius auctoritate sortiri videntur effectum quae ab huiusmodi senatoribus vel iudicibus statuuntur.

But the steward of St. Mary strove in many ways to invalidate these reasons. For although the said B., around the primordia of his prelacy, had not had the favor of the Apostolic See, yet because in the course of time he was received by it, and ratihabition is drawn back, he had to be regarded as if he had from the beginning been legitimately instituted; who, as a foreign judge, could not be avoided by the monastery, since it is neither new nor unusual that, where clerics are plaintiff and defendant, they prosecute civil causes in the City before judges established by the Apostolic See, by delegation of the senators having jurisdiction from it. Whence they are not understood to be in a foreign forum, but to litigate in the proper forum of the Roman Pontiff, by whose authority the things decreed by such senators or judges seem to obtain effect.

Quodsi forum senatorium fuisset monasterio penitus alienum, quia tamen oeconomus dicti monasterii sub L. iudice a praefato B. inter ecclesiam S. Mariae et dictum I. de Atteia delegato, ipsi I. adstitit, et eum in iure defendit, iudicium eius non potuit ulterius doclinare. Statutum autem ipsius B., de quo saepius est praemissum, et quod non iuri adversum, sed consonum potius exsistebat, (quum etiam in iure canonico caveatur, quod res in litigio posita non sit in personam aliam transferanda), non ad possessores solos, sed etiam ad illos decebat extendi, qui tenore saltem detentionis cuiusque poterant conveniri, quales constat esse colonos etiam temporales. Perpetui namque utilem saltem possessionem habentes et conveniri possunt, et in alium transferre quod habent, sicut I. fecerat ante dictus, cuius factum neque praemissum arbitrium poterat, nec transactio excusare, quum in dolum et fraudem fuerint attentata.

If the senatorial forum had been altogether alien to the monastery, nevertheless, because the economus of the said monastery, under Judge L., delegated by the aforesaid B. in the case between the church of St. Mary and the said I. of Atteia, stood by that same I. and defended him in law, he could no longer decline its judgment. But the statute of B. himself, so often premised, which did not exist as adverse to law but rather consonant with it (since even in canon law it is provided that a thing placed in litigation is not to be transferred to another person), ought to be extended not to possessors alone, but also to those who, by the tenor at least of anyone’s detention, could be convened—such as are known to be coloni, even temporary ones. For perpetual coloni, indeed, having at least useful possession, can both be convened and transfer to another what they hold, as the aforesaid I. had done; whose deed neither the aforesaid arbitration could excuse nor the settlement, since they had been attempted in guile and fraud.

Iudex namque, in quem fuit a partibus compromissum, consanguineus ipsius I. et infeudatus monasterii dicitur exstitisse, nihilque fecisse in publicum, sed omnia in secreto; quamvis instar iudiciorum sint arbitria introducta. Coegit quoque partes ad transigendum, sicut ex rescripto transactionis apparet. Et quum de transactione non fuerit compromissum, quae non est necessitatis, sed liberae potius voluntatis, dolo quasi ex perspicuis insidiis iam probato transactionem inefficacem penitus asserebat.

For the judge to whom the parties had by compromise submitted is said to have been a kinsman of that I. and an enfeoffed man of the monastery, and to have done nothing in public, but everything in secret; although arbitrations have been introduced in the likeness of judgments. He also compelled the parties to settle, as appears from the rescript of the transaction. And since there had been no submission about a settlement—which is not of necessity, but rather of free will—he maintained that the settlement was utterly ineffective, with fraud, as it were already proved from manifest snares, now established.

Illa quoque ratione dicebat ecclesia petitionem monasterii repellendam, quod, quum possessionem ipsam sine dolo et culpa sua obtinuerit auctoritate praetoris, et per hoc ius sibi fuerit acquisitum, monasterium vestrum super possessiorio audiri ulterius non debebat, cui parata erat in petitorio respondere.] His ergo et similibus in nostra et fratrum nostrorum praesentia prudenter a partibus allegatis, Nos attendentes, quod laicis, etiam religiosis, super ecclesiis et personis ecclesiasticis nulla sit attributa facu1tas, quos obsequendi manet necessitas, non auctoritas imperandi, a quibus, si quid motu proprio statutum fuerit, quod ecclesiarum etiam respiciat commodum et favorem, nullius firmitatis exsistit, nisi ab ecclesia fuerit approbatum, unde statutum Basilii de non alienandis praediis rusticis vel urbanis, ministeriis et ornamentis ecclesiarum, illa reprobatum fuit potissima ratione, quod auctoritate non fuit Romani Pontificis roboratum, ne in exemplum transeat similia praesumendi, quod a senatore factum fuerat in praeiudicium monasterii, non conventi, nec confessi etiam vel convicti, prorsus in irritum revocantes, easdem possessiones restituendas sibi sententialiter diffinimus, nec ipsas etc. [cf. c. 3. ut lite pend. II. 16. Datum Lateran.

The church also said by that reasoning that the petition of the monastery was to be repelled, because, since it had obtained that very possession without deceit and without its own fault by the authority of the praetor, and through this a right had been acquired to itself, your monastery ought not further to be heard on the possessory issue, to which it was prepared to respond in the petitory.] Therefore, with these and similar things prudently alleged by the parties in our presence and in that of our brothers, We, considering that to laymen, even to religious, no faculty has been attributed over churches and ecclesiastical persons—of whom the necessity of obeying remains, not the authority of commanding—and that from them, if anything shall have been statuted of their own motion (motu proprio), which even regards the benefit and favor of the churches, it has no firmness unless it has been approved by the Church, whence the statute of Basil concerning not alienating rural or urban estates, the ministries and ornaments of churches, was disallowed for this most weighty reason, that it was not strengthened by the authority of the Roman Pontiff, lest it pass into an example for presuming similar things, what had been done by the senator to the prejudice of the monastery, not summoned, nor even confessed or convicted, we utterly revoke into nullity, and we definitively determine by sentence that those same possessions are to be restored to it, nor them etc. [cf. ch. 3. “while the suit is pending.” 2. 16. Given at the Lateran.

V. Kal. Dec. 1199.]

November 27, 1199.]

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Poena simpliciter apposita propter contumaciam in dubio intelligitur temporalis, et non perpetua.

A penalty simply imposed on account of contumacy is understood, when in doubt, to be temporal and not perpetual.

Idem universis Doctoribus Parisiis commorantibus.

The same, to all the Doctors residing at Paris.

Ex literis vestrae devotionis accepimus, quod, quum quidam moderni doctores liberalium artium a maiorum suorum vestigiis in tribus praesertim articulis deviarent, habitu videlicet inhonesto, in lectionum et disputationum ordine non servato, et pio usu in celebrandis exsequiis decedentium clericorum iam quasi penitus negligenter omisso, vos, cupientes vestrae consulere honestati, octo ex vobis iuratos ad hoc unanimiter elegistis, ut super dictis articulis de prudentium virorum consilio bona fide statuerent quod foret expediens et honestum, ad illud in posterum observandum vos iuramento interposito communiter adstringendo, excepto duntaxat magistro G., qui, iurare renuens et formidans, fideiussoriam pro se tantum obtulit cautionem. Fuit insuper ad cautelam a vobis fide praestita protinus constitutum, ut, si quisquam magistrorum adversus alios duceret resistendum, et primo, secundo tertiove commonitus infra triduum universitati parere contemneret magistrorum, ex tunc beneficio societatis eorum in magistralibus privaretur, et quidem hoc ultimum quidam ex vobis simpliciter, quidam vero, nisi satisfaceret, et nonnulli, nisi per nos se admitti ab aliis obtineret, se intellexisse fatentur. Quum autem supradictus magister G. infra triduum universitati non paruerit requisitus, iuxta condictum vestrum ex tunc a vobis habitus est exclusus.

From the letters of your devotion we have received that, whereas certain modern doctors of the liberal arts were deviating from the footsteps of their elders especially in three articles—namely, in an indecorous habit, in not observing the order of readings and disputations, and in the pious use, now as if entirely neglected, of celebrating the exequies of deceased clerics—you, desiring to consult for your honorableness, unanimously chose eight sworn from among you to determine in good faith, with the counsel of prudent men, what would be expedient and honest concerning the said articles, binding you in common by an interposed oath to observe it thereafter, except only Master G., who, refusing and fearing to swear, offered a surety caution for himself alone. It was moreover, as a precaution, immediately established by you, a pledge of faith having been provided, that if any of the masters should lead resistance against the others, and, having been warned a first, second, or third time, should within three days contemn to obey the university of the masters, from then he would be deprived of the benefit of their society in magisterial matters; and indeed, as to this last point, some of you confess that they understood it simply, some, however, unless he should make satisfaction, and some, unless through us he should obtain to be admitted by others. But when the aforesaid Master G., though required, did not obey the university within three days, according to your compact he was from then held by you as excluded.

Qui, quum satisfactioni condignae postmodum se obtulisset, in IV. vestrum iuramento interposito compromisit, illorum dictum pro bono pacis se gratum et ratum pariter habiturum. Illi vero, usi consilio sapientum, dictum suum communiter promulgarunt, memorato magistro in virtute iuramenti praestiti prohibentes, ne deinceps in licitis universitati resisteret magistrorum, et iniungentes eidem, ut tamdiu in eo statu persisteret, quo tunc erat, donec per se vel procuratorem suum se posse ab aliis magistris admitti per sedem apostolicam obtineret, salva in omnibus honestate. Unde nobis humiliter supplicastis, ut eundem magistrum, virum utique providum et honestum, qui tanquam obedientiae filius quod sibi praedicti quatuor iniunxerunt suscepit humiliter et patienter observat, ex benignitate sedis apostolicae faceremus communioni restitui magistrorum.

He, when afterward he had offered himself to condign satisfaction, compromised himself to 4 of you with an oath interposed, that for the good of peace he would alike hold their dictum as agreeable and ratified. They, however, employing the counsel of the wise, jointly promulgated their dictum, forbidding the aforesaid master, by virtue of the oath rendered, henceforth to resist the university of the masters in lawful matters, and enjoining him to persist for so long in that status in which he then was, until, by himself or by his proctor, he should obtain through the Apostolic See that he could be admitted by the other masters, his honor preserved in all things. Whence you humbly supplicated us that the same master, a man assuredly provident and honest, who, as a son of obedience, has undertaken what the aforesaid four enjoined upon him and observes it humbly and patiently, we would, by the benignity of the Apostolic See, cause to be restored to the communion of the masters.

Nos igitur ex praemissis intelligentes, eidem magistro fuisse mandatum, ut tam diu in eo statu persisteret, quo tunc erat, donec magistrorum communioni de mandato sedis apostolicae redderetur, et paratus sit super praemissis satisfactionem congruam exhibere: Licet a vobis fide praestita fuerit constitutum, ut, si quis magistrorum ordinationi universitatis ipsorum duceret resistendum, et primo, secundo tertiove commonitus infra triduum universitati parere contemneret magistrorum, ex tunc beneficio societatis eorum in magistralibus privaretur, et ob hoc magister G. fuit eorum communione privatus, quia tamen constitutum non fuit, ut in perpetuum huiusmodi privatio perduraret, quum tam iuris canonici quam nostri moris exsistat, ut is, qui propter contumaciam communione privatur, quum satisfactionem congruam exhibuerit, restitutionem obtineat: universitati vestrae praesentium auctoritate mandamus, quatenus supradictum magistrum statutis vestris nunc humiliter parere curantem, ad communionis vestrae consortium in magistralibus admittatis.

We therefore, understanding from the aforesaid that a mandate had been given to the same master that he should persist for so long in that status in which he then was until he should be restored to the communion of the masters by mandate of the Apostolic See, and that he is prepared to exhibit appropriate satisfaction concerning the aforesaid: Although by you, faith having been pledged, it had been established that, if any of the masters should deem it necessary to resist the ordinance of their university, and, when admonished the first, second, or third time, within a three-day period should refuse in contempt to obey the university of the masters, from then he would be deprived of the benefit of their society in magisterial matters, and on this account Master G. was deprived of their communion, yet because it was not established that such deprivation should endure in perpetuity, since it exists both by canon law and by our custom that he who is deprived of communion on account of contumacy, when he has exhibited appropriate satisfaction, obtains restitution: we command your university by the authority of these presents that you admit the aforesaid master, who is now taking care humbly to obey your statutes, into the fellowship of your communion in magisterial matters.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Non possunt canonici sine causa restringere numerum canonicorum seu praebendarum. Abb. Sicul.

The canons cannot without cause restrict the number of canons or of prebends. Abbot Siculus.

Honorius III. Episcopo et Cantori Cabilonensi.

Honorius 3. To the Bishop and the Cantor of Chalon.

Ex parte venerabilis fratris nostri episcopi Eduensis fuit propositum coram nobis, quod canonici Eduenses propriis commodis inhiantes praebendarum numerum ab antiquo in ecclesia Eduensi statutum, licet non sint eius diminuti reditus, restrinxerunt, ut sic in temporalibus magis abundent, dum ea, de quibus valet sustentari canonicorum numerus consuetus, tali praetextu nituntur in augmentum convertere praebendarum, et in facti sui tuitionem super hoc confirmationis literas a nobis dicuntur impetrasse in communi forma. § 1. Nolentes igitur divini numinis minui cultum huiusmodi occasione in ecclesia ipsa, sed potius augmentari, discretioni vestrae mandamus, quatenus, si praemissis veritas suffragatur, antiquum numerum facientes auctoritate nostra servari, praebendas, quas a tempore ultimi statuti inveneritis vacasse in ecclesia memorata, non obstante aliqua constitutione super hoc a canonicis ipsis facta, vel confirmatione a nobis ab eisdem obtenta, personis idoneis cum consilio eiusdem episcopi sublato appellationis obstaculo conferatis.

On the part of our venerable brother, the bishop of Autun, it was set forth before us that the canons of Autun, gaping after their own advantages, have restricted the number of prebends established from of old in the church of Autun, although its revenues have not been diminished, so that thus they might abound the more in temporals, while under such a pretext they strive to convert into an augmentation of prebends those resources by which the accustomed number of canons is able to be sustained; and for the defense of their deed they are said to have procured from us letters of confirmation in common form on this matter. § 1. Not wishing, therefore, the cult of the divine numen to be diminished on this occasion in that church, but rather to be increased, we command to your discretion that, if truth supports the aforesaid, causing the ancient number to be observed by our authority, you confer upon suitable persons, with the counsel of that same bishop, the prebends which from the time of the last statute you shall find to have stood vacant in the aforesaid church, notwithstanding any constitution made on this by the canons themselves, or confirmation obtained from us by the same, the obstacle of appeal being removed.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Constitutio futura respicit, et non praeterita, nisi in ea de praeteritis caveatur.

A constitution looks to the future, and not to the past, unless provision be made in it concerning past matters.

Gregorius IX. Archipresbytero S. Mariae maioris de Urbe.

Gregory IX. To the Archpriest of St. Mary Major of the City.

Quoniam constitutio apostolicae sedis omnes adstringit et nihil debet obscurum vel ambiguum continere, declaramus, constitutionem, quam nuper super praeferendis in perceptione portionis maioribus et consuetis servitiis, a minoribus exhibendis, edidimus, non ad praeterita, sed ad futura tantum extendi, quum leges et constitutiones futuris certum sit dare formam negotiis, non ad praeterita facta trahi, nisi nominatim in eis de praeteritis caveatur.

Since a constitution of the apostolic see binds all and ought to contain nothing obscure or ambiguous, we declare that the constitution which we lately issued concerning preference, in the perception of the portion, for the greater, and the customary services to be exhibited by the lesser, is extended not to past matters, but only to future; since it is certain that laws and constitutions give form to future affairs, not to be drawn to past deeds, unless it is expressly provided in them concerning past matters.

TITULUS III. DE RESCRIPTIS.

TITLE 3. ON RESCRIPTS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Privilegio generali, secundum ius commune obtento, obstat rescriptum speciale, etiam de eo mentionem non faciens. H. d. secundum intellectum magis communem.

A special rescript stands in the way of a general privilege, obtained according to the common law, even without making mention of it. Thus decided, according to the more common understanding.

Alexander III. Senonensi Archiepiscopo.

Alexander III. To the Archbishop of Sens.

Sicut Romana ecclesia omnium ecclesiarum disponente Domino mater est et magistra, ita etiam nos, qui eidem ecclesiae, licet immeriti, supernae dispositionis providentia praesidemus, [et] prout Dominus nobis ministraverit, consultationibus respondere cogimur singulorum, et quae videntur dubia apostolicae circumspectionis providentia declarare. Sane Quaesitum est a nobis ex parte tua, utrum, si alicuius causa inter aliquos delegatis iudicibus sublato remedio appellationis committitur, et literis apostolicis altera pars munita, quibus ei generaliter est indultum, ut libere sibi liceat appellare, si in vocem appellationis proruperit, an eius in eadem causa debeat appellationi deferri? Huic igitur Inquisitioni tuae praesentibus literis taliter respondemus, quod eius in hac parte appellatio non debet admitti, postquam est causa iudicibus appellatione remota commissa, quia speciale mandatum derogat generali.

Just as the Roman church, with the Lord disposing, is the mother and teacher of all churches, so also we, who, though unworthy, preside over the same church by the providence of heavenly disposition, [and] as the Lord shall have ministered to us, are compelled to respond to the consultations of individuals, and to declare, by the providence of apostolic circumspection, the things which seem doubtful. Indeed it has been asked of us on your part whether, if the cause of someone between certain persons is committed to delegated judges with the remedy of appeal removed, and the other party is fortified with apostolic letters, by which it is generally indulted to him that it be permitted to him freely to appeal, if he should burst forth into the voice of appeal, whether his appeal in the same cause ought to be deferred to. To this your inquisition, therefore, by the present letters we thus respond: that his appeal in this part ought not to be admitted, after the cause has been committed to judges with appeal removed, because a special mandate derogates from a general one.

[Praeterea etc. cf. c. 5. de off. iud.

[Moreover etc. cf. c. 5. on the office of the judge.

del. I. 29.]

delete 1. 29.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

In rescripto apostolico subintelligitur clausula: "si preces veritate nitantur." Et si rescriptum prohibet causae cognitionem, est de falsitate suspectum.

In the apostolic rescript, the clause is implicitly understood: "if the petitions are supported by truth." And if the rescript prohibits the cognition of the cause, it is suspected of falsity.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ex parte venerabilis fratris nostri Conventrensis episcopi nostris est auribus intimatum, quod, quum de causa, quae inter G. et F. clericos vertitur super praebenda de Novalis, cognoscens legitime eidem F. secundum tenorem literarum nostrarum, continentium, quod, si constaret, ipsum F. de periurio esse convictum, et perpetuo illi renunciasse praebendae, appellatione cessante amoveretur ab ea; eo cognito et probato, praebendam adiudicasset eandem, ipse in vocem appellationis prorupit, et ad te, quod ei praebendam praecise et absque causae cognitione restitueres, literas nostras reportavit, et episcopum, qui post appellationem eum praebenda spoliavit, auctoritate alicui beneficium conferendi appellatione cessante privares, donec per se, vel per nuncium, aut per literas suas de tanto excessu satisfacturus ad sedem apostolicam accederet, et praenominatum G., si eundem F. in iam dicta praebenda praesumeret molestare, vinculo excommunicationis usque ad dignam satisfactionem adstringeres. Verum quoniam non credimus, nos ita praecise scripsisse, et si taliter scripsimus, hoc ex nimia occupatione contigit, et in huiusmodi literis intelligenda est haec conditio, etiamsi non apponatur: "si preces veritate nitantur:" fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus inspectis literis, quas episcopo praedicto direximus, si inveneris, quod secundum praedictum modum ei scripserimus, et in literis nostris appellatio fuerit inhibita, et in literis, quas tibi praefatus F. reportavit, non fuerit habita mentio priorum literarum, sententiam praefati episcopi omni occasione et appellatione cessante confirmes, et saepedictum F. cum literis nostris, quas tibi detulit, ad praesentiam nostram venire compellas.

On the part of our venerable brother the Bishop of Coventry it has been intimated to our ears that, when, concerning the cause which is contested between G. and F., clerics, over the prebend of Novalis, he, legitimately taking cognizance, to that same F. according to the tenor of our letters—which contained that, if it were established that the said F. had been convicted of perjury and had renounced the prebend to him in perpetuity, he should, appeal ceasing, be removed from it—this being known and proved, had adjudged that same prebend, he himself burst into the cry of appeal, and carried back to you our letters, to the effect that you should restore the prebend to him precisely and without cognition of the cause, and that you should deprive of authority to confer any benefice, appeal ceasing, the bishop who after the appeal despoiled him of the prebend, until he should come to the Apostolic See in person, or by a nuncio, or by his letters, to make satisfaction for so great an excess, and that you should bind the aforesaid G., if he should presume to molest that same F. in the already-said prebend, with the bond of excommunication until due satisfaction. However, since we do not believe that we wrote so precisely; and if we did write thus, this happened from excessive occupation; and in letters of this sort this condition is to be understood, even if it is not appended: "if the petitions rest on truth": we command to your fraternity by apostolic writings, by way of precept, that, upon inspecting the letters which we addressed to the aforesaid bishop, if you find that we wrote to him according to the aforesaid manner, and in our letters an appeal was inhibited, and in the letters which the aforesaid F. brought back to you no mention was had of the prior letters, you confirm the sentence of the aforesaid bishop, all occasion and appeal ceasing, and compel the oft-mentioned F., with our letters which he brought to you, to come into our presence.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Si in secundo rescripto, per adversarium impetrato, non fiat mentio de primo, valet primum, et non secundum; alias valet secundum. Et si primum fuit impetratum communi consensu partium, non valet secundum impetratum per alteram partem, hoc tacito.

If in the second rescript, obtained by the adversary, no mention is made of the first, the first is valid and not the second; otherwise the second is valid. And if the first was obtained by the common consent of the parties, the second, obtained by the other party, is not valid, this being passed over in silence.

Idem Wintoniensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Winchester.

Ceterum si aliquis ad iudices super aliqua causa ab apostolica sede impetraverit literas commissionis, et adversarius eius eandem causam postmodum obtinuerit committi aliis, de commissione priori non habita mentione, priores iudices ad decisionem causae possunt procedere, nec secundae literae obtinent alicuius roboris firmitatem. Si vero in secundis literis habeatur mentio de commissione priori, praedicta causa a priorum est exempta iudicio, quum eaedem literae non sint veritate tacita impetratae. Verum si de assensu partium causa committitur, et processu temporis, vel etiam continuo, alterutra pars altera nesciente causam ipsam, tacito de commissione priori facta, alii iudici obtinuerit delegari: non immerito is, qui tali dolo vel fraude adversarium suum laborare coegit, in expensis condemnari debet eidem.

Moreover, if someone has obtained from the apostolic see letters of commission to judges concerning some cause, and his adversary afterward has procured that the same cause be committed to others, with no mention had of the prior commission, the former judges can proceed to the decision of the cause, nor do the second letters obtain any firmness of binding force. But if in the second letters mention is had of the prior commission, the aforesaid cause is exempted from the judgment of the former, since those same letters were not obtained with the truth kept tacit. Yet if by the assent of the parties the cause is committed, and with the progress of time, or even immediately, either party, the other being unaware, has procured that the cause itself, with silence kept about the prior commission made, be delegated to another judge: not without merit should he who by such deceit or fraud has forced his adversary to labor be condemned in expenses to him.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Si Papa mandat in rescripto de duobus inquiri alternative, ad certum effectum consequendum sufficit alterum probari.

If the Pope mandates in a rescript that inquiry be made alternatively concerning two matters, to obtain a certain effect it suffices that one be proved.

Idem Eboracensi Archiepiscopo.

The same, to the Archbishop of York.

Inter ceteras consultationes tuas [id nobis] fuit propositum coram nobis, quid tenere debeas, quum aliqua sub disiunctione mandantur, quorum unum verum est, alterum falsum, utputa si proponatur, quod si talis sit sacerdotis filius, et in sacerdotio genitus, qui proximo in tali ecclesia ministravit, vel quod illicite ecclesiam occupavit eandem. Huic ergo quaestioni taliter respondemus, quod convenit, iudici quodcunque istorum constiterit, illi praelibatam ecclesiam adiudicari debere. Et idem in similibus observandum est.

Among your other consultations [that to us] there was set forth before us what you ought to hold, when certain things are mandated under a disjunction, of which one is true, the other false; for example, if it be proposed that either such a one is a priest’s son, and begotten in the priesthood, who most recently ministered in such a church, or that he illicitly occupied the same church. To this question, therefore, we thus respond: that it is fitting that the judge, whatsoever of these shall have been established, should adjudge the aforesaid church to him. And the same is to be observed in similar cases.

Sane si etc. (cf. c. 8. de off. iud.

Indeed, if, etc. (cf. ch. 8, On the Office of the Judge.)

del. I. 29.)

del. 1. 29.)

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Is, ad quem rescriptum Papae dirigitur, debet illi parere, vel causam rationabilem assignare, quare parere non potest.

He, to whom the Pope’s rescript is directed, ought to obey him, or adduce a reasonable cause why he cannot obey.

Idem Ravennati Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Ravenna.

Si quando aliqua tuae fraternitati scripta dirigimus, quae animum tuum exasperare videntur, turbari non debes neque moveri, aut credere, quod personam tuam velimus contemptibilem reddere vel despectam, quia te sicut carum fratrem nostrum et immobilem columnam ecclesiae affluentissima caritate diligimus, et honoris et exaltationis tuae desideramus modis omnibus incrementum. Nam etsi saepe fratribus et coepiscopis nostris secundum varietatem eorum, quae nobis suggeruntur, aspere et dure scribamus, hoc tamen non ex minori affectione contingit, sed ut clamoribus querelantium secundum Deum et iuxta officii nostri debitum satisfacere comprobemur. Quapropter monemus prudentiam tuam et hortamur attentius, quatenus de cetero non movearis, neque turberis, nec tuus animus deiiciatur, si tibi durum vel asperum scripserimus; sed sicut vir providus et discretus Qualitatem negotii, pro quo tibi scribitur, diligenter considerans et attendens, aut mandatum nostrum devote et reverenter adimpleas, aut per literas tuas quare adimplere non possis sufficientem et rationabilem causam praetendas quia nos patienter sustinebimus, si non feceris quod prava nobis fuerit insinuatione suggestum.

If ever we direct to your fraternity certain writings which seem to exasperate your mind, you ought not to be troubled nor moved, nor to believe that we wish to render your person contemptible or despised, because we love you with most abundant charity as our dear brother and an immovable column of the Church, and we desire by all means the increase of your honor and exaltation. For even if we often write harshly and sternly to our brothers and co-bishops according to the variety of those things that are suggested to us, this nevertheless does not occur from a lesser affection, but so that we may be proven to satisfy, according to God and in keeping with the obligation of our office, the clamors of the complainants. Wherefore we admonish your prudence and exhort you more attentively, that henceforth you be not moved nor disturbed, nor let your spirit be cast down, if we shall have written something hard or harsh to you; but, like a provident and discreet man, carefully considering and attending to the Quality of the business on account of which it is written to you, either fulfill our mandate devoutly and reverently, or in your letters put forward a sufficient and reasonable cause why you cannot fulfill it; for we will patiently endure it, if you do not do that which has been suggested to us by perverse insinuation.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Cistercienses sunt privilegiati, quod non possunt conveniri per rescriptum Papae, nisi in eo fiat mentio de eorum ordine.

The Cistercians are privileged, in that they cannot be convened by a rescript of the Pope, unless mention is made therein of their order.

Idem Cisterciensibus Fratribus.

The same to the Cistercian Brothers.

Quum ordinem Cisterciensem professi eo privilegio, quo fratres alii [eiusdem ordinis], gaudeatis, inter vos et clericos alios saeculares super decimis quaestione suborta, tacito quod sitis Cisterciensis ordinis, contra vos velut contra monachos alterius ordinis literas a sede apostolica impetrantes, deinde iuramentis et litigiis, sicut vobis significantibus accepimus, et expensis difficilibus vos inquietant. Volentes ergo vobis sollicite providere, ne contra tenorem privilegiorum vestrorum possitis quorumlibet temeritate vexari, auctoritate apostolica vobis mandamus, ut Si contra vos super decimis vel aliis, quae ordini vestro specialiter sedes apostolica indulsit, non facta mentione Cisterciensis ordinis, literae fuerint a sede apostolica impetratae, per eas minime teneamini respondere.

Since you, having professed the Cistercian order, enjoy that privilege by which the other brothers [of the same order] do, when a question has arisen between you and other secular clerics concerning tithes, they, keeping silent that you are of the Cistercian order, procure letters from the Apostolic See against you as though against monks of another order, and then, by oaths and litigations, as we have learned from your report, and by burdensome expenses, they disquiet you. Wishing therefore to provide solicitously for you, lest, against the tenor of your privileges, you be able to be vexed by anyone’s temerity, by apostolic authority we command you, that If against you concerning tithes or other things which the Apostolic See has specially indulged to your order, no mention having been made of the Cistercian order, letters shall have been procured from the Apostolic See, you are by no means held to respond by them.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Si sede vacante scribitur capitulo, ut gerenti vices episcopi, ut praebendam alicui conferat, si creatur episcopus nondum exsecuto mandato, et ad eum spectet collatio praebendarum, illud adimplere tenetur. Hoc dicit secundum lecturam communiter approbatam. Abb.

If, while the see is vacant, it is written to the chapter that the one discharging the bishop’s functions should confer a prebend upon someone, if a bishop is created before the mandate has been executed, and the collation of prebends pertains to him, he is bound to fulfill it. He says this according to the reading commonly approved. Abbot.

Sicul.

Sicilian.

Idem Tornacensi Episcopo.

The Same to the Bishop of Tournai.

Eam te (Et infra:) Dudum siquidem ante tuam promotionem literae a nobis, si bene meminimus, emanarunt, quibus decano et ecclesiae tibi commissae, te adhuc in eodem capitulo exsistente, mandatum dedimus et praeceptum, ut dilectum filium nostrum P. praesentium latorem, qui de gente Iudaeorum originem duxit, et divina gratia fidem Christi humiliter et devote suscepit, obtentu suae conversationis, obtentuque literarum, in quibus ita profecit, quod ecclesiastico beneficio dignus non immerito reputatur, receptis literis nostris in canonicum reciperent, et praebendam, si qua vacaret, vel quam primo vacare contingeret, liberaliter sibi conferre deberent. (Et infra:) Ipsi vero, sicut eodem M. referente recepimus, literis nostris post consecrationem tuam receptis, quia donatio praebendarum ad te spectabat, praeceptum nostrum, sicut asserebant, debitae exsecutioni non potuerunt mandare. Quum itaque praescriptus P., sicut asserit, te super hoc ex parte nostra instanter requireret, tu ei respondisti, quod nullum inde a nobis mandatum receperas, et sic eum a te infecto negotio remisisti.

The same to you (And below:) For indeed some time ago, before your promotion, letters from us, if we remember well, were issued, by which to the dean and to the church committed to you, while you were still existing in that same chapter, we gave a mandate and precept, that our beloved son P., the bearer of these presents, who drew his origin from the nation of the Jews and by divine grace humbly and devoutly received the faith of Christ, on the ground of his conversation and on the ground of his letters, in which he has so profited that he is not undeservedly reckoned worthy of an ecclesiastical benefice, upon receiving our letters they should receive into the canonry, and should generously confer upon him a prebend, if any were vacant, or the one which should first happen to fall vacant. (And below:) But they, as we received with the same M. reporting, our letters having been received after your consecration—because the donation of prebends pertained to you—were not able, as they asserted, to commit our precept to due execution. When therefore the aforesaid P., as he asserts, urgently petitioned you about this on our part, you answered him that you had received no mandate from us concerning it, and thus you sent him away from you with the business unfinished.

Quod nullatenus fecisse deberes, si data literarum diligentius attendisses; quum tempore, quo literae ipsae datae fuerunt, de capitulo ipso esses, sicut qui eras archidiaconus et canonicus eiusdem ecclesiae, licet nec esses adhuc in episcopum consecratus. (Et infra:) Pro eo vero, quod Iudaeus exstiterit, ipsum dedignari non debes. (Et infra:) Fraternitati tuae mandamus, quatenus eum in canonicum ecclesiae tuae recipias, et ei stallum in choro et locum in capitulo assignes.

That you ought by no means to have done, if you had attended more diligently to the letters that were issued; since at the time when the letters themselves were given, you were of that very chapter, as one who was archdeacon and canon of the same church, although you had not yet been consecrated as bishop. (And below:) Indeed, for the fact that he has been a Jew, you ought not to disdain him. (And below:) We command your Fraternity that you receive him as a canon of your church, and assign to him a stall in the choir and a place in the chapter.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Non valet rescriptum impetratum ad beneficia, si in eo tacetur dignitas impetrantis.

A rescript obtained for benefices is not valid, if in it the dignity of the petitioner is kept silent.

Lucius III. Linconensi Episcopo.

Lucius 3. To the Bishop of Lincoln.

Ad aures nostras te significante pervenit, quod plerumque decani, archidiaconi, praecentores vel alii ecclesiasticis praediti dignitatibus, super minoribus beneficiis per interpositas personas literas impetrantes, nomen supprimunt dignitatis suae, et simplici nomine se appellant, tanquam non habeant aliquem personatum, ideoque rescripto nostro postulas edoceri, si fraus ista tacendi praeiudicium eis debeat generare? Consultationi igitur tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum non sit intentionis nostrae, ut personae pluribus reditibus abundantes per literas nostras pauperes clericos super minoribus beneficiis inquietent, literas, in quibus actor suae nomen dignitatis supprimit, vires nolumus aliquas obtinere. Postremo etc.

It has come to our ears, you signifying, that very often deans, archdeacons, precentors, or others endowed with ecclesiastical dignities, obtaining letters concerning lesser benefices through interposed persons, suppress the name of their dignity, and call themselves by a simple name, as though they did not have any personate; and therefore by our rescript you ask to be instructed whether this fraud of keeping silent ought to generate prejudice to them? To your consultation therefore we thus respond, that, since it is not our intention that persons abounding in more revenues, by our letters, should disquiet poor clerics over lesser benefices, we are unwilling that letters in which the petitioner suppresses the name of his dignity obtain any force. Finally, etc.

(cf. c. 36. de app. II. 28.)

(cf. ch. 36. on appeals 2. 28.)

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Valet secundum rescriptum impetratum ab adversario, licet non faciat mentionem de primo, si primus impetrans dolo vel negligentia non fuit usus illo.

The second rescript, obtained by the adversary, is valid, although it makes no mention of the first, if the first impetrant, through fraud or negligence, did not make use of it.

Idem Norvicensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Norwich.

Si autem aliquis, auctoritate posteriorum literarum per adversarium in iudicium tractus, obiecerit, literas se priores habere, de quibus in posterioribus mentio non habetur, si eis dolo vel negligentia uti postposuerit, excusari non debet. Si autem, quia delegati iudicis copiam nequiverit habere, per posteriores literas non poterit conveniri.

But if someone, drawn into judgment by his adversary by the authority of posterior letters, should object that he has prior letters, of which no mention is had in the posterior ones, if he has postponed using them through fraud or negligence, he ought not to be excused. If, however, because he has not been able to have the availability of the delegated judge, he cannot be convened by virtue of the posterior letters.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Non valent rescripta, per quae incerti iudices dantur, vel futura negotia committuntur.

Rescripts, by which indeterminate judges are appointed, or future business is committed, are not valid.

Idem.

The same.

Ad haec sumus in sede iustitiae disponente Domino constituti, ut quae contra iustitiam attentantur nostra sollicitudine ad rectitudinis tramitem revocentur etc. (Et infra:) Proinde Significatum est nobis, quosdam in provinciae tuae partibus tales, ut asserunt, de cancellaria nostra literas recepisse, per quas eorum omnia negotia unius iudicis vel plurium, quos sibi elegerint, arbitrio committuntur, sicque fit, ut, si aliquem pulsare voluerint, examen ordinarii iudicis non requirant, sed ad unum iudicem vel plures delegatos sibi propitios et exinde parti adversae suspectos super examinanda quaestione recurrant. Quod quantum sit Deo contrarium et sacris canonibus inimicum, nemo ambigit, qui vel modicam notitiam canonicae institutionis apprehendit.

To these things we are established, with the Lord disposing, in the seat of justice, so that the things which are attempted against justice may by our solicitude be called back to the path of rectitude, etc. (And below:) Accordingly it has been signified to us that certain persons in parts of your province, as they assert, have received letters from our chancellery, by which all their affairs are committed to the discretion of one judge or of several, whom they may have chosen for themselves; and thus it comes about that, if they should wish to sue someone, they do not seek the examination of the ordinary judge, but resort to one judge or several delegated, favorable to themselves and thence suspected by the adverse party, for the question to be examined. How contrary this is to God and hostile to the sacred canons, no one doubts who has apprehended even a slight knowledge of canonical institution.

Tales itaque literas a cancellaria nostra non credimus prodiisse, vel, si forte prodierint, conscientiam nostram, quae diversis occupationibus impedita singulis examinandis non sufficit, effugerunt. Nos igitur huic morbo celeri volentes obviare remedio, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus quatenus, si literas tales in provincia tua vel impetratas vel deinceps impetrandas inveneris, eas carere viribus nostra auctoritate decernas, et ne ab aliquo in iudicium admittantur super quacunque quaestione prohibeas.

Such letters, therefore, we do not believe to have issued from our chancery; or, if perchance they have issued, they have escaped our conscience, which, hindered by diverse occupations, does not suffice for examining each singly. We therefore, wishing to meet this malady with a swift remedy, by apostolic writings command your fraternity that, if you find such letters in your province either already impetrated or henceforth to be impetrated, you should by our authority decree them to be without force, and forbid that they be admitted into judgment by anyone concerning whatsoever question.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Falsa latinitas vitiat rescriptum Papae. Hoc dicit Ioan. Andr.; concordat Abbas.

False Latinity vitiates the rescript of the Pope. John Andrew says this; the Abbot concurs.

Idem.

The same.

Ad audientiam nostram te significante pervenit, quod H. de sancto Stephano super absolutione sua literas tibi, ut prima facie videbantur, apostolicas praesentavit, quas, quoniam habuisti suspectas, nec de cancellaria ecclesiae Romanae emanasse putasti, ad nos remittere curavisti, consulens apostolatum nostrum, unde devotionem tuam in Domino commendamus, utrum occasione ipsarum literarum praefatum virum habere debeas absolutum. Quibus quoniam manifestum continent in constructione peccatum, fidem te nolumus adhibere.

It has come to our hearing, with you signifying, that H. of Saint Stephen, concerning his absolution, presented to you letters which, as they seemed at first sight, were apostolic; which, since you held them suspect and did not think that they had emanated from the chancery of the Roman Church, you took care to remit to us, consulting our apostolate, wherefore we commend your devotion in the Lord, whether on the occasion of those letters you ought to have the aforesaid man as absolved. Since they plainly contain in their construction a fault, we do not wish you to lend credence to them.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Contra secundum rescriptum non potest opponi de taciturnitate primi impetrati per appellantem, de sua appellatione non habita mentione. Hoc dic. Ioan.

Against the second rescript, one cannot object on the basis of the taciturnity of the first, which was obtained by the appellant, no mention having been had of his own appellation. This says John.

Andr.; concord. Abb. Sicul.

Andrew; the Sicilian Abbot agrees.

Clemens III.

Clement III.

Ex parte S. personae ecclesiae de Tarento nobis innotuit, quod, quum capella de Emptonn. ad praedictam ecclesiam de iure pertineat, ab ea multis temporibus iniuste est subtracta, et O. diaconus, qui iam dictam capellam detinet, capellanum ipsius ecclesiae G., nomine ipsius S. in ea ministrantem, post appellationem a se factam amovit. Quam quum esset S. prosecutus, et ad iudices literas impetrasset, ipse O. appellationem suam prosequi non curavit, quumque auctoritate praedictorum iudicum in ius esset vocatus, dixit, se literas priores habere, de quibus nulla mentio in posterioribus habebatur, quas usque ad tertiam citationem suppressit, eisque dolo vel negligentia uti postposuit, quod ex diuturnitate temporis videbatur, in quibus nulla mentio de appellatione ab ipso facta fiebat, quum biennium a tempore appellationis iam fuisset elapsum.

On the part of S., the persona of the church of Tarento, it became known to us that, although the chapel of Emptonn. pertains by right to the aforesaid church, it has been unjustly subtracted from it for many periods, and O., a deacon, who holds the already-said chapel, removed the chaplain of that church, G., ministering there in the name of the said S., after an appeal made by himself. Which appeal when S. had pursued, and had obtained letters to the judges, O. himself did not care to prosecute his appeal; and when by the authority of the aforesaid judges he was called into court, he said that he had earlier letters, of which no mention was had in the later ones, which he suppressed up to the third citation, and to use which he postponed by fraud or negligence, as was seen from the long duration of time, in which no mention was made of the appeal made by himself, although a span of two years from the time of the appeal had already elapsed.

Ideoque fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si ita esse constiterit, revocatis in statum pristinum omnibus, quae post appellationem ipsius O. inveneritis attentata, praescriptam capellam matrici ecclesiae appellatione remota restituere procuretis, praedictum O., si eum appellationem suam non fuisse prosecutum constiterit, memorato S. in expensis necessariis condemnantes.

Therefore we command your fraternity by apostolic writings that, if it shall have been established to be so, with all things which you shall find to have been attempted after the appeal of O. recalled to their former state, you take care to restore the aforesaid chapel to the mother church, the appeal set aside, condemning the aforesaid O., if it shall have been established that he did not prosecute his appeal, to the aforementioned S. for the necessary expenses.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Rescriptum, quo scribitur pluribus cum clausula: "Quod si non omnes etc." intelligitur tam de impotentia facti, quam iuris.

A rescript, wherein it is written to several with the clause: "But if not all, etc.," is understood as concerning impossibility both of fact and of law.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine III.

Sciscitatus es a nobis petitorio destinato, de qua impotentia illud intelligatur, quod in literis nostris saepe consuevit apponi, ut si duo vel tres, vel etiam plures, quibus literae diriguntur, ipsis exsequendis simul interesse nequiverint, unus aut plures eorum, quibus scribitur, nihilominus exsequantur. Nos vero in hoc ita sentimus, quod tam de iure quam de facto illa impotentia censeatur. De iure, si aliquem illorum, quibus literae diriguntur, servum, vel infamem aut alio legitimo impedimento detentum esse constiterit; de facto, si constiterit, eum casu mortis occumbere, aut inevitabilis necessitatis articulo impediri, quo minus valeat interesse; dummodo is, qui pro necessitate praesens esse non potest, collegis suis canonice excusationem suam curet, si poterit, destinare, ut alii coniudices vel exsecutores nihilominus ad consummationem iniuncti mandati procedant.

You have inquired of us by a petition sent, about which impotence (inability) that clause is to be understood, which is often accustomed to be appended in our letters: namely, that if two or three, or even more, to whom the letters are directed, have not been able to be present together for executing them, one or more of those to whom it is written should nevertheless execute. We for our part think thus herein: that that impotence is to be reckoned both de jure and de facto. De jure, if it has been established that someone of those to whom the letters are directed is a slave, or infamous, or detained by some other lawful impediment; de facto, if it has been established that he has succumbed to a case of death, or is hindered at the crisis of inevitable necessity, so that he is not able to be present; provided that he who by necessity cannot be present takes care, if he can, to send his canonical excuse to his colleagues, so that the other co-judges or executors may nevertheless proceed to the consummation of the enjoined mandate.

Nec ille, qui tantummodo non vult interesse, hac impossibilitatis interpretatione valet aliquatenus excusari, nisi forte sic in rescripto habeatur expressum, si non omnes interfuerint, vel simul nequiverint aut noluerint interesse.

Nor may he who merely does not wish to be present be in any measure excused by this interpretation of impossibility, unless perhaps it is thus expressly contained in the rescript: if not all have been present, or were unable to be present together, or were unwilling to be present.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

In quaestione revocationis rescriptorum recurritur ad arbitros, si iudices in cognitione sibi non deferant, nec invicem concordent. H. d. usque ad § Quoniam. ñ (Quoniam etc.:) Per generalem clausulam positam in rescripto delegatus ante expressionem personarum vel rerum iurisdictionem habet in habitu, et non in actu.

In the question of the revocation of rescripts, recourse is had to arbiters, if the judges do not defer the cognizance to themselves, nor agree with one another. H. d. up to § Since. ñ (Since etc.:) By a general clause set in the rescript, the delegate, before the expression of the persons or of the matters, has jurisdiction in habitu, and not in actu.

Et speciales literae derogant literis generalibus super non specificatis in eis, quamquam de illis nullam faciant mentionem. Abb.

And special letters derogate from general letters regarding things not specified in them, although they make no mention of them. Abbot.

Innocentius III. Eliensi Episcopo.

Innocent III. To the Bishop of Ely.

Pastoralis officii (Et infra: [cf. c. 28. de off. iud. del.

Of the pastoral office (And below: [cf. ch. 28 on the office of the delegated judge.

I. 29.]) Praeterea quaesivisti, quando de revocatione literarum ambigitur, utrum iudices priores, an posteriores cognoscere debeant, et utrum per secundas sint primae literae revocatae? Ad quod tibi respondemus, quod, nisi posteriores prioribus, vel e converso duxerint deferendum, simul utrique cognoscant, et, si forte nequiverint simul in unam sententiam concordare, quamvis plures sint ex una parte quam ex altera, per arbitros communiter electos a partibus huiusmodi concertatio sopiatur. Quoniam autem sub huiusmodi forma, videlicet: "Causam, quam talis adversus talem, et quosdam alios super hoc, et quibusdam aliis se habere proponit, tibi duximus committendam," a nobis multotiens literae impetrantur, et sollicite quaesivisti, an iudex ex delegatione huiusmodi ante personarum vel rerum expressionem super personis vel rebus exprimendis habeat potestatem, adiiciens, utrum, si antequam personae vel res expressae fuerint nominatim, super non expressis in commissione priori, sed generaliter comprehensis speciales literae, quae de priori commissione nullam faciant mentionem, ad alios iudices a sede apostolica emanaverint, eundem vigorem debeant obtinere?

1. 29.]) Moreover, you have inquired, when there is ambiguity about the revocation of letters, whether the prior judges or the posterior ought to take cognizance, and whether by the second the first letters are revoked. To which we respond to you, that unless the later shall have deemed it to be deferred to the earlier, or conversely, both should take cognizance together; and if by chance they are not able together to agree into one sentence, although there are more on one side than on the other, let such contention be lulled by arbitrators commonly elected by the parties. And since under such a form, namely: “The cause which such a one proposes that he has against such a one, and certain others on this matter, and against certain others, we have deemed to be committed to you,” letters are many times obtained from us, you have diligently asked whether a judge from such a delegation, before the expression of persons or of things, has power over the persons or things to be expressed, adding whether, if before the persons or things shall have been expressly named, special letters concerning those not expressed in the prior commission but comprehended generally, which make no mention of the prior commission, shall have emanated from the Apostolic See to other judges, they ought to obtain the same force?

Nos igitur ad haec duo taliter respondemus, quod, quum generali per speciale procul dubio derogetur, iurisdictio per generales literas attributa, per speciales, quantum ad ea, quae specialiter exprimuntur, penitus enervatur, licet de prioribus non faciant mentionem. Unde superflua relinquitur prima quaestio; etsi merito dici possit, quod, donec iurisdictio revocetur, eam super rerum vel personarum articulis exprimendis obtinet delegatus; sed antequam exprimantur personae vel res, delegatus nequit iurisdictionem huiusmodi exercere. [Quia vero etc.

We therefore to these two things respond thus: that, since without doubt the general is derogated by the special, the jurisdiction attributed by general letters is, by special ones, utterly enervated, so far as concerns those things which are specially expressed, although they make no mention of the prior. Whence the first question is left superfluous; although it may rightly be said that, until the jurisdiction is revoked, the delegate holds it for the purpose of expressing the articles of things or of persons; but before the persons or things are expressed, the delegate cannot exercise jurisdiction of this kind. [Because indeed etc.

(cf. c. 28. de off. iud. del.

(cf. ch. 28 on the office of the delegated judge.

I. 29.) Dat. Rom. ap. S. Petr.

1. 29.) Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s.

XIV. Kal. Iun.

14 days before the Kalends of June.

1204.]

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Per generalem clausulam: "Quidam alii, et res aliae," multitudo effrenata non includitur, nec personae, nec res maiores expressis, sed pares vel minores.

By the general clause: "Certain others, and other things," an unbridled multitude is not included, nor persons, nor things greater than those expressed, but those equal or lesser.

Idem Senonensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Sens.

Sedes apostolica consuevit exhibere se petentibus liberalem; sed quidam eius gratia nequiter abutuntur, dum quod ipsa de benignitate concedit ipsi ad malignitatem retorquent. Quidam enim malignari volentes, in commissionibus nostris minores et viliores personas propriis nominibus exprimunt, maiores autem et digniores specialibus vocabulis non designant, sed eas sub quodam generalitatis involucro comprehendunt, ut commissiones ipsas a nobis facilius impetrent, sub hac forma: "Conquerentur tales de isto vel illo, et aliis quibusdam propriis nominibus exprimendis, qui eis super tali negotio et quibusdam aliis rebus iniuriosi nimis et graves exsistunt." Nos igitur volentes eorum malitiis obviare, decernimus, ut, quum in commissionibus nostris minores et viliores personae solummodo designantur, maiores et digniores sub generali clausula non intelligantur includi. Sed nec liceat occasione generalitatis huiusmodi multitudinem effrenatam in iudicium evocare, nec super maioribus et gravioribus negotiis audiantur qui de minoribus et levioribus tantum faciunt mentionem.

The Apostolic See has been accustomed to show itself liberal to petitioners; but certain men wickedly abuse its favor, in that what it grants out of benignity they themselves twist unto malignity. For certain persons, wishing to act with malignity, in our commissions express the lesser and viler persons by their proper names, but the greater and more worthy they do not designate by special vocables; rather they include them under a certain involucre of generality, so that they may more easily obtain the commissions themselves from us, under this form: "Such-and-such complain concerning this man or that, and certain others to be expressed by their proper names, who prove to be excessively injurious and grievous to them about such a business and certain other matters." We therefore, wishing to meet their malices, decree that, when in our commissions only the lesser and viler persons are designated, the greater and more worthy are not to be understood as included under the general clause. Nor let it be permitted, on the occasion of a generality of this sort, to summon an unbridled multitude into judgment, nor let those be heard concerning greater and graver negotiations who make mention only of lesser and lighter ones.

Si quis vero aliquas personas expresserit, non, ut velit cum eis in iudicio experiri, sed ut ad pares transire valeat vel minores, quia fraus et dolus ei patrocinari non debent, tanquam mendax precator careat penitus impetratis. [Dat. Anagniae XV. Kal.

If, however, someone has specified certain persons, not so that he intends to try a case with them in court, but so that he may be able to pass over to equals or to inferiors, since fraud and guile ought not to sponsor him, let him, as a mendacious petitioner, be utterly deprived of the things obtained. [Given at Anagni 15 Kal.

Ian. Ao. VI. 1203.]

Jan. Year 6. 1203.]

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Qui contra unum super eodem ad diversos iudices diversa rescripta impetrat, et eis utitur, perdit commodum utriusque.

He who, against one party concerning the same matter, obtains diverse rescripts to different judges, and uses them, loses the advantage of both.

Idem R. Cantori et R. Priori de Monte Leprosorum.

The same to R., the Cantor, and R., the Prior, of the Mount of the Lepers.

Ex tenore literarum, quas nobis per dilectum filium Ph. latorem praesentium destinastis, intelleximus evidenter, R. sacerdotem de Collovilla ad alios iudices super quaestione, quae inter ipsum et dilectum filium abbatem et conventum de Becco super manerio de Colevill. et rebus aliis vertitur, literas apostolicas impetrasse. Qui quum partem citassent adversam, dictus presbyter coram eis noluit litigare.

From the tenor of the letters which you sent to us through our beloved son Ph., the bearer of these presents, we have clearly understood that R., a priest of Collovilla, obtained apostolic letters to other judges concerning the question which is in controversy between himself and our beloved son the abbot and the convent of Bec about the manor of Colevill. and other matters; and when they had cited the adverse party, the said presbyter was unwilling to litigate before them.

Postmodum vero idem presbyter super eodem negotio vobis nostras literas praesentavit, in quibus de prioribus mentio non fiebat. Quumque vos in causae cognitione procedere velletis, partibus ad vestram praesentiam convocatis, memoratus abbas coram vobis proposuit, quod non tenebatur per directas ad vos literas presbytero respondere, quum per alias ab aliis iudicibus fuisset citatus, quae auctoritate illarum non fuerant revocatae. Verum quia super hoc dubitastis, sedem duxistis apostolicam consulendam.

Afterwards indeed the same presbyter, concerning the same business, presented to you our letters, in which no mention was made of the prior ones. And when you wished to proceed in the cognition of the cause, the parties having been convoked to your presence, the aforesaid abbot put forward before you that he was not bound, by letters directed to you, to answer the presbyter, since by other letters he had been cited by other judges, which had not been revoked by the authority of those. But because you doubted about this, you judged that the Apostolic See should be consulted.

Nos igitur attendentes fraudem presbyteri memorati, duas commissiones super eodem negotio impetrantis, quarum altera non faciebat mentionem de reliqua, quia fraus et dolus alicui patrocinari non debent, decernimus, ut ipse commodo careat utriusque. [Dat. Ferentini IV. Id. Iul.

We therefore, considering the fraud of the aforesaid presbyter, who procured two commissions concerning the same business, of which one made no mention of the other, since fraud and deceit ought to avail no one, decree that he be deprived of the benefit of both. [Given at Ferentino, 12 July.

Ao. VI. 1203.]

Year 6. 1203.]

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Non valet rescriptum ad beneficium impetratum, de beneficio impetrantis non faciens mentionem.

A rescript impetrated for a benefice is not valid, making no mention of the benefice of the petitioner.

Idem Mediolanensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Milan.

Quum adeo scripta sedis apostolicae moderemur, ut ex certa scientia nihil in eis faciamus apponi, quod de iure debeat reprehendi, miramur non modicum et movemur, quod, quotiens ad te vel ad aliquos tibi subiectos nostras literas destinamus, te super eis mirari rescribis, ac si mandaremus aliquid inhonestum. Scripsisti etenim nobis, quod, quum P. clericus in ecclesia Modecensi sufficientem sibi sit praebendam adeptus, mirabaris, quod pro receptione ipsius in ecclesia de Gronzola praeposito et fratribus eiusdem ecclesiae literas apostolicas miseramus, quum, si literarum nostrarum diligenter seriem attendisses, nihil penitus invenisses in eis, quod debuisset tuum animum offendisse. Quum enim in literis ipsis nec de praebenda ipsius P. mentio haberetur, nec Modecensis canonicus, immo nec etiam clericus diceretur in eis, et in literis ipsis haec esset adiecta conditio: "si dignus exsisteret ad ecclesiasticum beneficium obtinendum, et si eadem ecclesia ex dono parentum ipsius quandam capellam cum dote fuisset adepta, et a consanguineis eius oblationes et mortuaria pro tempore, et decimas perciperet annuatim: intelligere potuisses, qualiter literae ipsae fuerant impetratae, in quibus de beneficio ipsius, pro quo scribebatur, mentio non fiebat.

Since we so moderate the writings of the Apostolic See that, with certain knowledge, we allow nothing to be inserted in them which ought by law to be reprehended, we marvel not a little and are moved that, whenever we address our letters to you or to some who are subject to you, you write back wondering at them, as if we were mandating something dishonorable. For you wrote to us that, since P., a cleric, has obtained for himself a sufficient prebend in the Modecensian church, you wondered that we had sent apostolic letters to the provost and the brothers of the same church for his reception in the church of Gronzola; whereas, if you had carefully attended to the series of our letters, you would have found absolutely nothing in them which ought to have offended your mind. For in those same letters neither was there mention made of the prebend of P. himself, nor was he said therein to be a Modecensian canon—nay, nor even a cleric—and in those letters this condition had been added: "if he should prove worthy to obtain an ecclesiastical benefice, and if that same church had obtained by the gift of his parents a certain chapel with its dowry, and received from his kinsmen oblations and mortuaries for the time being, and tithes annually": you could have understood how those letters had been impetrated, in which no mention was made of his benefice, on account of which was being written.

Ideoque Fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus quum ad te vel ad tuos literae apostolicae diriguntur, earum tenorem diligenter attendas, et quod mandatur in eis, dum tamen nec per suppressionem veritatis, aut expressionem falsitatis obtentae fuerint, facias effectui mancipari. [Datum Romae etc. XIII.

And therefore we command your Fraternity through apostolic writings, that whenever apostolic letters are directed to you or to yours, you diligently attend to their tenor, and that what is commanded in them, provided, however, that they have not been obtained by suppression of the truth or expression of falsehood, you cause to be carried into effect. [Given at Rome, etc., 13.

Kal. Iun. 1198.]

Kalends of June 1198.]

CAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER 18.

Ordo rescripti interpretationem recipit a iuro communi.

The order of a rescript receives its interpretation from the common law.

Idem Electo, Decano, et N. Canonico Cameracensi.

The same to the Elect, the Dean, and N., Canon of Cambrai.

Causam, quae inter Praemonstratensem et Pramonensem ecclesias super possessionibus de Anapia vertitur, discretioni vestrae commisisse meminimus fine canonico terminandam. Sed Quia in literis illis animadvertimus fuisse insertum, quod, si ulterutra partium citata legitime praesentiam vestram adire vel iudicio vestro parere contemneret, vos nihilominus praesentis partis probationes recipere, et, quantum de iure poteritis, in causae cognitione ac decisione procedere minime tardaretis: nos volentes, ut clausula illa, "quantum de iure poteritis," quae ante, quam de probationum receptione mentio fieret, fuerat inserenda, clausulam illam de receptione probationum praecedat, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus ipsam intelligentes ibidem in eadem causa iuxta tenorem literarum illarum procedere non tardetis, attente provisuri, ut, si literarum auctoritate priorum in eodem negotio legitime est processum, firmum et stabile perseveret; alioquin, si occasione clausulae memoratae aliquid constiterit in alterius partis praeiudicium attentatum, id viribus decernimus cariturum, volentes nihilominus et mandantes, ut in decisione ipsius negotii, sicut praemissum est, tam super principali, quam super incidentibus quaestionibus appellatione remota canonice procedatis. [Nullis obstantibus etc.

We remember to have entrusted to your discretion the case which is being turned between the Praemonstratensian and the Pramonensian churches over the possessions of Anapia, to be terminated with a canonical end. But because in those letters we noticed that it had been inserted that, if either party, having been lawfully cited, should contemn to approach your presence or to obey your judgment, you should nonetheless receive the proofs of the party present, and that you should in no way delay to proceed, as far as you could by right, in the cognition and decision of the cause: we, wishing that that clause, “quantum de iure poteritis,” which ought to have been inserted before mention was made of the reception of proofs, should precede that clause about the reception of proofs, by apostolic writings command to your discretion that, understanding this, you should not delay to proceed in the same cause in that place according to the tenor of those letters, taking careful provision that, if by the authority of the earlier letters lawful process has been made in the same business, it may persevere firm and stable; otherwise, if on occasion of the aforesaid clause it shall have been established that anything has been attempted to the prejudice of the other party, we decree that it shall lack force, wishing nonetheless and mandating that in the decision of that business, as has been premised, both on the principal and on the incidental questions, appeal removed, you proceed canonically. [With nothing notwithstanding, etc.]

Dat. Lateran. XIII.

Given at the Lateran, 13.

Kal. April 1198.]

Kalends of April 1198.]

CAP. XIX.

CHAPTER 19.

Non valet impetratio in ecclesia numerata, non facta de numero mentione, si per eam frangitur numerus canonicorum, licet non frangatur numerus praebendarum; et processus inde factus est nullus. Hoc dicit quoad intellectum Panor.

An impetration in a numbered church is not valid, no mention of the number having been made, if by it the number of canons is broken, although the number of prebends is not broken; and the process made therefrom is null. This Panor. says as to the interpretation.

Idem Archiepiscopo Senonensi.

The same to the Archbishop of Sens.

Constitutus apud sedem apostolicam in praesentia dilecti filii nostri G. sancti Angeli diaconi cardinalis P. clericus, quem ei concesseramus et parti alteri auditorem, proposuit olim coram ipso, quod quum bonae memoriae C. Papa praedecessor noster dilecto filio decano et capitulo Bituricensi dederit in mandatis, ut ipsum reciperent in canonicum et in fratrem, et praebendam ei conferrent, si qua tunc in eorum vacaret ecclesia, vel proximo vacaturam, venerabili fratre nostro Bituricensi archiepiscopo ei monitore concesso, et ipsi quum mandatum eius admittere non curassent, eis praecipiendo mandavit, ut quod eis mandaverat adimplerent, sibi super hoc exsecutoribus deputatis. [Interim autem capituli nuncius ad apostolicam sedem accedens, quum suggessisset, ipsum P. in pluribus ecclesiis habere praebendas, Bituricensem ecclesiam ab eius obtinuit impetitione absolvi, indulgentia etiam impetrata, ne infra triennium aliquem recipere in fratrem cogerentur. Quumque postmodumn idem P. ad ecclesiam Romanam reversus, eidem praedecessori nostro exponere curavisset, quod, licet in Claromontensi ecclesia quoddam beneficium, quod concedi etiam laicis consuevit, et familiaritas appellatur, fuisset adeptus, et ex ipso tamen vel alio, quod haberet, non posset commode sustentari, idem praedecessor noster dictis decano et capitulo iniunxit, ut, praedicta indulgentia in suo robore permanente, praebendam, quae post triennium primo vacaret, ipsi conferrent, interim autem ei stallum in choro et locum in capitulo assignarent, exsecutione huius mandati dilecto filio Claromontensi praeposito delegata, qui, sicut ex eius literis manifeste liquebat, quum dictos decanum et capitulum ad implendum mandatum apostolicum diligentius monuisset, nec profecisset in aliquo, praedictum P. de praebenda primo post triennium vacatura auctoritate curavit apostolica investire, ei stallum in choro et locum in capitulo concedendo.] Verum pars adversa respondit, quod, quum in Bituricensi ecclesia certus esset numerus canonicorum institutus, firmatus iureiurando, et per Romanum Pontificem confirmatus, et quum de hoc memoratus P. non fecisset in suis literis mentionem, intelligendum erat, circumvenisse praedecessorem nostrum, et dictas literas veritate tacita impetrasse.

Having appeared at the apostolic see in the presence of our beloved son G., cardinal deacon of St. Angel, P., a cleric—whom we had granted as auditor to him and to the other party—formerly set forth before him that, when C., Pope of good memory, our predecessor, had given in mandate to our beloved son the dean and the chapter of Bourges that they should receive him as a canon and as a brother, and confer a prebend upon him if any were then vacant in their church, or one about to be vacant next, with our venerable brother the archbishop of Bourges granted to him as monitor; and when they had not cared to admit his mandate, he by way of precept commanded them to fulfill what he had mandated to them, appointing executors on his part for this. [Meanwhile a nuncio of the chapter, coming to the apostolic see, when he had suggested that this P. held prebends in several churches, obtained that the church of Bourges be absolved from his claim, an indulgence also having been procured that they should not be compelled within three years to receive anyone into brotherhood. And when afterward the same P., having returned to the Roman church, had taken care to expose to that same predecessor of ours that, although in the church of Clermont he had acquired a certain benefice which is even wont to be granted to laymen and is called “familiaritas,” yet from that or from any other which he had he could not be suitably sustained, that same predecessor of ours enjoined upon the said dean and chapter that, the aforesaid indulgence remaining in its force, they should confer upon him the prebend which should first become vacant after the three-year period, and in the meantime assign to him a stall in the choir and a place in the chapter, the execution of this mandate having been delegated to the beloved son the provost of Clermont, who, as was manifest from his letters, when he had more diligently admonished the said dean and chapter to fulfill the apostolic mandate and had not advanced in any respect, took care by apostolic authority to invest the aforesaid P. with the prebend first to become vacant after three years, granting to him a stall in the choir and a place in the chapter.] But the opposing party replied that, since in the church of Bourges a certain number of canons had been established, ratified by oath, and confirmed by the Roman Pontiff, and since P. had not made mention of this in his letters, it was to be understood that he had circumvented our predecessor and had obtained the said letters with the truth kept silent.

Licet enim, quum in aliqua ecclesia certus statuitur numerus, haec apponatur conditio vel intelligatur apponi: "salva sedis apostolicae auctoritate," non tamen erat credendum, quod eum ex certa scientia contra iuramenta eorum recipi mandavisset, quum de hoc in eius literis nihil fuisset expressum. Nos igitur de praedictis per memoratum cardinalem instructi Discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si legitime vobis constiterit, numerum canonicum, qui nunc est in eadem ecclesia, per decanum et capitulum eiusdem ecclesiae iuramento firmatum, antequam praedictus clericus a praedecessore nostro literas exsecutorias impetrasset, quicquid factum est occasione literarum ipsarum, quas idem clericus a sede apostolica impetrasse dignoscitur, cassum et irritum decernatis haberi, alioquin ei faciatis in eadem ecclesia praebendam, si qua vacat, sublato cuiuslibet appellationis obstaculo assignari. [Contradictores etc.

For although, when in some church a fixed number is established, this condition is added or is understood to be added: "with the authority of the Apostolic See saved," nevertheless it was not to be believed that he, with set knowledge, had commanded him to be received against their oaths, since nothing about this had been expressed in his letters. We, therefore, instructed concerning the aforesaid by the aforesaid cardinal, by apostolic writings command Your Discretion by way of precept, to the extent that, if it has lawfully become clear to you that the fixed number of canons which now is in the same church, by the oath of the dean and chapter of the same church, had been confirmed before the aforesaid cleric had obtained executory letters from our predecessor, you are to decree that whatever was done on occasion of those letters, which the same cleric is known to have obtained from the Apostolic See, be held null and void; otherwise, you are to have a prebend assigned to him in the same church, if any is vacant, with the obstacle of any appeal removed. [The contradictors etc.

Dat. Spoleti, XI. Kal. Sept.

Given at Spoleto, August 22.

1198.]

CAP. XX.

CHAPTER 20.

Difficile et famosum c. et est clavis totius tituli. Et h. d. in summa: Exprimens falsum, vel tacens verum in rescripto, si malitiose, caret prorsus impetratis. Sed si per simplicitatem vel ignorantiam aut obtinuisset vero expresso, et suppresso falso saltem literas in forma communi, et delegatus procedit servato iuris ordine, et non speciali forma rescripti; secus, si nullo modo literas habuisset.

A difficult and notorious case, and it is the key of the whole title. And this, in sum: One who expresses the false, or keeps silent about the true in a rescript, if maliciously, is entirely deprived of what was obtained. But if through simplicity or ignorance he had obtained— with the truth expressed and the false suppressed— at least letters in the common form, then the delegate proceeds with the order of law observed, and not by the special form of the rescript; otherwise, if he had in no way had letters.

Idem A. Canonico Pictaviensi.

The same, to A., Canon of Poitiers.

Super literis, quae ab aliquibus ex malitia, et a nonnullis ex ignorantia, tacita veritate vel suggesta falsitate impetrantur a nobis, diversos intelleximus diversa sentire, aliis asserentibus, eos debere prorsus carere omni commodo literarum, quum mendax precator carere debeat penitus impetratis; aliis vero dicentibus, quod, etsi forma carere debeant in literis nostris expressa, nihilominus tamen iuxta rigorem iuris sit a delegato iudice in negotio procedendum. Nos igitur inter eos, qui per fraudem vel malitiam, et illos, qui per simplicitatem vel ignorantiam literas a nobis impetrant, huiusmodi credimus discretionem adhibendam, ut hi, qui priori modo falsitatem exprimunt vel supprimunt veritatem, in suae perversitatis poenam nullum ex illis literis commodum consequantur, ita videlicet, quod delegatus, postquam sibi super hoc facta fuerit fides, nullatenus de causa cognoscat. Inter alios autem, qui posteriori modo literas impetrant, duximus distinguendum, quae falsitas suggesta fuerit, vel quae veritas sit suppressa.

Concerning letters which are impetrated from us by some out of malice and by some out of ignorance, with the truth kept tacit or a falsity suggested, we have understood that various persons think variously, some asserting that they ought utterly to lack every benefit of the letters, since a mendacious petitioner ought altogether to lack the things impetrated; others, however, saying that, even if they ought to lack the form expressed in our letters, nevertheless the delegated judge should proceed in the business according to the rigor of law. We therefore believe that between those who impetrate letters from us through fraud or malice, and those who do so through simplicity or ignorance, such a discretion should be applied: that those who in the former way express falsity or suppress truth, as a penalty for their perversity, should obtain no benefit from those letters—namely, that the delegate, after proof on this point has been made to him, should in no way take cognizance of the cause. Among the others, however, who impetrate letters in the latter way, we have judged that a distinction should be made as to what falsity was suggested, or what truth has been suppressed.

Nam si talis expressa sit falsitas vel veritas occultata, quae, quamvis fuisset tacita vel expressa, nos nihilominus saltem in forma communi literas dedissemus: delegatus, non sequens formam in literis ipsis appositam, secundum ordinem iuris in causa procedat. Si vero per huiusmodi falsitatis expressionem vel suppressionem etiam veritatis literae fuerint impetratae, qua tacita vel expressa nos nullas prorsus literas dedissemus, a delegato non est aliquatenus procedendum, nisi forsitan eatenus, ut partibus ad suam praesentiam convocatis de precum qualitate cognoscat, ut sic in utroque casu eadem ratio, quae delegantem moveret, moveat etiam delegatum, et ubi delegans suas literas denegaret, delegatus etiam suae cognitionis officium nullatenus interponat. [Dat.

For if such a falsity be expressed or truth hidden, such that, even if it had been kept silent or expressed, we nonetheless would have given letters at least in the common form: the delegate, not following the form appended in the letters themselves, should proceed in the cause according to the order of law. But if by such expression of falsity or suppression even of truth letters have been obtained, where, with that being silent or expressed, we would have given no letters at all, it is in no wise to be proceeded with by the delegate, unless perhaps to this extent, that, the parties being convoked to his presence, he may ascertain the quality of the petitions, so that in either case the same rationale which would move the delegator may also move the delegate, and where the delegator would deny his letters, the delegate likewise by no means interpose the office of his cognition. [Given.

Ferentini XV. Kal. Nov. Pont.

At Ferentino, 15 days before the Kalends of November (October 18). Pontificate.

nostri Ao. XI. 1208.]

of our pontificate, year 11, 1208.]

CAP. XXI.

CHAPTER 21.

In causa monasterii convenitur abbas per rescriptum, in quo nulla fit mentio de conventu; nec propter hoc appellari potest, nisi abbatis et conventus bona essent distincta omnino.

In the cause of a monastery the abbot is convened by a rescript, in which no mention is made of the convent; nor on this account can an appeal be made, unless the goods of the abbot and of the convent were altogether distinct.

Idem Abbati et Conventui Praemonstratensi.

The same to the Abbot and Convent of Prémontré.

Edoceri per vestras literas postulastis a nobis, utrum per literas adversus abbates vestri ordinis, nulla mentione habita de suis conventibus, impetratas, teneantur abbates ipsi super causis, quae ad conventus pertinent et eosdem, de ipsis querelantibus respondere, ac, licet inhibita sit appellatio, per appellationis obiectum possint, ne respondeant, se tueri. Super quo vobis duximus respondendum, quod iidem abbates, nisi alia causa rationabilis suffragetur, per appellationem se tueri non possunt, quo minus debeant auctoritate literarum huiusmodi legitime respondere, quum ex officio suo teneantur abbates congregationum suarum negotia procurare, nisi forte abbatis et conventus negotia essent omnino discreta. [Dat.

You have asked to be instructed by your letters from us, whether, by letters procured against abbots of your order, no mention having been had of their convents, the abbots themselves are held, concerning causes which pertain to the convents, to answer those complaining about them; and whether, although appellation is inhibited, they can, by the object/interposition of an appeal, protect themselves so as not to answer. On which we have deemed to respond to you, that those same abbots, unless some other reasonable cause should support them, cannot by appeal protect themselves so as not to be bound to answer lawfully by authority of letters of this kind, since by their office abbots are held to procure the business of their congregations, unless perhaps the business of the abbot and of the convent were altogether distinct. [Dat.

Laterani IV. Kal. Mart. Ao. XI. 1208.]

At the Lateran, the 4th day before the Kalends of March, in the 11th year, 1208.]

CAP. XXII.

CHAPTER 22.

Processus factus per literas subreptitias irritatur; sed factus contra formam rescripti, irritus nunciatur.

A process carried out by subreptitious letters is annulled; but one made contrary to the form of the rescript is declared void.

Idem Archiepiscopo et Magistro W. Canonico Magdeburgensibus.

The same to the Archbishop and to Master W., Canon, of Magdeburg.

Quum dilecta in Christo filia R. custos Hesiensis ecclesiae, ac Volpertus clericus procurator G. monialis, olim ad sedem apostolicam [iam] accessissent [et] super electionibus in eadem ecclesia celebratis de custode ac moniali dictis litigaverint aliquamdiu coram nobis, [nos iis diligenter auditis, quae tam a procuratore ipso fuere proposita, quam custode, Helerwardensi et Hergensi abbatibus ac praeposito Geismariensi dedimus in mandatis, ut quicquid factum fuerat super monialis electione iam dictae, auctoritate nostra suffulti, nullius contradictione vel appellatione obstante, denunciarent irritum et inane, ac super ipsius electione custodis veritate diligentius inquisita, si electionem ipsius canonicam et personam idoneam invenirent, ipsam auctoritate apostolica confirmarent, contradictores per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione postposita compescentes. Verum quum ipsa custos mandatum huiusmodi iudicibus praesentasset, quod de praefata moniali factum fuerat, denunciaverunt irritum et inane. Quae quum nollet dimittere abbatiam, iudices ipsi excommunicationis eam vinculo innodantes: mandaverunt eandem arctius evitari; sed ipsa cum electricibus suis post aliquot dies super electione sua per nuncium appellavit.

When the beloved in Christ daughter R., custodian of the Hessian church, and Volpert, a cleric, procurator of G., a nun, had once [now] come to the Apostolic See [and] had litigated for some time before us concerning the elections held in the same church of the said custodian and nun, [we, after diligently hearing the things which were proposed both by the procurator himself and by the custodian, gave mandate to the abbots of Helerward and Herg and to the provost of Geismar, that whatever had been done concerning the election of the already-mentioned nun, supported by our authority, notwithstanding any contradiction or appeal, they should denounce as null and void, and, the truth having been more diligently inquired concerning the election of the custodian herself, if they should find her election canonical and the person suitable, they should confirm it by apostolic authority, restraining the contradictors by ecclesiastical censure, appeal being set aside. But when the custodian herself had presented a mandate of this kind to the judges, what had been done regarding the aforesaid nun they denounced as null and void. Since she would not relinquish the abbacy, the judges themselves, binding her with the bond of excommunication, ordered that she be more strictly avoided; but she, with her electresses, after some days appealed by a messenger concerning her own election.]

Iudices autem appellationi nullatenus deferentes, praesertim quum de nostro expresso mandato fuisset eius electio irritata, et appellatio esset in literis nostris inhibita, citato Herisiensi conventu, de ipsius electione custodis, prout ipsis iniunctum fuerat, inquirere studuerunt. Quumque ipsius electionem invenissent canonicam idoneamque personam, habito prudentum consilio electionem confirmantes ipsius, abbatiam Herisiensem auctoritate nostra per diffinitivam sententiam adiudicaverunt eidem. Et licet dioecesanus episcopus appellarit et inhibuerit.

Moreover, the judges, in no way deferring to the appeal—especially since, by our express mandate, her election had been annulled, and an appeal had been inhibited in our letters—having cited the Herisian convent, strove to inquire concerning the said election of the custodian, as had been enjoined upon them. And when they had found her election canonical and the person suitable, having taken counsel of prudent men, confirming her election, they adjudged the Herisian abbacy to the same by our authority through a definitive sentence. And although the diocesan bishop appealed and inhibited.

Herisiensi conventui, ne illi tanquam abbatissae praesumerent obedire, ipsi tamen eam in corporalem eiusdem abbatiae possessionem cum omni mansuetudine induxerunt, a qua per .. fratrem monialis praedictae ac fautores ipsius per violentiam est eiecta, et praeter alia mala, quae ibidem fuere nequiter perpetrata per illos, dictam R. coegerunt sacramento firmare, ut usque ad festum beati Martini tunc futurum proxime Herisiensem ecclesiam non intraret, nec etiam domo simplici vel quod ibidem obtinebat stipendio uteretur. Porro quum dicta R. super iis et aliis graviter vexaretur, ad nostram duxit praesentiam recurrendum, memorata G. moniali similiter veniente. Quumque super iis ipsa R. proposuerit quaestionem, et postulaverit confirmari processum iudicum praedictorum, et ut satisfieret sibi de damnis et iniuriis irrogatis, dicta G. proposuit ex adverso, quod quum electa fuerit in Herisiensis ecclesiae abbatissam a maiori et saniori parte conventus, et eius electio per dioecesanum fuerit episcopum confirmata, ipsa custos ad abbatem de Conradesburch et eius coniudices literas impetravit.

To the Herisian convent, that they should not presume to obey her as abbess; nevertheless they led her into the corporal possession of the same abbey with all meekness, from which she was ejected by violence by the .. brother of the aforesaid nun and her favorers; and, besides other evils which were wickedly perpetrated there by them, they compelled the said R. to confirm by oath that, until the feast of Blessed Martin then next to come, she would not enter the Herisian church, nor even use the simple house or the stipend which she held there. Furthermore, since the said R. was being grievously vexed over these and other things, she judged it necessary to have recourse to our presence, the aforesaid nun G. likewise coming. And when R. herself had set forth the question concerning these matters, and had requested that the process of the aforesaid judges be confirmed, and that satisfaction be made to her for the damages and injuries inflicted, the said G. asserted on the contrary that, since she had been elected as abbess of the church of Heris by the greater and sounder part of the convent, and her election had been confirmed by the diocesan bishop, the custodian herself procured letters to the abbot of Conradesburch and his co-judges.

Ad quorum praesentiam quum ipsa G. citata veniret, et ostenderet, se spoliatam fuisse ipsius occasione custodis, sententiam ab ipsis iudicibus reputavit se illi nullatenus respondere teneri, nisi foret primitus restituta. Sed ipsa custos ab eadem sententia provocando, appellationem suam est personaliter prosecuta. Ceterum quum ipsa G. ad hoc tantum procuratorem transmiserit, ut eadem confirmaretur sententia, procurator ipsius mandati fines excedens passus est obtinere custodem quod voluit contra ipsam, et ad supradictos iudices literas reportavit, quorum unus excommunicationis sententiae subiacebat, prout literae venerabilis fratis nostri Maguntinensis archiepiscopi nobis exhibitae continebant; cum quo alter eorum, absente tertio, in omnibus inordinate processit, et licet tam ipsa quam Herisiense capitulum pro diversis gravaminibus appellarint, ipsi tamen nihilominus procedentes, eandem custodem per Albertum familiarem ipsius, qui, sicut ex eisdem literis memorati archiepiscopi probabatur, vinculo erat excommunicationis adstrictus, et B. plebanum in corporalem fecerunt possessionem induci.

When, upon being cited, G. herself came into their presence and showed that she had been despoiled on the occasion of that custodian, she judged by the sentence of those judges that she was in no way bound to answer to her unless she were first restored. But the custodian herself, by provoking an appeal from that same sentence, prosecuted her appeal personally. Moreover, since G. sent a procurator for this only, that the same sentence might be confirmed, her procurator, exceeding the limits of his mandate, allowed the custodian to obtain what she wished against her, and brought back letters to the aforesaid judges, one of whom lay under a sentence of excommunication, as the letters of our venerable brother, the archbishop of Mainz, shown to us contained; with whom another of them, the third being absent, proceeded in all things inordinately, and although both she and the Herisian chapter appealed for diverse grievances, nevertheless they, proceeding nonetheless, caused the same custodian—through Albert, her familiar, who, as was proved from those same letters of the aforesaid archbishop, was bound by the bond of excommunication—and B., the parish priest, to be inducted into corporal possession.

Ad probandum vero, quod procurator iamdictus mandatum tale receperit, ut videlicet appellationem interpositam prosequi procuraret, testes coram auditore sibi dato produxit. Sed e contra responsum est, quod, etsi testes illi mandatum tale probassent, per hoc tamen nullatenus est ostensum, quin aliud recepisset, et ideo, quum esset pro sententia praesumendum, praesertim quum fuisset a nobis cum maturitate consilii promulgata, manifeste intelligi poterat, quod super principali negotio procurator praedictus mandatum receperat generale, sicut eadem custos per testem unicum, quem produxit, plenius ostendebat. Nos autem iis et aliis intellectis, quae fuerunt ab unaquaque parte proposita, praefatam G. monialem ab administratione ipsius abbatiae sententialiter duximus removendam, dilectis filiis scholastico Hildesemensi, custodi et scholastico Mindensibus dantes nostris literis in praeceptis, ut, ad ipsam ecclesiam personaliter accedentes, abbatiae administrationem eiusdem alii personae idoneae committere procurarent, cui ad opus ecclesiae fieret hinc inde resignatio subtractorum; ipsi vero interim de confirmationis sententia, quae super electione custodis lata erat a delegatis iudicibus, cognoscentes, sicut iustum esset, confirmarent vel infirmarent eandem; ita videlicet, quod, si pro eo, quod unus ex iudicibus delegatis, qui eandem sententiam tulerant, excommunicationis esset vinculo publice innodatus, quando sententia lata fuit, sicut per metropolitani literas monstrabatur, aut ex alia causa ipsam constaret sententiam infirmandam, ea cassata cognoscerent iterum de ipsius electione custodis, et quae in factum fuissent proposita vel personam plenius audientes, ipsam, si fuisset inventa canonica, infirmarent; alioquin ea penitus infirmata, darent sororibus facultatem liberam eligendi, et, quam in abbatissam sibi ducerent regulariter eligendam, eius electionem sublato appellationis obstaculo confirmarent, ac praefatae custodi de bonis ecclesiae facerent in expensis legitimis provideri; contradictores nihilominus vel rebelles, ut a sua temeritate desisterent, per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione remota cogentes.

To prove, indeed, that the aforesaid procurator had received such a mandate, namely that he should see to prosecuting the interposed appellation, he produced witnesses before the auditor assigned to him. But on the contrary it was answered that, even if those witnesses had proved such a mandate, by this it was nonetheless in no way shown that he had not received another; and therefore, since one ought to presume in favor of the sentence, especially since it had been promulgated by us with maturity of counsel, it could be plainly understood that concerning the principal business the aforesaid procurator had received a general mandate, as the same custos, through the single witness whom she produced, was showing more fully. But we, these things and others understood which had been proposed by each side, judged by sentence that the aforesaid nun G. must be removed from the administration of that abbey, giving by our letters in the form of precepts to our beloved sons, the scholasticus of Hildesheim, the custos, and the scholasticus of Minden, that, personally approaching that church, they should take care to commit the administration of the abbey to another suitable person, to whom, for the work of the church, a resignation of the things subtracted should be made on both sides; and that they themselves meanwhile, inquiring concerning the sentence of confirmation which had been delivered by the delegated judges upon the election of the custos, as would be just, should confirm or infirm the same; namely thus: that if, because one of the delegated judges who delivered the same sentence had been publicly bound by the bond of excommunication when the sentence was delivered, as was shown by the letters of the metropolitan, or if for some other cause it should be clear that that sentence ought to be infirmed, with it annulled they should inquire again concerning the election of the same custos, and, more fully hearing the things which had been proposed in fact or concerning the person, they should confirm her, if she had been found canonical; otherwise, with it entirely infirmed, they should give the sisters free faculty of electing, and the one whom they should deem to be regularly to be elected as abbess, they should confirm her election, the obstacle of appellation removed, and they should cause provision to be made for the aforesaid custos out of the goods of the church for legitimate expenses; nonetheless compelling contradictors or rebels, that they desist from their temerity, by ecclesiastical censure, the appellation removed.

Testes etiam, qui nominati essent, si se gratia, odio vel timore subtraherent, per districtionem eandem cessante appellatione cogerent veritati testimonium perhibere. Ipsi vero iudices tam custodem ipsam quam conventum Herisiensis ecclesiae ad suam praesentiam evocantes, dilationis eis terminum indulserunt; sed dilatione pendente praeposita Herisiensis cum complicibus suis abbati de Reinvehusen, praeposito de Nova Ecclesia, et plebano de Eschenshuseim nostras literas praesentavit, in quibus eisdem iudicibus mandabatur, ut supradicta custos quaedam ipsius ecclesiae ornamenta, custodiae quoque proventus ad usum ecclesiae pertinentes, et reditus de Meinchsern, qui debebant sororum necessitatibus ministrari, ac quaedam alia de praebendis earum, quae per quosdam praedones malitiose subtraxerat et ipsa pro suae voluntatis arbitrio detinebat, per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione remota iustitia mediante restituere cogeretur; quarum auctoritate custos ipsa citata, quum statuto sibi die non posset coram iudicibus comparere, ipsi post appellationem a Lamberto clerico interpositam pro parte custodis eiusdem, in ipsam excommunicationis sententiam protulerunt. Et licet eodem die procurator ipsius comparuerit coram eis, et eandem excommunicationis sententiam, utpote minus rationabiliter latam, peteret relaxari, quum in nullo penitus audiretur, appellationem a praedicto Lamberto clerico interpositam ratam habuit, et recessit.

They should also compel the witnesses who had been named, if they were withdrawing themselves by favor, hatred, or fear, by the same distraint, the appeal ceasing, to bear testimony to the truth. But the judges themselves, summoning both the custodian herself and the convent of the church of Heris to their presence, granted them a term of delay; but, the delay pending, the prioress of Heris with her accomplices presented our letters to the abbot of Reinvehusen, the provost of New Church, and the parish priest of Eschenshuseim, in which it was commanded to those same judges that the aforesaid custos be compelled, by ecclesiastical censure, the appeal removed, justice mediating, to restore certain ornaments of that church, and also the revenues of the custodianship pertaining to the use of the church, and the incomes from Meinchsern, which ought to have been supplied to the needs of the sisters, and certain other things from their prebends, which she had maliciously abstracted through certain brigands and was detaining at her own will; by the authority of which, the custos herself having been cited, since on the day set for her she could not appear before the judges, they, after an appeal had been interposed by Lambert the cleric on behalf of that same custos, pronounced a sentence of excommunication against her. And although on the same day her procurator appeared before them and sought to have that sentence of excommunication relaxed, as having been issued with less than due reason, since he was not at all heard in anything, he held valid the appeal interposed by the aforesaid Lambert the cleric, and withdrew.

Ipsi vero appellationi minime deferentes receperunt testes a praepositae ac complicum eius parte productos, et eorum depositionibus in ipsius custodis absentia publicatis, ipsam cum complicibus suis ad restitutionem centum quinquaginta marcarum, et de furto ac sacrilegio nihilominus condemnarunt, excommunicationis sententiae supponentes easdem. Postmodum autem quum procurator custodis ipsius praedictorum scholastici Mindensis et coniudicum suorum conspectui se statuto termino praesentasset pro eadem custode in iudicio processurus, iidem iudices asserentes, quod, quum praefata custos excommunicata esset a iudicibus memoratis, sicut ipsa non poterat agere, sic nec eius debebat procurator audiri, eam ab agendo per sententiam repulerunt. Procurator autem ex adverso respondit, quod talis excommunicationis sententia sibi nocere non poterat vel custodi, quum per legitimae appellationis obstaculum, quae sententiam ipsam praecesserat, de iure fuerit impedita.

But they, in no wise deferring to the appeal, received the witnesses produced on the part of the prioress and her accomplices; and their depositions having been published in the absence of the custodian, they condemned her with her accomplices to the restitution of 150 marks, and likewise for theft and sacrilege, subjecting the same to the sentence of excommunication. Afterwards, however, when the procurator of the said custodian had presented himself before the aforesaid Minden scholasticus and his co-judges at the appointed term, intending to proceed in judgment for the same custodian, the same judges, asserting that, since the aforesaid custodian had been excommunicated by the aforesaid judges, just as she could not act, so neither ought her procurator to be heard, repelled her from acting by sentence. But the procurator, on the contrary, replied that such a sentence of excommunication could not harm either himself or the custodian, since by the obstacle of a legitimate appellation, which had preceded that sentence, it had by law been impeded.

Quumque iudices ipsi, allegationem huiusmodi frivolam reputantes, nollent de appellatione cognoscere, procurator iam dictus ad sedem apostolicam appellavit; sed ipsi appellationi deferre nolentes, testes, quos pars altera producere voluit ad probandum, quod unus ex delegatis iudicibus, qui sententiam tulerant pro custode, tunc excommunicatus erat, quum pro ea confirmationis sententia lata fuit, ea occasione sumpta, quod quidam ex ipsis testibus a remotis partibus venerant, receperunt. Propter quod quaedam sorores Herisienses pro se ac praedicta custode ad sedem apostolicam provocarunt. Qui appellationem interpositam contemnentes, G. monialem ab administratione Herisiensis ecclesiae removerunt, ipsam eiusdem ecclesiae praepositae committentes, aliquas personas idoneas in suum adiutorium recepturae.

And when the judges themselves, reckoning such an allegation frivolous, were unwilling to take cognizance of the appellation, the aforesaid procurator appealed to the apostolic see; but they, unwilling to defer to this appellation, received the witnesses whom the other party wished to produce to prove that one of the delegated judges, who had delivered sentence for the custodian, was at that time excommunicated when the sentence of confirmation was pronounced, taking occasion from the fact that certain of those witnesses had come from remote parts. Wherefore certain sisters of Herisum, on their own behalf and on behalf of the aforesaid custodian, appealed to the apostolic see. They, contemning the interposed appellation, removed the nun G. from the administration of the church of Herisum, committing the same to the prioress of the said church, who was to receive some suitable persons into her assistance.

Iidem quoque iudices articulum de resignatione subtractorum intermittentes, qui primo fuerat in mandato nostrarum literarum insertus, testes super alio articulo receperunt, quia videlicet ab abbate praedicto et coniudicibus suis legitime olim fuerat provocatum, eo, quod rescripti nostri copiam partibus facere noluerunt. Qui receptos testes super praemissis articulis postmodum publicantes, confirmationis sententiam pro saepe dicta custode latam penitus infirmarunt; ac de ipsius electione nihilominus inquirentes, tanquam celebratam minus canonice cassaverunt, concessa sororibus eligendi libera facultate. Quae convenientes in unum saepedictam G. monialem unanimiter elegerunt, cuius electionem dicti iudices confirmantes, abbatiae possessionem et cathedram solenniter assignarunt eidem, supradictam custodem et fautrices eius excommunicatas publice nunciando.

The same judges also, intermitting the article concerning the surrender of the items taken away, which at first had been inserted in the mandate of our letters, received witnesses on another article, because, namely, by the aforesaid abbot and his co-judges it had long ago been lawfully appealed, on the ground that they were unwilling to make a copy of our rescript available to the parties. They, later publishing the witnesses received on the aforesaid articles, utterly invalidated the sentence of confirmation delivered for the oft-mentioned custodian; and, nonetheless inquiring into her election, as having been celebrated less canonically, they quashed it, granting to the sisters the free faculty of electing. Coming together into one, they unanimously elected the oft-named G., a nun, whose election the said judges, confirming it, solemnly assigned to her the possession of the abbey and the cathedra, publicly announcing that the above-said custodian and her favorers were excommunicated.

Subsequenter autem ii, qui super articulo praenotato, de resignatione scilicet subtractorum, auditores fuerant a praedictis iudicibus deputati, recipientes testes a praedictae praepositae ac suarum complicum parte productos, depositiones ipsorum sub sigillis propriis interclusas eisdem iudicibus transmiserunt. Verum quum custos ipsa iter arripuisset ad sedem apostolicam veniendi, memorati iudices noluerunt dicta testium publicare, ad nostram praesentiam eadem sub sigillis suis destinantes inclusa.] Nos igitur haec et alia, quae tam custos praedicta, quam I. clericus, qui pro eodem negotio venerat contra ipsam, nuper apud sedem apostolicam constituti proponere voluerunt, et acta iudicun ab iisdem nobis exhibita diligentius attendentes, deprehendimus manifeste, praedictas literas ad abbatem de Remech, et suos coniudices impetratas, fuisse per subreptionem obtentas, quum in eis illius articuli, videlicet de subtractorum resignatione, fuerit praeter conscientiam nostram cognitio demandata, qui in prioribus literis ad scholasticum Hildesensem et coniudices suos obtentis, insertus fuerat, de quibus in secundis literis mentio aliqua non fiebat, et ideo quod ipsarum literarum occasione dignoscitur attentatum penitus duximus irritandum. Dictum insuper scholasticum Hildesemensen et coniudices suos invenimus minus provide processisse.

Subsequently, however, those who had been deputed by the aforesaid judges as auditors upon the aforesaid article, namely concerning the resignation of the subtracted goods, receiving witnesses produced by the party of the aforesaid prioress and her accomplices, transmitted to the same judges their depositions enclosed under their own seals. But when the custodian herself had undertaken a journey to come to the apostolic see, the said judges were unwilling to publish the witnesses’ statements, sending the same, enclosed under their seals, to our presence.] We therefore, giving more diligent attention to these things and to other matters which both the aforesaid custodian and I., a cleric, who had come on account of the same business against her, lately, being present at the apostolic see, wished to set forth, and to the acts of the judges exhibited to us by the same, have plainly discovered that the aforesaid letters procured to the abbot of Remech and his co-judges were obtained through surreption, since in them the cognizance of that article, namely of the resignation of the subtracted goods, was, without our knowledge, committed—an article which had been inserted in the earlier letters obtained to the Scholastic of Hildesheim and his co-judges, of which in the second letters no mention at all was made—and therefore we have deemed that what is recognized to have been attempted on the occasion of those letters must be utterly annulled. Moreover, we found that the said Scholastic of Hildesheim and his co-judges proceeded less providently.

Quum enim in literis nostris eisdem principaliter mandaretur, ut ad praedictam ecclesiam personaliter accedentes personae idoneae administrationem committerent abbatiae, cui ad opus eius fieret hinc inde resignatio subtractorum, ipsi formam mandati apostolici transponentes, illo capitulo praetermisso de aliis articulis inordinate plurimum cognoverant, propter quod processum ipsorum contra nostri formam rescripti ac iuris ordinem attentatum irritum decernimus et inanem. Ideoque mandamus, quatenus, convenientes in loco competenti et tuto G., A. et quibusdam aliis sororibus eiusdem ecclesiae, sicut iustum fuerit, restitutis, et forma mandati nostri exacta diligentia observata, in negotio ipso iuxta tenorem praecedentium literarum appellatione remota ratione praevia procedatis ita, quod per vestram sollicitudinem circumspectam saltem hac vice negotio tamdiu prorogato finis debitus imponatur. [Quia vero etc.]

For since in our letters to those same men it was principally mandated that, personally approaching the aforesaid church, suitable persons should commit the administration to the abbey, for whose benefit on this side and that a resignation of the subtracted things would be made, they, transposing the form of the apostolic mandate, with that chapter passed over, had in very disorderly fashion taken much cognizance concerning other articles, wherefore we declare their process, attempted against the form of our rescript and the order of law, null and void. And therefore we command, that, meeting in a suitable and safe place, with G., A., and certain other sisters of the same church restored, as shall be just, and with the form of our mandate observed with exact diligence, you proceed in the business itself according to the tenor of the preceding letters, appeal removed, with prior reasoning, in such wise that by your circumspect solicitude, at least this time, upon a matter so long prorogued, the due end may be imposed. [Because indeed etc.]

CAP. XXIII.

CHAPTER 23.

Valet secundum rescriptum, licet de primo non faciat mentionem, quo uti noluit impetrans intra annum.

The second rescript is valid, although it makes no mention of the first, which the impetrant did not wish to use within a year.

Idem.

The same.

Plerumque contingit, quod aliqui contra quosdam super aliquibus rebus nostris literis impetratis, illis uti multo tempore postponentes, tunc demum eas exhibent, quum aliarum literarum auctoritate ab eis, contra quos ipsi primitus literas impetrarant, coeperint conveniri, dicentes, posteriores literas non valere, utpote non facientes de prioribus mentionem. Quum igitur non sit malitiis hominum indulgendum, praesentium auctoritate statuimus, ut, si quis nostras literas impetrans infra annum, postquam copiam iudicum habuerit, ex malitia vel negligentia postposuerit uti eis, auctoritate posteriorum literarum valeat conveniri, licet in ipsis nulla de prioribus mentio habeatur.

It very often happens that some, having obtained our letters against certain persons concerning certain matters, postponing to use them for a very long time, then at length produce them when, by the authority of other letters, they have begun to be convened by those against whom they themselves had originally obtained letters, saying that the posterior letters do not avail, inasmuch as they make no mention of the prior. Since therefore the malices of men are not to be indulged, by the authority of these presents we establish that, if anyone obtaining our letters should, within a year after he has had the availability of judges, have deferred to use them out of malice or negligence, he may be validly convened by the authority of posterior letters, although in them no mention of the prior is had.

CAP. XXIV.

CHAPTER 24.

Si a delegato aliquid mandatur ordinario, debet humiliter exsequi. Sed si alius delegatus per alias literas post exsecutionem mandat contrarium, vel si ante exsecutionem innotuerit ordinario, inter delegatum, qui mandavit, et alium, contentionem esse de iurisdictione, faciat sibi utrarumque literarum copiam exhiberi; non ut iurisdictionaliter cognoscat, sed ut se informet, an per secundas revocentur primae. Et si primae revocentur, exsequatur secundum mandatum.

If something is mandated by a delegate to the ordinary, he ought humbly to execute it. But if another delegate by other letters after the execution mandates the contrary, or if before execution it has become known to the ordinary that between the delegate who mandated and the other there is a contention about jurisdiction, let him have a copy of both letters exhibited to him; not that he may take cognizance jurisdictionally, but that he may inform himself whether the first are revoked by the second. And if the first are revoked, let him execute the second mandate.

Si autem non revocentur, vel de hoc dubitet, non exsequatur secundum mandatum, donec contentio de iurisdictione terminetur. Abb. Sic.

If, however, they are not revoked, or he is in doubt about this, let him not execute the second mandate until the contention about jurisdiction is terminated. Abbot: Thus.

Idem Rothomagensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Rouen.

Quum contingat (Et infra: [cf. c. 11. de aet. et qual. I. 14.]) Praeterea quum quidam super aliquo litigantes ad diversos iudices literas impetrant, quorum quidam obtenti a parte altera tibi mandant, ut partem adversam denuncies excommunicationis sententiae subiacere, aliis iudicibus postmodum tibi iniungentibus, ut eandem denuncies absolutam: quaeris a nobis an utrisque, an neutris, vel alterutris saltem obedire debeas in hac parte?

When it happens (And below: [cf. c. 11. on age and quality 1. 14.]) Furthermore, when certain persons litigating over some matter impetrate letters to diverse judges, some of whom, won over by the other party, mandate to you that you denounce the adverse party to be subject to the sentence of excommunication, while other judges afterward enjoin upon you that you denounce the same as absolved: you ask us whether in this matter you ought to obey both, or neither, or at least the one or the other?

Super quo tuae prudentiae respondentes credimus distinguendum, an, quum primum mandatum recepisse dignosceris, tibi forsan innotuerit, inter illos et alios super iurisdictione discordiam suscitatam, an super hoc nihil omnino scivisti? Et quidem, si super contentione huiusmodi nihil tibi penitus innotescat, quum primum mandatum recipere te contingat, illud debes humiliter exsecutioni mandare. Sed si postea contrarium tibi ab aliis demandatur, tunc, literarum ad utrosque a sede apostolica obtentarum copia postulata, quas tibi auctoritate praesentium districte praecipimus exhiberi, si ex ipsarum tenore deprehenderis evidenter ita, quod non sit aliquatenus haesitandum, quod literae, quae ad illos, a quibus secundum mandatum receperis, impetratae noscuntur, expresse revocent literas aliorum, tu illud intrepidus exsequaris, quod tibi secundo loco mandatur.

On which, responding to your prudence, we believe a distinction must be made: whether, when you are recognized to have received the first mandate, perhaps it became known to you that between those and others a discord over jurisdiction had been stirred up, or whether you knew absolutely nothing about this. And indeed, if nothing at all concerning a contention of this kind has been made known to you, when it happens that you receive the first mandate, you ought humbly to commit that to execution. But if afterward the contrary is demanded of you by others, then, a copy of the letters obtained for both parties from the Apostolic See having been requested—which by the authority of these presents we strictly command to be exhibited to you—if from their tenor you clearly discern thus, so that there is in no way to be hesitated, that the letters which are known to have been procured for those from whom you have received the second mandate expressly revoke the letters of the others, you should intrepidly execute that which is commanded to you in the second place.

Si vero ex literarum inspectione manifeste tibi constet, quod literae obtentae ad illos, qui primum dedere mandatum, per alias minime revocantur, secundum mandatum nullatenus exsequaris. Quod si super hoc tibi merito fuerit dubitandum, ad exsequendum secundum mandatum te procedere non oportet, donec iuxta cuiusdam nostrae constitutionis tenorem inter eos huiusmodi concertatio sopiatur. Et id ipsum facere debes, si primo mandato recepto et nondum exsecutioni mandato tibi forsan innotuerit, quod inter se, super iurisdictione videlicet demandata, coeperint disceptare.

But if, from the inspection of the letters, it is manifestly clear to you that the letters obtained for those who first gave the mandate are in no way revoked by others, you should by no means execute the second mandate. But if on this point you have deserved reason to doubt, you ought not to proceed to execute the second mandate until, according to the tenor of a certain our constitution, the contestation of this kind between them is quieted. And you must do this very same thing if, the first mandate having been received and not yet committed to execution, it perhaps has become known to you that they have begun to dispute among themselves, namely over the jurisdiction enjoined.

Ceterum in his omnibus puram et providam te convenit intentionem habere, ne vel ad declinandum mandatum dubitare te dicas, ubi dubitandum non est, vel etiam ad [mandatum] exsequendum te asseras esse certum, ubi certus esse non debes. Licet autem ex his certa tibi detur doctrina, qualiter in his te debeas habere, nulla tamen tibi attribuitur potestas, ut inter delegatos aut partes de iurisdictione debeas iudicare. [Insuper etc.

Moreover, in all these matters it befits you to have a pure and provident intention, lest you either say that you are in doubt in order to decline a mandate where there is no room for doubting, or else assert that you are certain for executing [the mandate] where you ought not to be certain. And although from these a sure doctrine is given to you as to how you ought to conduct yourself in these matters, nevertheless no power is attributed to you to judge between the delegates or the parties concerning jurisdiction. [Insuper etc.

(cf. c. 36. de off. iud. del.

(cf. ch. 36 on the office of the delegated judge.

I. 29.) Dat. Lat. Kal.

1. 29.) Dated at the Lateran, on the Kalends.

Sept. Ao. XIII. 1210.]

Sept. Year 13. 1210.]

CAP. XXV.

CHAPTER 25.

Quando in rescripto plura narrantur, diversos effectus operantia, non sufficit impetranti alterum solum probare, ad utrumque effectum consequendum.

When, in a rescript, several things are narrated, operating diverse effects, it does not suffice for the petitioner to prove only one, for the obtaining of both effects.

Idem Magistro G. et P. de Firmisca.

The same to Master G. and P. of Firmisca.

Olim ex literis dilectorum filiorum sancti Nicasii Remensis, Sargiensis et Vallis Regiae abbatum fuit nostris auribus intimatum, quod, quum ad eos semel et iterum a nobis literae processissent, super eo videlicet, quod P. clericus sancti Remigii Remensis parochiam de Salice S. Remigii, quam R. de Clivo clericus per interpositam personam ab abbate S. Remigii sibi collatam fuisse proposuit, detinebat, ipsi partes semel, secundo et tertio citaverunt, et dictum P. de S. Remigio, quia citatus pluries comparere noluit per se vel per responsalem aliquem coram eis, excommunicationis vinculo innodantes, fecerunt fructus ipsius parochiae sequestrari. Quumque postmodum idem P. accedens ad eos se iuri promiserit pariturum, ac obtinuerit se absolvi, ipsi absolutionis literas concedentes diem ei assignaverunt et locum, quibus coram eis quod promiserat adimpleret; qui diem et locum ex literis illis radens, in loco rasurae scripsit, quod ipsi ei sequestratos fructus assignari mandabant, quod coram duobus eorum tandem, tertio sui absentiam excusante per literas, est confessus. Nos igitur, quum tantae temeritatis excessus falsitatis scrupulo non careret, vobis dedimus in mandatis, ut, si esset ita, ipsi praesumptori super dicta parochia perpetuum silentium imponentes, praefato R. de Clivo clerico assignaretis eandem cum fructibus sequestratis.

Once, from the letters of the beloved sons, the abbots of Saint Nicaise of Reims, of Sargiensis, and of the Royal Valley, it was intimated to our ears that, when letters had gone forth from us to them once and again, namely on this point, that P., a cleric of Saint Remigius of Reims, was detaining the parish of Salice of Saint Remigius, which R. de Clivo, a cleric, asserted had been conferred upon him by the abbot of Saint Remigius through an interposed person, they cited the parties once, a second time, and a third time, and, binding with the bond of excommunication the said P. of Saint Remigius, because, though cited repeatedly, he was unwilling to appear before them either in person or by some responsible agent, they caused the fruits of that parish to be sequestered. And when afterward the same P., approaching them, promised that he would submit to the law, and obtained to be absolved, they, granting letters of absolution, assigned to him a day and place, on which before them he should fulfill what he had promised; he, scraping out the day and place from those letters, wrote in the place of the erasure that they were commanding that the sequestered fruits be assigned to him, which he confessed before two of them at length, the third excusing his absence by letters. We therefore, since an excess of such temerity did not lack a scruple of falsity, gave you in mandates that, if it were so, imposing perpetual silence upon that presumptuous person regarding the said parish, you should assign the same to the aforesaid R. de Clivo, cleric, together with the sequestered fruits.

Verum sicut vos, filii G. et P., per vestras nobis literas intimastis, quum dictus R. rasuram praefatam coram vobis per testes idoneos probavisset, et ob hoc postulasset sibi dictam ecclesiam assignari, vos utrum clausula illa: "si esset ita," de omnibus superioribus, an de articulo tantum rasurae deberet intelligi dubitastis; in negotio ipso procedere ulterius distulistis, eligentes secundum hoc potius sedis apostolicae oraculum implorare, quam aliquid temere definire. Nos igitur diligentiam vestram in Domino commendantes respondemus, quod clausula illa ad omnia debet superiora referri, ad hoc, ut ipsi R. praefata ecclesia conferatur; quia, licet vitium falsitatis ad imponendum ei perpetuum silentium super ecclesia ipsa sufficiat, qui falsitatem huiusmodi perpetravit, non tamen propter hoc eadem ecclesia est adversario assignanda, nisi super aliis facta fuerit plena fides. [Dat.

But as you, sons G. and P., intimated to us by your letters, when the said R., before you, had proved the aforesaid erasure through suitable witnesses, and on this account had requested that the said church be assigned to himself, you doubted whether that clause: "if it were so," ought to be understood of all the foregoing, or only of the article of the erasure; in the matter itself you deferred to proceed further, choosing rather on this point to implore the oracle of the Apostolic See than to define anything rashly. We, therefore, commending your diligence in the Lord, answer that that clause ought to be referred to all the foregoing, to this end, that the aforesaid church be conferred upon the same R.; because, although the vice of falsity suffices to impose perpetual silence concerning the church itself upon him who perpetrated such falsity, nevertheless for this reason the same church is not to be assigned to the adversary, unless full faith shall have been made concerning the other matters. [Given.

Lat. VI. Non. Mart.

Lateran, March 2.

Pont. nostr. Ao. XV. 1212.]

In the 15th year of our pontificate, 1212.]

CAP. XXVI.

CHAPTER 26.

Non valet rescriptum super restitutione beneficii impetratum, quod de causa excommunicationis et amotionis impetrantis non facit mentionem.

A rescript obtained for the restitution of a benefice is not valid if it makes no mention of the cause of the petitioner’s excommunication and removal.

Idem Episcopo Imolensi.

The same to the Bishop of Imola.

Dilectus filius, abbas sancti Stephani Bononiensis, per suas nobis literas intimavit, quod, quum ipse, cui visitationis officium in civitate ac dioecesi Bononiensi commisimus, B. et A. presbyteros ab ecclesiis suis propter eorum graves et manifestos excessus duxerit amovendos, iidem presbyteri super restitutione sua nostras ad te in communi forma literas impetrarunt, de amotionis suae causa et excommunicationis, qua tenentur adstricti, nullam facientes penitus mentionem. Procuratoribus igitur vicinorum et ecclesiarum ipsarum exceptiones in tua praesentia proponentibus antedictas, tu supersedendum huiusmodi negotio decrevisti, donec super hoc nostrae voluntatis beneplacitum recepisses. Nos igitur in hoc tuam prudentiam commendantes fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, literas ipsas, tanquam per veri suppressionem obtentas, viribus carere decernas, et quod circa presbyteros praedictos provide factum est, per memoratum abbatem praecipias firmiter observari, appellatione remota.

The beloved son, the abbot of Saint Stephen of Bologna, intimated to us by his letters that, since he—unto whom we have committed the office of visitation in the city and diocese of Bologna—judged that B. and A., presbyters, should be removed from their churches on account of their grave and manifest excesses, those same presbyters obtained our letters to you in common form concerning their restitution, making absolutely no mention of the cause of their removal and of the excommunication by which they are held bound. Therefore, when the procurators of the neighbors and of those churches themselves were propounding the aforesaid exceptions in your presence, you decreed that such a business should be superseded until you had received the good-pleasure of our will on this matter. We therefore, commending your prudence herein, by apostolic writings mandate to your fraternity that, if it is so, you decree that those letters lack force, as having been obtained by suppression of the truth, and that what has been providently done concerning the aforesaid presbyters you order to be firmly observed through the aforesaid abbot, appeal being removed.

CAP. XXVII.

CHAPTER 27.

Per literas iustitiae non tenetur episcopus providere habenti perpetuam vicariam vel sufficiens patrimonium, nec valent literae gratiae ad beneficium obtinendum, in quibus impetrans tacuit perpetuam vicariam. Hoc dicit comprehendendo utrumque intellectum.

By letters of justice the bishop is not held to provide for one having a perpetual vicarage or a sufficient patrimony, nor do letters of grace avail for obtaining a benefice, in which the impetrant kept silence about the perpetual vicarage. He says this by comprehending both senses.

Idem Episcopo Veratisamensi.

The same to the Bishop of Veratisa.

Postulasti per sedem apostolicam edoceri, utrum alicuius ecclesiae perpetuo vicario, de proventibus vicariae bonisque paternis habenti unde valeat commode sustentari, tenearis per illam formam communem: "Quum secundum Apostolum," in ecclesiastico beneficio providere. Ad quod sic duximus respondendum, quod, quum per formam praedictam necessitatibus pauperum clericorum, qui nullum sunt ecclesiasticum beneficium assecuti, sicut ibidem exprimi consuevit, sedes apostolica duxerit succurrendum, perpetuus vicarius, nisi de vicaria fecerit mentionem, commodum reportare non debet de huiusmodi literis, utpote veritate tacita impetratis. Non enim beneficio ecclesiastico carere debet dici, cui competenter de perpetuae vicariae proventibus est provisum.

You requested through the apostolic see to be instructed whether, for a perpetual vicar of some church, who has from the revenues of the vicariate and from paternal goods that whereby he is able to be suitably sustained, you are held by that common form, "Since, according to the Apostle," to provide an ecclesiastical benefice. To which we have judged thus to reply: since by the aforesaid form the apostolic see has deemed it right to succor the necessities of poor clerics who have obtained no ecclesiastical benefice, as is wont to be expressed there, a perpetual vicar, unless he has made mention of the vicariate, ought not to reap advantage from letters of this sort, inasmuch as they have been obtained with the truth kept silent. For he ought not to be said to lack an ecclesiastical benefice, for whom competent provision has been made from the revenues of a perpetual vicariate.

Et pro habente beneficii sufficientis subsidium ex certa scientia super obtinendo alio beneficio de levi non scribimus, quin faciamus de primo in nostris literis mentionem. [Tu denique etc. Dat.

And as regards one who has the subsidy of a sufficient benefice, from certain knowledge we do not write lightly concerning the obtaining of another benefice, without making mention of the first in our letters. [You then, etc. Given.

Lat. VI. Id. Ian. Pont.

Lateran, January 8, of the Pontificate.

nostri Ao. XVI. 1214.]

of our pontificate, year 16, 1214.]

CAP. XXVIII.

CHAPTER 28.

Per literas apostolicas, de hac constitutione mentionem non facientes, non potest quis trahi ultra duas diaetas extra suam dioecesim nisi de consensu partium literae fuerint impetratae. Hoc dicit usque ad § Sunt et alii. ñ § 1. Non valent literae, ad lites impetratae, sine speciali mandato domini, nisi impetrentur per coniunctam personam.

By apostolic letters, making no mention of this constitution, no one can be haled more than two day-journeys beyond his own diocese unless letters have been obtained by the consent of the parties. He says this up to § “There are also others.” ñ § 1. Letters obtained for suits are not valid without the special mandate of the lord, unless they are obtained through a connected person.

h. d.

this decretal.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the general council.

Nonnulli gratia sedis apostolicae abutentes, literas eius ad remotos iudices impetrare nituntur, ut reus fatigatus laboribus et expensis liti cedere vel importunitatem actoris redimere compellatur. Quum autem per iudicium iniuriis aditus patere non debeat, quas iuris observantia interdicit, statuimus, ne quis ultra duas diaetas extra suam dioecesim per literas apostolicas ad iudicium trahi possit, nisi de assensu partium fuerint impetratae, vel expressam de hac constitutione fecerint mentionem. § 1. Sunt et alii, qui se ad novum genus mercimonii convertentes, velut sopitas possint suscitare querelas vel novas immittere quaestiones, fingunt causas, super quibus a sede apostolica literas impetrant absque dominorum mandato, quae vel reo, ne propter eas laborum vel expensarum dispendio molestetur, aut actori, ut per ipsas adversarium indebita molestatione fatiget, venales exponunt.

Some, abusing the favor of the apostolic see, strive to procure its letters to remote judges, so that the defendant, wearied by labors and expenses, may be compelled to yield the suit or to redeem the importunity of the actor. But since by judgment the approaches ought not to lie open to injuries which the observance of the law forbids, we decree that no one can be dragged to judgment by apostolic letters beyond two diets outside his own diocese, unless they shall have been obtained by the assent of the parties, or shall have made express mention of this constitution. § 1. There are also others who, turning themselves to a new kind of merchandising, as though they could rouse extinguished complaints or inject new questions, feign causes, concerning which they procure letters from the apostolic see without the mandate of the lords; which they put up for sale either to the defendant, so that on account of them he may not be troubled by loss of labors or expenses, or to the plaintiff, that by them he may weary his adversary with undue molestation.

Quum autem lites restringendae sint potius quam laxandae, hac generali constitutione sancimus, ut, si quis super aliqua quaestione de cetero sine speciali mandato domini literas apostolicas impetrare praesumpserit, et literae illae non valeant, et ipse tanquam falsarius puniatur, nisi forte de illis personis exstiterit, a quibus non debet exigi de iure mandatum.

Since, moreover, lawsuits ought rather to be restrained than loosened, by this general constitution we sanction that, if anyone hereafter shall presume to obtain apostolic letters concerning any question without the special mandate of the lord, both those letters shall not be valid, and he himself shall be punished as a forger, unless perhaps he should be of those persons from whom by right a mandate ought not to be demanded.

CAP. XXIX.

CHAPTER 29.

Si occasione duorum rescriptorum, unius scilicet in causa principali, alterius in causa appellationis, contenditur, non iudex super principali, sed deputatus super appellatione, cognoscere debet de validitate appellationis.

If, on the occasion of two rescripts—namely, one in the principal cause and the other in the cause of the appeal—there is contention, not the judge over the principal, but the one deputed over the appeal ought to take cognizance of the validity of the appeal.

Honorius III. Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et Coniudicibus suis.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishop of Canterbury and his co-judges.

Dilectus filius I. Sarracenus clericus exposuit coram nobis, quod, quum Iordanus clericus Dumeliensis ipsum super ecclesia sancti Nicolai Dumeliensis coram vobis auctoritate literarum nostrarum traxisset in causam, ex parte ipsius I. in praesentia vestra fuit excipiendo propositum, quod auctoritate ipsarum literarum non debebat, nec poterat conveniri eo, quod ultra duas diaetas a dioecesi, ubi praedicta ecclesia sita erat, contra statuta concilii generalis, de quo in eisdem literis non fiebat mentio, distabatis. Et quia huiusmodi exceptionem admittere denegantes nihilominus procedebatis in causa, pro eo duntaxat, quod idem I. in Rophensi et Eliensi dioecesi beneficia obtinet, quasi ex hoc ibi domicilium intelligeretur habere, ipse ad nostram audientiam appellavit. Sed vos, eius appellatione contempta, partem alteram mittendam in possessionem eiusdem ecclesiae causa custodiae decrevistis.

The beloved son I., Saracenus, a cleric, set forth before us that, when Jordan, a Dumelian cleric, had drawn him into a case before you by the authority of our letters concerning the church of Saint Nicholas of Dumelium, on the part of the said I. it was proposed by way of exception in your presence that by the authority of those same letters he ought not, nor could he, be convened, for the reason that you were at a distance beyond two day-journeys from the diocese where the aforesaid church was situated, contrary to the statutes of the general council, of which no mention was made in those same letters. And because, refusing to admit an exception of this sort, you were nonetheless proceeding in the case, for this reason only, that the same I. holds benefices in the dioceses of Rochester and Ely, as if from this it were to be understood that he has a domicile there, he appealed to our audience. But you, his appeal being despised, decreed that the other party be placed in possession of the same church for purposes of custody.

Quumque idem I. appellationem interpositam prosecutus, ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum Eboracensem archiepiscopum et eius collegas nostras super praemissis literas impetrasset, vos, in causa ipsa nihilominus procedentes, eisdem iudicibus, ne in commisso sibi procedant negotio, inhibetis. Quocirca discretioni vestrae mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, causae supersedeatis eidem, quum non vos, sed dicti iudices cognoscere habeant, ad quos iurisdictio debeat pertinere.

And when the same I., having prosecuted the interposed appeal, had obtained our letters concerning the aforesaid matters from our venerable brother the archbishop of York and his colleagues, you, nevertheless proceeding in the case itself, inhibit those same judges, lest they proceed in the business committed to them. Wherefore we mandate to your discretion that, if it is so, you should supersede yourselves from the same case, since not you, but the said judges ought to take cognizance, to whom the jurisdiction ought to pertain.

CAP. XXX.

CHAPTER 30.

Si plures impetrant in eadem ecclesia, statur datae, ut primus impetrans praeferatur, et solus admittatur. Ita communiter summant doctores, et procedit istud summarium secundum opinionem communem, quae hodie invaluit, propter iura nova.

If several impetrate in the same church, the grant made is abided by, so that the first impetrant is preferred and he alone is admitted. Thus the doctors commonly sum up, and this summary proceeds according to the common opinion, which has today prevailed, on account of the new laws.

Idem Episcopo et Archidiacono Legionensibus.

The same, to the Bishop and Archdeacon of León.

Capitulum sanctae crucis Cameracensis exhibita nobis petitione monstravit, quod Callimacho clerico Noviomensis dioecesis, super praebendali beneficio in eorum ecclesia obtinendo literas nostras ad eos prius monitorias, et demum praeceptorias impetrante, B. clericus Tornacensis dioecesis contra eos super consimili beneficio in eadem sibi ecclesia conferendo ad I. archiepiscopum Tornacensem et eius collegas, de praedictis literis non habita mentione, exsecutorias a nobis literas impetravit, qui post appellationem ad nos interpositam in eos suspensionis et excommunicationis sententias protulerunt, ac dictus C. super exsecutione mandati pro eo facti ad alios obtinuit scripta nostra, qui tulerunt suspensionis et excommunicationis sententias in eosdem. Unde nobis humiliter supplicarunt, ut, quum in eadem ecclesia XII. tantum sint praebendae, et ob hoc non sine magno gravamine simul providere possent, utique faceremus easdem sententias relaxari, et provideri eorum alteri in eadem ecclesia de praebenda: praesentim, quum in utriusque literis clausula illa contineretur inserta, nisi eadem ecclesia de mandato nostro foret in alterius receptione gravata.

The chapter of the Holy Cross of Cambrai, having presented a petition to us, showed that, Callimachus, a cleric of the diocese of Noyon, having obtained from us to them first monitory and then preceptory letters concerning obtaining a prebendal benefice in their church, B., a cleric of the diocese of Tournai, against them, for the conferral to himself in the same church of a similar benefice, to I., the archbishop of Tournai and his colleagues, without mention having been made of the aforesaid letters, obtained executory letters from us; who, after an appeal to us had been interposed, pronounced sentences of suspension and excommunication against them, and the said C., concerning the execution of the mandate made on his behalf, obtained our writings to others, who pronounced sentences of suspension and excommunication upon those same men. Whence they humbly supplicated us that, since in the same church there are only 12 prebends, and because of this they could not without great burden provide at the same time, we should indeed have those same sentences relaxed, and provide to one of them in the same church a prebend: especially since in the letters of each that clause had been inserted, unless the same church should be burdened by our mandate in the reception of the other.

Quocirca discretioni vestrae mandamus, quatenus, eo recepto in canonicum et in fratrem, assignatoque sibi beneficio praebendali, qui ad eos prius mandatum apostolicum reportavit praefatas sententias iuxta formam ecclesiae sublato appellationis obstaculo relaxetis, alteri super praebendali beneficio in eadem ecclesia silentium imponentes.

Wherefore we mandate to your discretion that, he being received as a canon and as a brother, and a prebendal benefice assigned to him, you relax, in favor of him who previously carried back to them the apostolic mandate, the aforesaid sentences, the obstacle of the appeal removed, according to the form of the Church, imposing silence upon the other concerning the prebendal benefice in the same church.

CAP. XXXI.

CHAPTER 31.

Si habens literas Papae ad beneficium eis propter annuam pensionem renunciat, non valent literae beneficiales per eum hoc tacito impetratae.

If one having the Pope’s letters for a benefice renounces them on account of an annual pension, the beneficial letters impetrated by him with this kept tacit are not valid.

Idem Bituricensi Archiepiscopo apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same to the Archbishop of Bourges, Legate of the Apostolic See.

Ad audientiam nostram te significante pervenit, quod quidam clerici, obtentis a sede apostolica literis super provisione sua in aliquibus ecclesiis tibi lege dioecesana subiectis, recipientes ab eis annuas pensiones, seu alia beneficia, ab eorum impetitione desistunt, renunciantes nostrarum beneficio literarum, deinde ad sedem apostolicam accedentes super provisione sua obtinent alias literas ab eadem, de literis antea impetratis non habita mentione, et sic gratia benignitatis apostolicae abutentes, ecclesias multipliciter inquietant. Ne igitur tales de suae circumventionis astutÌa glorientur, Fraternitati tuae mandamus, quatenus eos, qui, post literas nostras taliter venditas, alias, de illis mentione non habita, impetrabunt de cetero, vel hactenus impetrarunt, carere decernas commodo earundem, et ecclesias, contra quas fuerint impetratae, non permittas earum occasione vexari, revocando in irritum, si quid earum praetextu inveneris esse factum.

It has come to our hearing, you indicating, that certain clerics, having obtained from the Apostolic See letters concerning their provision in some churches subject to you by diocesan law, when they receive from them annual pensions or other benefices, desist from their prosecution, renouncing the benefit of our letters; then, approaching the Apostolic See, they obtain other letters from the same concerning their provision, no mention being had of the letters previously impetrated, and thus, abusing the favor of Apostolic benignity, they disturb the churches in many ways. Therefore, lest such men glory in the craftiness of their circumvention, we command your Fraternity, that you decree those who, after our letters have been thus sold, will hereafter impetrate others without mention of those, or have hitherto impetrated, to lack the advantage of the same; and that you not permit the churches against which they shall have been impetrated to be vexed on their account, revoking into nullity whatever you shall find to have been done under their pretext.

CAP. XXXII.

CHAPTER 32.

Receptus per literas apostolicas, licet praebendam exspectet, per alias literas hoc supprimentes in alia ecclesia recipi non debet. Hoc dicit inhaerendo verbis literae.

Received by apostolic letters, although he awaits a prebend, he ought not to be received in another church by other letters suppressing this. This he states by adhering to the words of the letter.

Gregorius IX. Archiepiscopo Mediolanensi.

Gregory 9. To the Archbishop of Milan.

In nostra proposuisti praesentia, quod nonnulli clerici a sede apostolica plures literas, non tamen alias de aliis mentionem facientes, impetrant fraudulenter, ut in pluribus ecclesiis admittantur, sicque aliquando in aliis recepti, licet nondum in eis ecclesiasticum beneficium sint assecuti, alias ecclesias super receptione sua nihilominus impetunt et molestant. (Et infra:) Mandamus, quatenus eos clericos ecclesiis, in quibus recepti sunt, faciens esse contentos, non permittas alias ab eis occasione literarum huiusmodi molestari, nisi de receptione forte sua expressam fecerint mentionem.

You set forth in our presence that certain clerics fraudulently obtain from the apostolic see several letters, yet not others that make mention of others, in order that they may be admitted into several churches; and thus, having been received in other places, although they have not yet acquired an ecclesiastical benefice in them, they nonetheless assail and harass other churches over their reception. (And further:) We command that, making those clerics be content with the churches in which they have been received, you do not permit other churches to be troubled by them on the pretext of letters of this kind, unless perchance they have made express mention concerning their reception.

CAP. XXXIII.

CHAPTER 33.

Non valet rescriptum, quod procurator revocatus et de hoc certificatus extra iudicium impetravit; secus tamen, si in iudicio, dummodo revocatio ad notitiam adversarii vel iudicis non pervenerit. Hoc dicit secundum lecturam magis communem.

A rescript is not valid which a procurator, having been revoked and certified of this, has obtained outside of judgment; otherwise, however, if in court, provided that the revocation has not come to the notice of the adversary or of the judge. He says this according to the more common reading.

Idem Episcopo Silvanectensi, et Abbati Caroliloci.

The same to the Bishop of Senlis, and to the Abbot of Charlieu.

Ex parte decani et capituli Laudunensis fuit propositum, quod, quum ipsi auctoritate apostolicae indulgentiae in nobilem virum I. excommunicationis sententiam protulissent, procuratoribus partium propter hoc ad sedem apostolicam accedentibus, et lite super diversis articulis contestata, nos causam vobis commisimus terminandam, hoc adiecto, ut non obstarent literae praeter assensum partium impetratae. Dictus autem nobilis citatus proposuit, quod per illas literas procedendum non erat ex eo, quod V., qui easdem literas impetraverat, falsus exstiterat procurator, quum ipse ante impetrationem literarum ipsarum, propter suspicionem, quam contra eundem conceperat, mandatum sibi traditum revocasset. Eis igitur proponentibus ex adverso, quod ad nos vel ad ipsos huiusmodi revocatio non pervenit, vos, quod deberetis per literas ipsas procedere, per quandam interlocutoriam protulistis.

On the part of the dean and chapter of Laon it was proposed that, since they, by authority of an apostolic indult, had pronounced a sentence of excommunication against the noble man I., the procurators of the parties, on account of this, approaching the apostolic see, and the suit having been contested upon diverse articles, we committed the cause to you for termination, with this added, that letters obtained without the assent of the parties should not stand in the way. But the said noble, having been cited, alleged that one ought not to proceed by those letters for this reason: that V., who had obtained those same letters, had proved a false procurator, since he himself, before the obtaining of those letters, on account of the suspicion which he had conceived against the same, had revoked the mandate delivered to him. They, therefore, alleging on the opposite side that such revocation had not come to us or to themselves, you, by a certain interlocutory, pronounced that you ought to proceed by those same letters.

(Et infra:) Petente itaque procuratore ipsorum, ut inspiceretis praedictam indulgentiam, procurator ipsius nobilis ex adverso respondit, quod non erat per iam dictas literas procedendum, exhibens alias quasdam posterius impetratas, inter alia continentes, ut, si de partium voluntate procederet, causam terminaretis eandem; alioquin ipsam sufficienter instructam remitteretis ad sedis apostolicae examen cum indulgentia memorata. Quas literas ipsi ex eo non valere dicebant, quia per eundem V. et post revocationem mandati fuerant impetratae. Quia vero iuxta generalis statuta concilii apostolicae literae, quas sine speciali mandato domini quis impetrat, valere non debent, nisi sit de illis personis, a quibus non est exigendum de iure mandatum, mandamus, quatenus, si revocatio mandati ad procuratorem pervenit, quum minus valere debeant literae, quae impetrantur ab illo, a quo mandatum dominus revocavit, in negotio iuxta priorum continentiam literarum, non obstantibus posterioribus, procedatis.

(And below:) Thus, at the request of their procurator, that you inspect the aforesaid indulgence, the procurator of that noble on the opposite side responded that it was not to be proceeded by the already-mentioned letters, producing certain others later obtained, containing, among other things, that, if it proceeded by the will of the parties, you should terminate that same cause; otherwise you should remit it, sufficiently instructed, to the examination of the Apostolic See together with the aforesaid indulgence. They said that those letters were not valid on this account, because they had been obtained by that same V., and after the revocation of the mandate. But since, according to the statutes of the general council, apostolic letters which one obtains without a special mandate of the lord ought not to be valid, unless it be of those persons from whom by law a mandate is not to be required, we command that, inasmuch as the revocation of the mandate has reached the procurator, since letters which are obtained by him from whom the lord has revoked the mandate ought to have lesser force, you are to proceed in the matter according to the tenor of the prior letters, the later notwithstanding.

CAP. XXXIV.

CHAPTER 34.

Rescriptum, impetratum contra hominem alicuius dioecesis, non extenditur ad hominem eiusdem nominis alterius dioecesis.

A rescript, impetrated against a person of some diocese, is not extended to a person of the same name of another diocese.

Idem Decano et Magistro G. Canonico Leodiensi.

The same to the Dean and to Master G., Canon of Liège.

Significante V. nos noveritis accepisse, quod, quum R. contra V. Remensis dioecesis super quibusdam pannis et aliis ad iudices literas impetrasset, idem V. excipiendo proposuit, quod, quum idem non de Remensi, sed de Leodiensi dioecesi exsisteret, per huiusmodi literas, quum de dioecesi Leodiensi non facerent aliquam mentionem, conveniri de iure non poterat, nec debebat. Et quia exceptionem huiusmodi admittere denegarunt, nostram audientiam appellavit. Ideoque mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, revocato in irritum, etc.

With V. signifying, know that we have received that, when R., against V., of the diocese of Reims, concerning certain cloths and other things, had obtained letters to the judges, the same V., by way of exception, proposed that, since he himself was not of Reims but of the diocese of Liège, by letters of this kind—since they made no mention of the diocese of Liège—he could not in law be convened, nor ought he to be. And because they refused to admit an exception of this kind, he appealed to our audience. Therefore we command that, if it is so, it be revoked into nullity, etc.

CAP. XXXV.

CHAPTER 35.

Per rescriptum, impetratum contra homines dioecesis, non possunt conveniri homines civitatis.

By a rescript, impetrated against the men of a diocese, the men of a city cannot be convened.

Idem Priori sancti Laudinensis, et Succentori Rothomagensi.

The same to the Prior of Saint-Lô, and to the Succentor of Rouen.

Rodulphus clericus, rector ecclesiae sancti Christophori de civitate Sagiensi sua nobis insinuatione monstravit, quod, quum magister R. eum per quasdam literas, contra episcopum Sagiensem et quosdam alios Sagiensis dioecesis super reditibus et rebus aliis impetratas a nobis, corum iudicibus super eadem ecclesia per generalem clausulam: "quidam alii" convenisset, idem rector proposuit excipiendo, quod, quum esset de civitate Sagiensi, et sub eadem clausula nullus de civitate ipsa intelligitur inclusus, conveniri non poterat per eandem. Et quia dicti iudices exceptionem huiusmodi recusarunt admittere, nostram audientiam appellavit. Ideoque mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, revocetis in irritum, etc.

Rodulphus the cleric, rector of the church of Saint Christopher of the city of Sées, showed us by his own representation that, when Master R., by certain letters obtained from us against the bishop of Sées and certain others of the diocese of Sées concerning revenues and other matters, had convened him before their judges with respect to the same church by the general clause, “certain others,” the same rector put forward by way of exception that, since he was of the city of Sées, and under that same clause no one of the city itself is understood to be included, he could not be convened by the same. And because the said judges refused to admit an exception of this kind, he appealed to our hearing. Therefore we command that, inasmuch as it is so, you revoke it into nullity, etc.

CAP. XXXVI.

CHAPTER 36.

Si conveniendus per clausulam moriatur re integra, successor conveniri non potest.

If the party to be convened under the clause dies with the matter entire, the successor cannot be convened.

Idem Abbati sancti Iacobi.

The same to the Abbot of Saint James.

Significavit nobis comitissa Namutensis, quod, quum mortuo comite fratre suo ipsa in eius successerit comitatu, G. et B. per quasdam literas apostolicas contra Tullensem episcopum et quosdam alios clericos et laicos impetratas, eam coram iudicibus, ad quos obtentae fuerant, super quadam summa pecuniae, quam eidem fratri suo se mutuasse dicebant, per illam generalem clausulam: "quidam alii," quia in praedicto comitatu successerat, convenerunt. Excipiente itaque procuratore suo, quod, quum adhuc frater eiusdem mulieris viveret, quando eaedem literae impetratae fuerunt, nec per ipsas, dum viveret, fuerat ad iudicium evocatus, earum auctoritate non poterat conveniri. Et quia iudices exceptionem non admittebant ipsius, nostram audientiam appellavit.

The Countess of Namur signified to us that, when her brother the count having died she herself succeeded to his county, G. and B., by certain apostolic letters obtained against the Bishop of Toul and certain other clerics and laics, convened her before the judges to whom they had been obtained, concerning a certain sum of money which they said they had loaned to that same her brother, by means of that general clause: "certain others," since she had succeeded in the aforesaid county. Her procurator therefore entering an exception, namely that, since the brother of the same woman was still living when those same letters were obtained, and by them, while he lived, he had not been summoned to judgment, she could not be convened by their authority. And because the judges did not admit her exception, she appealed to our audience.

(Et infra:) Ideoque mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, revocato in irritum, etc.

(And below:) And therefore we mandate that, if it is so, it be revoked into nullity, etc.

CAP. XXXVII.

CHAPTER 37.

Non valent literae exsecutoriae, in quibus impetrans falso dixit, monitorias praecessisse.

Executive letters are not valid, in which the petitioner falsely stated that monitory letters had preceded.

Idem Abbati sancti Victoris.

The same to the Abbot of Saint Victor.

Ex insinuatione episcopi Ambianensis accepimus, quod I. clericus super eius provisione ad ipsum praeceptorias, et postmodum ad vos exsecutorias contra eum literas impetravit. (Et infra:) Quocirca mandamus, quatenus, si nullae monitoriae super hoc praecesserint, exsecutoriis supersedeatis eisdem, dummodo eaedem exsecutoriae de monitoriis fecerint mentionem; alioquin in exsecutionis negotio iuxta directum ad vos pro ipso mandatum ratione praevia procedatis.

From the intimation of the bishop of Amiens we have learned that I., a cleric, concerning his provision, obtained letters against him—preceptorials directed to himself, and afterwards executorials directed to you. (And below:) Wherefore we command that, if no monitory letters in this matter have preceded, you should desist from those same executorials, provided that those same executorials have made mention of monitories; otherwise, in the business of execution, you are to proceed according to the mandate directed to you on his behalf, after prior examination.

CAP. XXXVIII.

CHAPTER 38.

Cessantibus clausulis in dubio Papa non intendit gravare eundem collatorem super provisione duorum; ideo secundus impetrans repellitur, sive primus exspectet, sive sit iam gratiam consecutus. Hoc dicit secundum intellectum Gloss.

With the clauses being absent, in a doubtful case the Pope does not intend to burden the same collator with respect to the provision of two; therefore the second impetrant is repelled, whether the first waits, or has already attained the grace. He says this according to the understanding of the Gloss.

Idem Noviensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Noviensis.

Mandatum apostolicum ad te directum, ut magistrum S. faceres in canonicorum recipi et in fratrem Noviensis ecclesiae, si pro alio ibidem non scripsimus, qui huiusmodi gratiam prosequatur, alio iam beneficium per nostras literas obtinente prosequi non teneris, quum super receptione duorum gravandi ecclesiam antedictam non fuerit intentio mandatoris.

The apostolic mandate directed to you, that you should cause Master S. to be received among the canons and into the brotherhood of the Church of Noyon—if we have not written there on behalf of another who prosecutes a grace of this sort—another already obtaining the benefice through our letters, you are not held to prosecute, since it was not the intention of the mandator to burden the aforesaid church with the reception of two.

CAP. XXXIX.

CHAPTER 39.

Ecclesia, in qua Papa primus dedit monitorias, et secundus exsecutorias, per primum, non per secundum intelligitur gravata.

The Church, in which the first Pope issued monitories and the second executories, is understood to be burdened by the first, not by the second.

Idem.

The same.

Literis apostolicis ad vos directis, ut G. clericum reciperetis in canonicum et in fratrem, nisi pro alio fuisset per nos ecclesia vestra gravata, mandatum nostrum vos exsequi volumus et mandamus; non obstante, quod T. subdiaconum per nostras literas exsecutorias recepistis, qui a bonae memoriae H. praedecessore nostro monitorias impetravit, quum factum praedecessoris nostri potius, quam nostrum fuerimus prosecuti.

By apostolic letters directed to you, that you should receive G., a cleric, as a canon and as a brother, unless on account of another your church had been burdened by us, we will and we command that you execute our mandate; notwithstanding that you received T., a subdeacon, by our executory letters, who had obtained monitory letters from H. of good memory, our predecessor, since we were prosecuting the act of our predecessor rather than our own.

CAP. XL.

CHAPTER 40.

Dioecesanus, cui scribitur, ut in dioecesi sua, ubi pro alio scriptum non est, provideat vel faciat provideri, non potest id exsequi circa beneficium spectans ad collationem alterius, iam pro alio gravati.

The Diocesan, to whom it is written that in his diocese, where it is not written for another, he should provide or cause provision to be made, cannot execute this with respect to a benefice looking to the collation of another, already burdened on behalf of another.

Idem.

The same.

Abbatem, qui mandatum apostolicum iam recepit, ut S. clerico in aliqua ecclesiarum sui monasterii provideret, et per literas generales ad dioecesanum episcopum obtentas, ut in dioecesi sua, ubi pro alio scriptum non esset, faceret provideri, cogi iuris ratio non permittit, nec super conferendis ecclesiis aut beneficiis aggravari, etiamsi facultatem habeat dioecesanus per easdem literas providendi.

An abbot, who has already received an apostolic mandate to provide for the clerk S. in some one of the churches of his monastery, and who has obtained general letters to the diocesan bishop that in his diocese, where nothing had been written for another, provision be made, the rationale of law does not permit to be compelled, nor to be burdened concerning the conferring of churches or benefices, even if the diocesan has by those same letters the faculty of making provision.

CAP. XLI.

CHAPTER 41.

Per rescriptum directum excommunicatori, ut absolvat excommunicatum, si contra concilium eum excommunicavit, datis exsecutoribus, qui eo non parente exsequantur, non excommunicatori, sed exsecutoribus cognitio demandatur.

By a rescript directed to the excommunicator, that he absolve the excommunicated, if he has excommunicated him against the council, with executors appointed, who, he not complying, may carry it out, cognizance is entrusted not to the excommunicator, but to the executors.

Idem.

The same.

Ab excommunicato, qui contra statuta concilii generalis asserit se ligatum, literis ad excommunicatorem obtentis, ut, si est ita, sine difficultate absolvat eundem, et aliis deputatis iudicibus, qui, eo non parente, mandatum apostolicum exsequantur, non excommunicatori, qui de facto suo certus esse debet, licet in hoc deferatur eidem, sed illis cognitio demandatur.

From an excommunicated person who asserts himself to be bound contrary to the statutes of the general council, letters are obtained to the excommunicator that, if it is so, he should absolve the same without difficulty; and to other deputed judges, who, he not complying, shall execute the apostolic mandate, the cognizance is entrusted not to the excommunicator—who ought to be certain of his own act, although in this regard deference is shown to him—but to those judges.

CAP. XLII.

CHAPTER 42.

Si impetrans rescriptum ad beneficium, dixit se non beneficiatum, quum tamen haberet beneficium, licet exiguum, non valet rescriptum.

If one obtaining a rescript for a benefice said that he was not beneficed, although he had a benefice, albeit small, the rescript is not valid.

Idem.

The same.

Si proponente aliquo, nondum se beneficium ecclesiasticum assecutum, super provisione ipsius, licet minus competens obtinentis, rescriptum apostolicum de hoc mentionem non faciens impetretur, illud veluti fraudulenter obtentum dicimus non valere.

If, with someone proposing, not yet having acquired for himself an ecclesiastical benefice, concerning the provision of the same—albeit less competent for the obtainer—an apostolic rescript, making no mention of this, is procured, we say that that, as if fraudulently obtained, is not valid.

CAP. XLIII.

CHAPTER 43.

Abutentes rescripto apostolico in casibus hic enumeratis, privantur commodo rescripti, et condemnantur in sumptibus et damnis adversario.

Those abusing the apostolic rescript in the cases here enumerated are deprived of the benefit of the rescript, and are condemned in costs and damages to the adversary.

Idem Episcopo Parisiensi.

The same to the Bishop of Paris.

Quia nonnulli diversis modis literis apostolicis abutuntur, statuimus, ut, quicunque obtentas sub nomine suo literas aliis eiusdem nominis tradunt, qui quos volunt fatigant indebite per easdem, et qui eas tali modo recipiunt, quique illos, contra quos nihil habent quaestionis, faciunt in iudicium evocari, aut literas ipsas ad futuras trahunt controversias, quae nondum fuerant tempore impetrationis exortae, seu quemquam super uno negotio, vel etiam malitiose super pluribus personalibus actionibus, quae sub uno iudice possent tractari commodius, per varias literas coram diversis iudicibus trahunt, ut laboribus fatigatus et sumptibus vel compellatur componere, vel cedere iuri suo, aut reus actorem eodem tempore ad diversa loca, vel indeterminate ad villam, quae commune cum pluribus eiusdem provinciae villis habet vocabulum, citari procurat, ut, dum non comparuerit, excommunicetur quasi contumax, et sic eum a sua intentione repellat, earundem literarum commodo careant, et adversariis in moderatis expensis ac damnis, quae propter hoc eos pertulisse constiterit, condemnentur.

Because some people abuse apostolic letters in diverse ways, we decree that whoever, having obtained letters under his own name, hands them over to others of the same name, who harass whom they please unduly by means of the same; and those who receive them in such a way; and those who cause those against whom they have no quarrel to be summoned into judgment; or who drag the letters themselves into future controversies which had not yet arisen at the time of procurement; or who, over a single business, or even maliciously over several personal actions which could be handled more conveniently before one judge, drag parties by various letters before diverse judges, so that, wearied by labors and expenses, one is compelled either to compound or to cede his right; or the defendant contrives to have the plaintiff cited at the same time to different places, or indeterminately to a villa which has a name in common with many villas of the same province, so that, when he has not appeared, he may be excommunicated as contumacious, and thus be driven from his purpose—let them be deprived of the benefit of the same letters, and be condemned to their adversaries for moderate expenses and for the damages which it shall be established that they have suffered on that account.

TITULUS IV. DE CONSUETUDINE.

TITLE 4. ON CUSTOM.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Consuetudo, inferens gravamen ecclesiis, debet iudicis officio tolli. Hoc dicit secundum intellectum magis singularem.

Custom, bringing a gravamen upon churches, ought to be removed by the judge’s office. This he says according to a more singular understanding.

Gregorius I. in Registro.

Gregory 1. in the Register.

Consuetudines, quae ecclesiis gravamen inducere dignoscuntur, nostra nos decet consideratione remittere, [nec illuc etc.]

Customs which are recognized to induce a gravamen upon churches it befits us to remit by our consideration, [nor thither, etc.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Ex consuetudine potest introduci actus sive solennitas, per quam sine apprehensione reali transfertur possessio rei absentis. H. d. et est casus singularis secundum Abbatem Siculum.

From custom there can be introduced an act or solemnity, by which, without real apprehension, the possession of an absent thing is transferred. Here indeed it is a singular case, according to the Sicilian Abbot.

Innocentius III. Archiepiscopo et Capitulo Lugdunensi.

Innocent 3. To the Archbishop and Chapter of Lyons.

Ex literis, quas tu nobis, frater archiepiscope, destinasti, intelleximus manifeste, quod regnum Daciae, quantum ad ea, quae ad ius fori contingunt, consuetudinibus suis et institutionibus regum suorum omnino regatur. Unde nullum usum testamentorum illius provinciae habere contingit, qui alibi in ultimis decedentium voluntatibus secundum legalem observantiam custoditur. Si vero quis possessiones aliquas claustris vel aliis religiosis locis in bona valetudine vel ultima voluntate constitutus pro suorum vult remedio peccatorum conferre, hanc ecclesiae conferendi formam esse proponitis, quod in huiusmodi donationibus modicum terrae consuevit in manu accipere, vel in extremitate pallii, quod manu episcopi vel cuiuslibet alterius praelati ecclesiae sustinetur, aut super ipsum altare aliquo involutum panniculo cum debita humilitate ponendum sub testimonio videntium et audientium, sub dicta forma, quae scotatio vulgariter appellatur.

From the letters which you sent to us, brother archbishop, we understood clearly that the kingdom of Dacia, as far as those matters which pertain to the law of the forum are concerned, is altogether governed by its own customs and by the institutions of its kings. Whence it happens that that province has no use of testaments, which elsewhere is observed in the last wills of the dying according to legal observance. But if anyone wishes to confer certain possessions upon cloisters or other religious places, whether being in good health or at his last will, for the remedy of his sins, you set forth that this is the church’s form of conferring: that in donations of this sort a small portion of earth is accustomed to be received into the hand, or into the extremity of the pallium, which is held by the hand of the bishop or of any other prelate of the church, or it is to be placed upon the very altar, wrapped in some little cloth, with due humility, under the testimony of those seeing and hearing, under the said form, which is commonly called scotatio.

Verum quia huiusmodi donatio malitiose a quibusdam cavillatoribus, sicut asseris, impeditur, a nobis humiliter postulasti, ne loca religiosa et ecclesiae, quibus multae possessiones sub scotatione huiusmodi sunt collatae, ab aliquibus possint vel debeant temere perturbari, paterna debemus sollicitudine providere. Nolentes igitur, ut tales constitutiones, quas diuturnitas temporis, ut asseris, observavit, et usus consuetudinis hactenus approbatae retinuit, temeritate qualibet infirmentur, Discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus donationes eorum, quae sub obtentu consuetudinis claustris, ecclesiis vel quibuslibet locis religiosis pie ac provide conferuntur vel etiam sunt collata, faciatis irrevocabiliter observari, quum huiusmodi signum, quod scotatio dicitur, non tam factae donationis, quam traditae possessionis sit evidens argumentum, si quos contradictores inveneritis aut rebelles, auctoritate freti apostolica per censuram ecclesiasticam, monitione praemissa, sublato appellationis obstaculo, compescentes. [Dat.

But because such a donation is, as you assert, maliciously impeded by certain cavillers, you have humbly besought from us that we should with paternal solicitude provide lest religious places and churches, to which many possessions have been conferred under such scotation, can or ought to be rashly disturbed by anyone. Not wishing, therefore, that such constitutions, which the long duration of time, as you say, has observed, and the use of a hitherto approved custom has retained, be weakened by any temerity, we command by apostolic writings to your Discretion that you cause the donations of those things which, under the pretext of custom, are piously and prudently conferred, or even have been conferred, upon cloisters, churches, or any religious places, to be observed irrevocably, since this kind of sign, which is called scotation, is an evident proof not so much of a donation having been made as of possession having been delivered; and if you shall find any contradictors or rebels, restraining them by ecclesiastical censure, monition having been premised, the obstacle of appeal removed, relying on apostolic authority. [Given.

Lat. XVI. Kal.

Lateran, 16th day before the Kalends.

Dec. 1198.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Non valet consuetudo, ut in causis ecclesiasticis dictum populi pro sententia teneatur.

The consuetude does not hold good, that in ecclesiastical causes the people's dictum be held as a sentence.

Idem Episcopo Pictaviensi.

The Same to the Bishop of Poitiers.

Ad nostram audientiam noveris pervenisse, quod in tua dioecesi etiam in causis ecclesiasticis consuetudo minus rationabilis habeatur, quod, quum aliqua causa tractatur ibidem, et allegationibus et querelis utriusque partis auditis, a praesentibus literatis et illiteratis, sapientibus et insipientibus, quid iuris sit quaeritur, et quod illi dictaverint vel aliquis eorum, praesentium consilio requisito pro sententia teneatur. Nos igitur attendentes, quod consuetudo, quae canonicis obviat institutis, nullius debeat esse momenti, quum sententia a non suo iudice lata nullam obtineat firmitatem, ut in causis ecclesiasticis subiectorum tuorum, postquam tibi de meritis earum constiterit, sententiam proferre valeas, sicut ordo postulat rationis, auctoritate tibi praesentium, praemissa consuetudine non obstante, concedimus facultatem. [Nulli ergo etc.

Know that it has come to our hearing that in your diocese even in ecclesiastical causes a less reasonable custom is held: that, when some cause is handled there, and, the allegations and complaints of each party having been heard, inquiry is made of those present—literate and illiterate, wise and unwise—what the law is; and that what they have dictated, or any one of them, the counsel of those present being sought, is held for the sentence. We therefore, considering that a custom which contravenes canonical institutes ought to be of no moment, since a sentence delivered by one who is not its judge obtains no firmness, grant you by the authority of these presents, the aforesaid custom notwithstanding, the faculty that, in ecclesiastical causes of your subjects, after the merits of them have become clear to you, you may be able to pronounce sentence, as the order of reason demands. [Therefore to no one, etc.

Dat. Lat. XII.

Given at the Lateran, 12.

Kal. Mart. 1199.]

Kalends of March, 1199.]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Consuetudo non potest operari, ut clericus non episcopus possit exercere ea, quae sunt reservata ordini episcopali. Et est casus notabilis. Abb.

Custom cannot operate so that a cleric who is not a bishop may exercise those things that are reserved to the episcopal order. And it is a notable case. Abb.

Sicul.

Sicilian.

Idem L. Vicario nostro apud Constantinopolim constituto.

The same 50. To our Vicar constituted at Constantinople.

Quanto de benignitate sedis apostolicae locum obtines celsiorem, tanto tibi est sollicitius procurandum, ut te talem exhibeas in agendis, non declinans ad dextram vel ad sinistram, quod non minus re, quam nomine vices apostolicas gerere videaris. Pervenit sane ad audientiam nostram, quod quidam simplices sacerdotes apud Constantinopolim ea sacramenta praesumunt fidelibus exhibere, quae ab Apostolorum tempore rite fuerunt solis pontificibus reservata, ut est sacramentum confirmationis, quod chrismando renatos soli debent episcopi per manus impositionem conferre, ad excusandas excusationes in peccatis et sui erroris fomentum solam consuetudinem praetendentes, quum diuturnitas temporis peccata non minuat, sed augmentet, quae tanto graviora exsistunt, quanto infelicem animam diutius detinent alligatam. Volentes igitur haec et alia, quae oculos divinae maiestatis offendunt, de agro dominico exstirpari, Discretioni tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus omnibus latinis presbyteris apud Constantinopolim constitutis districte prohibeas, ne talia de cetero sua temeritate praesumant, quae licet non sint a fidelibus contemnenda, tutius tamen est ea sine periculo ex necessitate, quae legem non habet, omittere, quam ut ab his, quibus ea conferre non licet, ex temeritate, quae lege damnatur, non sine gravi periculo inaniter conferantur, quum umbra quaedam ostendatur in opere, veritas autem non subeat in effectu.

The higher a place you hold by the benignity of the apostolic see, the more solicitously must you procure that you show yourself such in your doings, not declining to the right or to the left, so that you may appear to bear apostolic vicariates not less in fact than in name. It has indeed come to our hearing that certain simple priests at Constantinople presume to exhibit to the faithful those sacraments which from the time of the Apostles were rightly reserved to pontiffs alone, as is the sacrament of Confirmation, which by chrismating the reborn bishops alone ought to confer through the imposition of hands, alleging custom alone to excuse excuses in sins and to foment their own error, since the length of time does not diminish sins but augments them, which are so much the graver as they detain the unhappy soul the longer bound. Willing therefore that these and other things which offend the eyes of the divine majesty be extirpated from the Lord’s field, we command by apostolic writings to your Discretion, with a precept, that you strictly prohibit all Latin presbyters established at Constantinople, lest hereafter by their temerity they presume such things; which, although they are not to be contemned by the faithful, yet it is safer to omit them without peril out of necessity, which has no law, than that by those to whom it is not permitted to confer them, out of temerity, which is condemned by law, they be vainly conferred not without grave peril, since a certain shadow is shown in the work, but the truth does not enter in the effect.

[Alios quoque etc. Dat. Lat.

[To others also, etc. Given at the Lateran.

XVI. Kal. Dec.

16th day before the Kalends of December.

1199.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Non valet consuetudo, per quam interdicti sententia violator.

A custom is not valid, by which the sentence of an interdict is violated.

Idem Decano et Capitulo Cenomanensi.

The same to the Dean and Chapter of Le Mans.

Quum inter vos ex una parte, et canonicos sancti Petri de Curia ex altera, super eo, quod dicti canonici sancti Petri generale interdictum a venerabili fratre nostro episcopo vestro, vel a vobis in civitate Cenomanensi positum non servabant, quaestio verteretur, utraque pars, ut eadem causa fine posset debito terminari, suum nuncium ad sedem apostolicam destinavit. Partibus igitur in nostra praesentia constitutis per procuratores idoneos audientiam praebuimus liberam et benignam, et quidem ecclesiae vestrae proposuit procurator, quod, quum Cenomanensis ecclesia suo loco et tempore pro excessibus saecularis potestatis interdicto velit supponere civitatem, ecclesia beati Petri de Curia, tanquam membrum suo capiti non cohaerens, campanis palsatis, apertis ianuis divina officia celebrare aliis cessantibus non omisit. Quum autem venerabilis frater noster Oct.

When between you on the one side, and the canons of Saint Peter of Curia on the other, there was a dispute concerning this: that the said canons of Saint Peter were not observing the general interdict laid by our venerable brother, your bishop, or by you, in the city of Le Mans, each party, so that the same cause might be able to be terminated with its due end, dispatched its envoy to the apostolic See. Therefore, with the parties set in our presence through suitable procurators, we afforded a free and kindly hearing; and indeed the procurator of your church alleged that, when the church of Le Mans wishes in its proper place and time to subject the city to an interdict for the excesses of the secular power, the church of blessed Peter of Curia, as a member not cohering with its head, with the bells struck and the doors opened, did not omit to celebrate the divine offices while others were ceasing. But when our venerable brother Oct.

Ostiensis episcopus tunc in partibus illis legationis officio fungeretur, iidem ad eius praesentiam accedentes, suam ei super hoc querimoniam exponere curaverunt. Qui, partibus convocatis, et rationibus utriusque diligenter auditis et cognitis, quum pars ecclesiae S. Petri per privilegia sedis apostolicae non posset ostendere se munitam, immo ei firmiter constaret, quod ex superbia potius ad hoc, quam ex causa rationabili ducerentur, sententialiter definivit, quod, quum in civitate Cenomanensi positum fuerit interdictum, illud eadem ecclesia observaret, vinculo quoque excommunicationis ac poenae ordinis et beneficii eos supponens, qui suae ducerent sententiae resistendum. Postmodum vero quum propter quosdam excessus saecularis potestatis tota Cenomanensis civitas supponeretur ecclesiastico interdicto, et ipsis canonicis S. Petri denunciatum fuisset, ut a divinorum celebratione cessarent, et observarent, sicut aliae ipsius civitatis ecclesiae, interdictum, ipsi maiorem temeritatem suae audaciae adiungentes, cum maiori solennitate suum sunt officium exsecuti, venire contra ipsius legati sententiam non verentes.

When the Bishop of Ostia was then discharging the office of legation in those parts, the same men, approaching into his presence, took care to set forth to him their complaint on this matter. He, the parties having been convoked, and the reasons of each diligently heard and known, since the party of the church of St. Peter could not show itself fortified by privileges of the Apostolic See—nay, it was firmly established to him that they were led to this rather by superbia than by a reasonable cause—defined by sentence that, when an interdict should have been placed in the Cenomanensian city, that same church should observe it, also subjecting to the bond of excommunication and to the penalty of order and of benefice those who should deem that his sentence ought to be resisted. Afterwards indeed, when on account of certain excesses of the secular power the whole Cenomanensian city was being subjected to an ecclesiastical interdict, and it had been denounced to those canons of St. Peter that they should cease from the celebration of divine things and should observe the interdict, as the other churches of that city, they, adding greater temerity to their audacity, with greater solemnity executed their office, not fearing to go against the sentence of that legate.

Procurator vero ipsorum proposuit ex adverso, quod ipsa ecclesia sancti Petri a sui fundatione libera exstitit et exempta, et de bonis progenitorum carissimi in Christo filii nostri Ioannis, Anglorum regis illustris fundata fuerat et dotata, firmiter asseverans, et ex hoc suam credens intentionem fundare, quod decanatum et praebendas ipsius ecclesiae idem rex et progenitores sui conferebant dioecesano episcopo inconsulto. Proposuit etiam, quod ex consuetudine tali hactenus eadem ecclesia gavisa fuerat libertate, et hoc multotiens idem vester episcopus recognovit, quod vos parochialem potestis interdicere capellanum, qui extra chorum celebrat ecclesiae ante dictae, allegans de consuetudine antedicta, quod in generali etiam interdicto licitum erat eis, pulsatis campanis, alta voce, interdictis tamen et excommunicatis exclusis, divina officia celebrare. Nos igitur cognito, quod ex tali consuetudine, si qua foret, disrumperetur nervus ecclesiasticae disciplinae, ipsam de consensu fratrum nostrorum penitus duximus irritandam, quum non consuetudo, sed corruptela potius sit censenda, concedentes tamen eidem ecclesiae S. Petri, quod, quum generale in civitate fuerit interdictum, ex benignitate sedis apostolicae licitum sit eis, clausis ianuis, exclusis excommunicatis et interdictis, non pulsatis campanis, submissa voce divina officia celebrare.

However, their procurator proposed on the contrary, that the church of Saint Peter itself from its foundation had existed free and exempt, and had been founded and endowed from the goods of the progenitors of our dearest son in Christ, John, illustrious king of the English, firmly asserting—and on this believing to ground his intention—that the decanate and the prebends of that same church the said king and his progenitors conferred without the diocesan bishop being consulted. He also proposed that, by such a consuetude, the same church hitherto had rejoiced in liberty, and this your same bishop has many times recognized: that you can interdict the parochial chaplain who celebrates outside the choir of the aforesaid church, alleging from the aforesaid consuetude that even under a general interdict it was licit for them, the bells having been rung, with a loud voice, the interdicted and the excommunicated, however, excluded, to celebrate the divine offices. We therefore, having recognized that by such a consuetude, if any there were, the sinew of ecclesiastical discipline would be snapped, judged the same, with the consent of our brothers, to be utterly annulled, since it is to be deemed not a consuetude but rather a corruptela; nevertheless granting to that same church of St. Peter that, when a general interdict shall have been in force in the city, by the benignity of the Apostolic See it shall be licit for them, the doors closed, the excommunicated and the interdicted excluded, the bells not rung, and in a subdued voice, to celebrate the divine offices.

[Nulli ergo Ö nostrae definitionis et concessionis Ö] Si quis autem nostrae diffinitionis sententiam etc. [Dat. III.

[Therefore let it be allowed to no one Ö of our definition and concession Ö] But if anyone, however, should act against the sentence of our definition, etc. [Given on the 3.

Non. Febr. Ao. VIII.

Nones of February, in the year 8.

1206.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

In attribuendis officiis novae dignitati servatur consuetudo vicinarum civitatum. Quae si diversa fuerit, servabitur magis rationabilis et aliis non praeiudicans.

In assigning offices to the new dignity, the custom of neighboring cities is observed. If that should be different, the more reasonable one—and one not prejudicing others—will be observed.

Idem Episcopo Heliensi.

The same to the Bishop of Ely.

Quum olim venerabilis frater noster Londonensis episcopus nostris auribus intimasset, quod in sua ecclesia proposuerat statuere praecentorum certum reditum assignaturus eidem sine laesione cuiusquam, nos eius precibus inclinati, ei licentiam concessimus praecentorem huiusmodi ordinandi, dummodo in conferendis sibi reditibus nulli inferretur praeiudicium, nihilominus statuentes, ut praecentor taliter institutus in sessionibus, processionibus et aliis illam haberet in Londonensi ecclesia dignitatem, quam habent alii praecentores in aliis ecclesiis Anglicanis. Postmodum autem nostris fuit auribus intimatum, quod, licet idem episcopus dilectum filium B. in eadem instituisset ecclesia praecentorem, quod tamen a vobis fuerat de praelibata dignitate statutum biennio iam elapso exsequi non curarat. Quapropter tibi dedimus in mandatis, ut illud, sublato cuiuslibet contradictionis et appellationis obstaculo, exsequi non postponeres, contradictores per censuram ecclesiasticam compescendo.

When once our venerable brother, the Bishop of London, had intimated to our ears that in his church he had proposed to establish for the precentors a fixed revenue, to be assigned to the same without lesion to anyone, we, inclined by his prayers, granted him license to ordain a precentor of this kind, provided that in conferring on him the revenues no prejudice be inflicted upon anyone; nonetheless decreeing that a precentor thus instituted should have in sessions, processions, and other matters that dignity in the Church of London which other precentors have in other English churches. Afterwards, however, it was intimated to our ears that, although the same bishop had instituted our beloved son B. as precentor in the same church, nevertheless he had not cared to carry out that which had been established by you concerning the aforesaid dignity, with two years now elapsed. Wherefore we have given you in mandate that you should not postpone carrying that out, the obstacle of any contradiction and appeal having been removed, restraining the contradictors by ecclesiastical censure.

Noviter vero dilectus filius decanus et quidam alii, personatus habentes in ecclesia memorata, suam nobis transmisere querelam, quod, quum per ecclesias Anglicanas consuetudines sint diversae, ac quidam cantorum minorem, quidam vero maiorem habeant dignitatem, nec possint dignitares eorum, quum sint vel variae vel repugnantes, convenire simul in unam, is, qui noviter est institutus in ecclesia Londoniensi praecentor, non contentus eo, quod habere potest sine praeiudicio aliorum, occasione literarum nostrarum quasdam ipsius decani et aliarum personarum eiusdem dignitates ecclesiae sibi nititur in eorum praeiudicium arrogare. Quocirca fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si secundum diversas consuetudines locorum diversas habere noveris praecentores in Anglicanis ecclesiis dignitates, iam dictum praecentorem illam habere facias in Londonensi ecclesia dignitatem, eaque appellatione remota manere contentum, quam, rationabilibus et approbatis consuetudinibus ecclesiae salvis, sine praeiudicio alieno poterit obtinere. [Dat.

More recently indeed the beloved son the dean, and certain others, holding personates in the aforesaid church, have transmitted to us their complaint: that, since throughout the English churches the customs are diverse, and some of the cantors have a lesser, but some indeed a greater dignity, and their dignities, since they are either various or even repugnant, cannot be made to agree together into one, he who has been newly instituted precentor in the church of London, not content with that which he can have without prejudice to others, under pretext of our letters strives to arrogate to himself certain dignities of the dean himself and of other persons of that same church, to their prejudice. Wherefore we command to your fraternity by apostolic writings, to the effect that, if you know that, according to the diverse customs of places, precentors have diverse dignities in the English churches, you cause the already-said precentor to have that dignity in the church of London, and, appeal removed, to remain content with it, which, the reasonable and approved customs of the church saved, he will be able to obtain without another’s prejudice. [Given.

Lat. II. Non. Febr.

Lateran. February 4.

Pont. nostr. Ao. XI. 1208.]

In the 11th year of our pontificate, 1208.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Non potest induci ex consuetudine, ut quis possit dimittere dignitatem sine superioris licentia, vel ut possit, electus administrare, non habita confirmatione a superiore.

It cannot be induced from custom that anyone may resign his dignity without the license of his superior, or that, having been elected, he may administer without confirmation had from the superior.

Idem Conventui Corbiensis monasterii.

The same to the Convent of the monastery of Corbie.

Quum venerabilis frater noster episcopus Hostiensis et dilectus filius L. tituli sanctae crucis presbyter cardinalis olim in partibus Alemaniae legationis officio fungerentur, invenerunt abbatem de monasterio Hermionensi, quod ad Romanam ecclesiam noscitur pertinere nullo mediante, ad monasterium Corbiense, quod est etiam Romanae ecclesiae speciale, propria temeritate migrasse, licentia illud deserendi, vel confirmatione a nobis, vel ab ipsis, qui vices nostras in illis partibus tunc gerebant, nec habita, nec petita. [Quumque Northusium advenisset regalia recepturus, iisdem exsistentibus ibidem, ut contemptus eius manifestior appareret, ad eos accedere non curavit, se mandatorum ipsorum exhibens modis omnibus contemptorem. Propter quod dicti legati venerabili fratri nostro Padeburnensi episcopo dederunt firmiter in mandatis, ut eundem ad suam praesentiam evocaret, et praedictis omnibus diligentius expositis coram eo, ipsum ab omni officio et beneficio suspendere non differret, donec nostro se conspectui praesentaret, de contemptu veniam petiturus.

When our venerable brother the bishop of Ostia and our beloved son L., presbyter cardinal of the title of the Holy Cross, were once discharging the office of legation in the regions of Germany, they found that the abbot from the monastery of Hermionense, which is known to pertain to the Roman Church with no intermediary, had, by his own rashness, migrated to the monastery of Corbie, which is also a special [possession] of the Roman Church, without license to desert the former, or confirmation from us, or from those who at that time were carrying our functions in those parts, neither obtained nor sought. [And when he had come to Northusia to receive the regalia, the same legates being present there, so that his contempt might appear more manifest, he did not care to approach them, showing himself in every way a contemner of their mandates. Wherefore the said legates gave strict instructions to our venerable brother, the bishop of Paderborn, that he should summon the same man to his presence, and, all the aforesaid matters more diligently set forth before him, he should not delay to suspend him from every office and benefice, until he should present himself to our sight, to seek pardon for the contempt.

Ceterum quum suum nuncium ad eorundem praesentiam destinaret, se super praedictis omnibus per eundem excusans illius terrae allegavit consuetudinem generalem, asserens, quod pro electionis confirmatione vel obtinenda etiam benedictione vel licentia de uno ad aliud monasterium transeundi, summus Pontifex vel eius legati non erant aliquatenus requirendi, quum in illis partibus consuetudo talis hactenus sit servata. Iidem vero legati precibus multorum inducti tam ecclesiasticorum quam saecularium principum, qui eosdem pro ipso instantissime rogaverunt, praedictam sententiam relaxarunt, praefato episcopo Padeburnensi mandantes, ut memorato abbati iniungere non differret, ut usque ad dominicam, qua cantatur "Laetare Ierusalem," proximo praeteritam nuncios suos ad sedem apostolicam destinaret, mandatum nostrum tam super hoc quam aliis eisdem mediantibus nunciis recepturus; quod si facere forte negligeret, ex tunc ipsum in pristinam sententiam reducere non differret, et eam faceret firmiter observari.] Postmodum autem, quum suos ad sedem apostolicam nuncios destinasset, iidem volentes eum multipliciter excusare, nuncii eius ad defensionem ipsius generalem illius terrae consuetudinem allegarunt. Quum igitur haec non tam consuetudo, quam corruptela merito sit censenda, quae profecto sacris est canonibus inimica, ipsam mandamus de cetero non servari.

Moreover, when he was sending his envoy to their presence, excusing himself through him concerning all the aforesaid matters, he alleged the general custom of that land, asserting that for the confirmation of an election, or for obtaining even benediction, or license to pass from one monastery to another, the Supreme Pontiff or his legates were not at all to be required, since such a custom had hitherto been observed in those parts. But the same legates, induced by the prayers of many both ecclesiastical and secular princes, who most urgently entreated them on his behalf, relaxed the aforesaid sentence, ordering the aforesaid bishop of Paderborn not to delay to enjoin the abbot aforesaid that, by the Sunday on which "Laetare Ierusalem" is sung, next past, he should send his envoys to the Apostolic See, to receive our mandate both concerning this and other matters through the same mediating messengers; but if he should perchance neglect to do this, from that time he should not delay to restore him to the former sentence, and cause it to be firmly observed. Afterwards, however, when he had sent his envoys to the Apostolic See, those same men, wishing in many ways to excuse him, his envoys alleged, for his defense, the general custom of that land. Since therefore this is to be judged not so much a custom as a corruption, which indeed is inimical to the sacred canons, we command that it henceforth not be observed.

[Dat. Lat. V. Non.

[Given at the Lateran, 5 Nones.

Maii Ao. XI. 1208.]

May, Year 11, 1208.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

De consuetudine potest induci, quod una ecclesia de gremio alterius teneatur sibi praelatum elegere. Et consuetudo est optima legum interpres.

From custom it can be inferred that one church is bound to elect for itself a prelate from the bosom of another. And custom is the best interpreter of laws.

Idem Decano Salesberiensi, A. Archidiacono et Magistro P. Penetel, Canonico Parisiensi.

The same to the Dean of Salisbury, to A., the Archdeacon, and to Master P. Penetel, Canon of Paris.

Quum dilectus filius Guil. Andrensis ecclesiae monachus, qui pro clerico eiusdem ecclesiae se gerebat, et G. Daubins monachus ac procurator monasterii Karofensis super iure eligendi abbatem in Andrensi monasterio, et eiusdem Guilelmi electione in nostra praesentia invicem litigarent, idem Gu. electionem suam a fratribus Andrensis ecclesiae concorditer celebratam auctoritate apostolica petiit confirmari, asserens tam de iure communi, quam de privilegio speciali eis a felicis recordationis Alexandro Papa concesso, et a nobis postmodum confirmato, liberam eligendi auctoritatem ad eosdem fratres tantummodo pertinere. Nam de iure communi omnis congregatio monachorum eligere sibi debet abbatem, et in eiusdem Alexandri privilegio continetur, ut obeunte monasterii Andrensis abbate nullus ibi qualibet subreptionis astutia seu violentia praeponatur, nisi quem fratres vel eorum pars consilii sanioris secundum Deum et beati Benedicti regulam duxerint eligendum.

When the beloved son William, a monk of the church of Andria, who was acting as a cleric of the same church, and G. Daubins, a monk and procurator of the monastery of Karof, were litigating with one another in our presence concerning the right of electing an abbot in the monastery of Andria, and concerning that same William’s election, that same William sought to have his election—celebrated concordantly by the brothers of the church of Andria—confirmed by apostolic authority, asserting that both by the common law and by a special privilege granted to them by Pope Alexander of happy memory and afterwards confirmed by us, the free authority of electing pertains to those same brothers alone. For by the common law every congregation of monks ought to elect an abbot for itself; and in the privilege of that same Alexander it is contained that, when the abbot of the monastery of Andria has died, no one be set over it by any cunning of surreption or by violence, except the one whom the brothers, or the sounder part of their counsel, shall have deemed ought to be elected according to God and the Rule of blessed Benedict.

A nobis quoque praedictis fratribus dignoscitur esse concessum, ut licitum sit eisdem, quum ecclesiam suam abbate vacare contigerit, personam idoneam de gremio eiusdem ecclesiae vel aliunde per regularem electionem sibi praeficere in pastorem Karoffensi monasterio praesentandam, ut ab ipso confirmationem accipiat, et reverentiam ei, quam debet, impendat. Dictus vero Gaufridus procuratur proposuit ex adverso, quod, quum olim ad petitionem comitis Balduini, uxoris et filiorum eius, patronorum ecclesiae Andrensis a bonae memoriae G. Moriensi episcopo fuerit constitutum, quod si praefatus locus divino munere adeo pullularet, ut prior aut abbas constitueretur ibidem, electio eius penes fratres eiusdem loci et capitulum Karofense penderet, et huiusmodi obtentu statuti sic fuerit longe retroactis temporibus observatum, ut monasterio Andrensi vacante, Andrenses fratres in Karofensi capitulo aliquem de gremio monasterii Karofensis sibi eligerent in abbatem, electio praedicti G. tam contra statuti tenorem, quam etiam contra consuetudinem approbatam, quae optima est legum interpres, minus canonice attentata, merito cassari debebat, et mandari fratribus antedictis, ut iuxta quod est hactenus obtentum, procederent ad electionem abbatis, [adiiciens, quod per privilegium supradicti praedecessoris nostri, nec etiam confirmationem nostram praeiudicari poterat monasterio Karoffensi, quum nulla penitus de praedicto statuto et approbata consuetudine habita mentione fuerint per subreptionem obtenta. Proposuit insuper idem G., quod ex alia quoque causa dicta electio cassari debebat, quia videlicet et ab interdictis et de interdicto fuerat celebrata.

It is also recognized to have been granted by us to the aforesaid brothers, that it be lawful for the same, when it has happened that their church is vacant of an abbot, to set over themselves as pastor, by a regular election, a suitable person from the bosom of the same church or from elsewhere, to be presented to the Karoffense monastery, so that he may receive confirmation from it, and that it render to him the reverence which it owes. But the said Geoffrey, the procurator, put forward on the opposite side, that, since once, at the petition of Count Baldwin, his wife and his sons, patrons of the church of Andrensis, it had been established by G., bishop of Morienne, of good memory, that if the aforesaid place should by divine gift so flourish that a prior or an abbot be appointed there, its election would depend with the brothers of that same place and the chapter of Karof, and by the force of such a statute it had thus been observed in times long past, that, when the monastery of Andrensis was vacant, the Andrensian brothers in the chapter of Karof would choose for themselves someone from the bosom of the monastery of Karof as abbot, the election of the aforesaid G., both against the tenor of the statute and also against the approved custom, which is the best interpreter of laws, having been attempted less canonically, ought deservedly to be quashed, and it be commanded to the aforesaid brothers that, according to what has hitherto been maintained, they proceed to the election of an abbot, [adding that neither by the privilege of our above-said predecessor nor even by our confirmation could prejudice be caused to the Karoffense monastery, since, with no mention at all having been made of the aforesaid statute and approved custom, they had been obtained through subreption. The same G. furthermore proposed that for another cause also the said election ought to be quashed, namely because it had been celebrated both by the interdicted and under an interdict.

Quum enim bonae memoriae Lambertus Morinensis episcopus supradictis fratribus dederit in praeceptis, prout in eius patentibus literis perspeximus contineri, ut ad Karoffense monasterium, de cuius gremio eligere debebant abbatem, infra octo dierum spatium accedentes, ibidem eligerent, ut debebant, quod si non facerent, scirent se ab omni officio et beneficio et ecclesiarum ingressu fore suspensos, ipsi mandato episcopi vilipenso infra praefixum tempus, prout debebant, eligere contempserunt. Unde quum post elapsum terminum suspensionis sententia coeperint esse ligati, electio post haec ab ipsis praesumpta debebat irrita iudicari. Ad hoc autem fuit ex adverso responsum, quod quum praedicto modo eligere Andrenses monachi minime tenerentur, episcopo sine causae cognitione hoc praecise mandanti non tenebantur obedire, ac ideo praedicta sententia interdicti eos ligare non potuit, utpote minus rationabiliter promulgata, maxime quum infra terminum ab episcopo constitutum ad Karoffense monasterium accedentes, licentiam petierint de suo monasterio eligendi, licet eam nequiverint obtinere.

Since Lambert, bishop of Morinensis, of good memory, had given in precepts to the aforesaid brothers, as we perceived to be contained in his patent letters, that, within the space of eight days, going to the Karoffense monastery, from whose bosom they ought to elect an abbot, they should there elect, as they ought; and that, if they should not do so, they should know themselves to be suspended from all office and benefice and from entry into churches, they, despising the bishop’s mandate, refused to elect within the prefixed time, as they ought. Whence, since after the lapse of the term they began to be bound by the sentence of suspension, the election thereafter presumed by them ought to be judged void. But to this it was answered on the opposite side that, since the Andrenses monks were in no way held to elect in the aforesaid manner, they were not bound to obey the bishop strictly commanding this without knowledge of the cause; and therefore the aforesaid sentence of interdict could not bind them, as having been promulgated less reasonably, especially since, within the term set by the bishop, going to the Karoffense monastery, they asked license to elect from their own monastery, although they were not able to obtain it.

Contra quod pars altera replicavit, quod, etsi fuisset forsitan dicta sententia minus iusta, humiliter tamen parere tenebantur eidem, quum fuisset a dioecesano episcopo promulgata.] His igitur et aliis, quae coram nobis utrinque fuere proposita, perspicaciter intellectis, Quia nobis constitit, electionem ipsam a suspensis, et de suspenso etiam celebratam, eam de consilio fratrum nostrorum iustitia cassavimus exigente. [Excommunicationis autem et suspensionis in ipsum Guilelmum et alios monachos Andrenses, et interdicti sententias in eorum ecclesias a venerabili fratre nostro Silvanectensi episcopo et coniudicibus eius post appellationem ad nos interpositam promulgatas ad cautelam duximus relaxandas.] Ceterum quum supradictum statutum, videlicet, quod penes fratres eiusdem loci et capitulum Karoffense pendeat abbatis electio, ita sane posset intelligi, quod per illud nec iuri communi, nec [apostolico] privilegio derogetur, ut videlicet ad saepedictos fratres electio spectet abbatis, et ad Karofense capitulum confirmatio, devotioni vestrae praesentium auctoritate mandamus, quatenus, auditis hinc inde propositis, si ex parte Karofensis coenobii talis fuerit consuetudo probata, quae iuri communi praeiudicet, in hac parte vos secundum illam consuetudinem decernatis electionem Andrensis abbatis de cetero faciendam; alioquin, quodsi talis consuetudo probata non fuerit, per quam in hoc casu praeiudicetur iuri communi, vos Andrensibus monachis ius eligendi abbatem sublato appellationis obstaculo adiudicare curetis, ut sic de cetero liberam habeant facultatem vel de gremio ecclesiae suae, vel etiam aliunde, per electionem canonicam eligendi personam idoneam in abbatem praesentandam Karofensi capitulo, ut ab eo, si fuerit canonica [electio], confirmetur. [Porro etc.

Against which the other party replied that, even if perhaps the said sentence had been less just, nevertheless they were bound humbly to obey it, since it had been promulgated by the diocesan bishop.] Therefore, these and the other things which on both sides were put forward before us having been keenly understood, since it was evident to us that the election itself had been held by suspended persons, and even under suspension, we, with the counsel of our brothers, justice requiring it, annulled it. [As for the sentences of excommunication and suspension against William himself and the other Andrensis monks, and the sentences of interdict upon their churches, promulgated by our venerable brother the Silvanectensis bishop and his co-judges after an appeal had been interposed to us, we deemed they should be relaxed as a precaution.] Moreover, since the above-mentioned statute, namely, that the election of an abbot rests with the brothers of that same place and the Karofense chapter, could indeed be understood in such a way that by it neither the common law nor the [apostolic] privilege is derogated, namely that the election of the abbot pertains to the aforesaid brothers and the confirmation to the Karofense chapter, by the authority of these presents we command to your devotion that, after hearing what is put forward on both sides, if on the part of the Karofense coenobium such a custom shall have been proved as would prejudice the common law, in this matter you should decree that the election of the abbot of Andrensis henceforth be done according to that custom; otherwise, if such a custom shall not have been proved by which in this case the common law would be prejudiced, you should see to it that the right of electing an abbot be adjudged to the Andrensis monks, the obstacle of appeal having been removed, so that thus henceforth they may have free faculty either from the bosom of their church, or even from elsewhere, of electing by canonical election a suitable person as abbot, to be presented to the Karofense chapter, that by it he may be confirmed, if the [election] be canonical. [Furthermore etc.

Dat. Lat. III.

Given at the Lateran, 3.

Non. Ian. Ao. XI. 1209.]

The Nones of January, in the year 11, 1209.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Capitulum sine episcopo statuta seu consuetudines novas facere vel antiquas immutare non potest.

The chapter cannot, without the bishop, make new statutes or customs, or alter the ancient ones.

Honorius III. Parisiensi Capitulo.

Honorius 3. To the Chapter of Paris.

Quum consuetudinis ususque longaevi non sit levis auctoritas, et plerumque discordiam pariant novitates, auctoritate vobis praesentium inhibemus, ne absque venerabilis fratris nostri episcopi vestri consilio et consensu immutetis ecclesiae vestrae constitutiones et consuetudines vestras approbatas, vel novas etiam inducatis; si quas forte fecistis in ipsius episcopi praeiudicium, postquam est regimen Parisiensis ecclesiae adeptus, irritas decernentes. [VI. Non. Mart.

Since custom and long-standing usage are not of slight authority, and novelties for the most part beget discord, by the authority of these presents we forbid you to alter, without the counsel and consent of our venerable brother, your bishop, the constitutions of your church and your approved customs, or to introduce new ones as well; and if perchance you have made any to the prejudice of that same bishop, after he has obtained the governance of the Church of Paris, we declare them void. [March 2.

Ao. V. 1221.]

Year 5, 1221.]

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Non valet consuetudo, per quam quis inducitur ad peccandum vel bona propria dissipandum.

A custom is not valid, by which someone is induced to sin or to dissipate one’s own goods.

Idem Maiori et Burgen. de Rupella.

The same to the Mayor and Burgesses of La Rochelle.

Ex parte vestra fuit propositum coram nobis, quod quum in patria vestra servatae sint hactenus duae consuetudines abusivae, quod si forte indigena vel extraneus prodigalitatis vitio, vel incuria, seu quocunque casu alio dissipaverit vel amiserit omnia bona sua, bona uxoris suae, quantumcunque laudabilis et honestae vitae, tam mobilia quam immobilia, pro suae voluntatis libito alienat, quare fit interdum, ut, viro defuncto, uxor remaneat indotata, et superstites filii extremae subiaceant incommodis paupertatis; et, quod si vir ducat uxorem, quae fide coniugii violata committat adulterium manifeste, nihilominus ipsa medietatem omnium bonorum, quae fuerit vir adeptus, impudenter exigit et improbe apprehendit, quae potius privanda esset omnibus viri bonis, quare super his provideri vobis per apostolicam sedem suppliciter postulastis. Nos itaque saluti et utilitati vestrae provide consulere cupientes, Tenore praesentium declaramus, vos non teneri ad huiusmodi consuetudines tanquam iuri contrarias observandas.

On your part it was set forth before us, that whereas in your fatherland two abusive customs have hitherto been observed, namely, that if perchance an indigene or a foreigner, by the vice of prodigality, or by incuria, or by whatever other chance, shall have dissipated or lost all his own goods, he alienates at the free will of his own volition the goods of his wife—however laudable and of honest life—both movables and immovables; wherefore it happens sometimes that, the man being deceased, the wife remains undowered, and the surviving sons are subjected to the extreme inconveniences of poverty; and that, if a man takes a wife who, the faith of marriage violated, manifestly commits adultery, nonetheless she impudently demands and improperly seizes the half of all the goods which the husband shall have acquired, she who rather ought to be deprived of all the husband’s goods; wherefore concerning these matters you have humbly petitioned to be provided for through the Apostolic See. We therefore, wishing to provide prudently for your salvation and utility, by the tenor of the present letters declare that you are not held to observe customs of this kind as contrary to law.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Consuetudo non derogat iuri naturali seu divino, cuius transgressio peccatum inducit; nec positivo, nisi sit rationabilis et praescripta.

Custom does not derogate from natural or divine law, the transgression of which induces sin; nor from positive law, unless it be reasonable and prescribed.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory 9.

Quum tanto sint graviora peccata, quanto diutius infelicem animam detinent alligatam, nemo sanae mentis intelligit, naturali iuri, cuius transgressio periculum salutis inducit, quacunque consuetudine, quae dicenda est verius in hac parte corruptela, posse aliquatenus derogari. Licet etiam longaevae consuetudinis non sit vilis auctoritas, non tamen est usque adeo valitura, ut vel iuri positivo debeat praeiudicium generare, nisi fuerit rationabilis et legitime sit praescripta.

Since sins are the more grievous, the longer they hold the unhappy soul bound, no one of sound mind understands that natural law—whose transgression induces danger to salvation—can be derogated from to any extent by whatever custom, which in this respect ought more truly to be called a corruption. Although the authority of long‑standing custom is not of small worth, nevertheless it will not so far prevail as to generate even a prejudice to positive law, unless it is reasonable and has been legitimately prescribed.

TITULUS V. DE POSTULATIONE PRAELATORUM.

TITLE 5. ON THE POSTULATION OF PRELATES.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Impostulabilis est qui violat interdictum. H. d. quoad titulum; habet enim multa alia dicta, quae non faciunt ad tit.

Unpostulable is he who violates an interdict. Here it is said as regards the title; for it has many other dicta, which do not pertain to the title.

Innocentius III. Decano et Capitulo Senonensi.

Innocent III. To the Dean and Chapter of Sens.

Ad haec in B. Petro (Et infra:) Sane, quum ecclesia Senonensis semper fuerit ecclesiae Romanae devota, non immerito ipsius ecclesiae passioni compatimur et doloribus condolemus, quum eo sit viduata pastore, qui, etsi nobilis esset genere, nobilior tamen fuit, sicut credimus, sanctitate. (Et infra:) Dolemus insuper quod dolori nimio, quem de tanti patris obitu conceperat ecclesia Senonensis, dolor alias supervenit, quum ea vix surgente ab officio funeris tam funesti, vix digne celebratis exsequiis tanti patris, rex ipse iniuste commotus possessiones ipsius tam ad mensam archiepiscopi, quam canonicorum atiam pertinentes, non ut decuit vel debuit, sed ut voluit et valuit, occupavit, et personas etiam, quae de mandato nostro suspenderant organa sua, compulit exsulare. (Et infra:) Quumque propter persecutionem instantem et diffidentiam animorum, quam in talibus et zelus movet interdum, et usus excusat, de facili non possetis in unum locum et propositum convenire, sed ad nos fuisset ab aliquibus appellatum, tandem non sine difficultate convenientes in unum, Altissiodorensem episcopum in archiepiscopum unanimiter postulastis, postulationem vestram per magistrum R. praecentorem vestrum, virum in utroque iure peritum, honestum, providum et discretum, qui apud nos super assumpti promotione negotii fideliter institit, et de contingentibus nihil omisit, et per abbatem S. Petri, et per vestras etiam literas exponentes et petentes humiliter, ut faciendae translationi favorem apostolicum et pium praeberemus assensum, considerata praesertim persecutione, quae communiter instat ecclesiae Gallicanae, ac necessitate, quae incumbit specialiter ecclesiae Senonensi.

To these things in Blessed Peter (And below:) Indeed, since the church of Sens has always been devoted to the Roman church, we not without cause sympathize with the passion of that church and grieve with its sorrows, since it has been widowed of that shepherd who, although he was noble by birth, yet was nobler, as we believe, in sanctity. (And below:) We grieve moreover that, upon the excessive grief which the church of Sens had conceived at the death of so great a father, there came grief of another kind, since, with it scarcely rising from the office of so mournful a funeral, the obsequies of so great a father having been scarcely worthily celebrated, the king himself, unjustly stirred, seized his possessions, both those pertaining to the table of the archbishop and those pertaining also to the canons, not as was fitting or as he ought, but as he wished and as he was able, and he even compelled the persons who, by our mandate, had suspended their organs, to go into exile. (And below:) And since, on account of the pressing persecution and the diffidence of spirits—which in such matters zeal sometimes stirs and custom excuses—you could not easily come together into one place and plan, but there had been an appeal to us by some, at length, not without difficulty coming together into one, you unanimously postulated the bishop of Auxerre as archbishop: your postulation through Master R., your precentor, a man skilled in both laws, honorable, provident, and discreet, who labored with us faithfully concerning the promotion of the undertaking assumed and omitted nothing of what pertained, and through the abbot of St. Peter, and through your letters also, setting forth and humbly asking that we should provide apostolic and pious assent to the translation to be made, considering especially the persecution which in common presses upon the Gallican church, and the necessity which in particular weighs upon the church of Sens.

Verum quoniam antequam idem magister ad sedem apostolicam accessisset, audieramus a multis, immo etiam nobis quasi pro certo constabat, quod idem episcopus interdicti sententiam non servasset, quod etiam idem magister non negavit, in nostra et fratrum nostrorum praesentia requisitus a nobis, in ipsius episcopi excusationem allegans, quod sententiam latam servare nullatenus tenebatur, quae ad eius notitiam nec per literas nostras, nec per dilectum filium P. S. Mariae in Via lata diaconum cardinalem tunc apostolicae sedis legatum, qui eandem sententiam promulgarat, nec per deputati ad hoc exsecutoris mandatum vel literas pervenisset, et quod in Altissiodorensi dioecesi rex ipse terram propriam non haberet, et quod eadem Altissiodorensis dioecesis ex alia causa fuerat interdicta. [Ceterum nuntii Remensis archiepiscopi et aliorum quorundam prius ad apostolicam sedem accesserant, ad excusandas excusationes in peccatis, occasiones quasdum frivolas praetendentes, scilicet quod dictus legatus post appellationem ad nos interpositam, cui visas fuerat detulisse constitutus iam extra fines regni Francorum in terram regis ipsius sententiam tulerat interdicti et modum excesserat in exsequendo, et quod ad quosdam eorum ipsius litterae non pervenissent. Sed si considerassent diligentius veritatem, quum scirent, quod frustra iacetur rete ante oculos pennatorum se sicut non poterant non debuerant taliter excusare, quum in accusationem potius excusatio convertatur.

But since, before that same master had come to the apostolic see, we had heard from many—indeed it was to us as if established for certain—that the same bishop had not observed the sentence of interdict, which the same master also did not deny, when questioned by us in our presence and that of our brothers, alleging in excuse of that bishop that he was by no means bound to observe the sentence that had been pronounced, which had not come to his knowledge either through our letters, nor through our beloved son P., cardinal deacon of St. Mary in Via Lata, then legate of the apostolic see, who had promulgated the same sentence, nor through the mandate or letters of the executor deputed for this; and that in the diocese of Auxerre the king himself had no proper land; and that the same diocese of Auxerre had been interdicted for another cause. [Moreover, the envoys of the archbishop of Reims and of certain others had previously come to the apostolic see, to excuse excuses in sins, putting forward certain frivolous pretexts, namely that the said legate, after an appeal to us had been interposed, to which he seemed to have deferred, already situated outside the borders of the kingdom of the Franks in the land of that king, had issued the sentence of interdict and had exceeded the measure in executing it, and that to some of them his letters had not come. But if they had considered the truth more diligently, since they knew that in vain is a net cast before the eyes of the feathered, they ought not thus to have excused themselves, just as they could not, since an excuse is rather turned into an accusation.]

Licet enim Cardinalis ipse regni Francorum exiisset, nondum tamen fuerat metas suae legationis egressus quum non solum in regno Francorum sed in Viennensi, Lugudenensi et Burginensi provinciis iniunctam sibi a Nobis legationis sollicitudinem suscepisset. Praetera dictam interdicti sententiam ipse non edidit, sed potius publicavit, nec fuit dictator ipsius, sed verius exsecutor. Unde quum secundum ius canonicum et legale ab executoribus non liceat appellari nisi forsan modum excederent in exsequendo, et nos in litteris super hoc directis ad ipsum appellationis curavimus obstaculum inhibere, appellationi huiusmodi non fuerat deferendum, cui non profecto cardinalis ipse non detulit sed distulit potius, ut alibi mandatum nostrum commodius adimpleret.

For although the Cardinal himself had gone out from the kingdom of the Franks, nevertheless he had not yet passed beyond the bounds of his legation, since he had undertaken the solicitude of the legation enjoined upon him by Us not only in the kingdom of the Franks but in the Viennensis, Lugdunensis, and Burgundensis provinces. Moreover, he did not issue the said sentence of interdict, but rather published it; nor was he its dictator, but more truly its executor. Whence, since according to canon and legal right it is not permitted to appeal from executors unless perchance they should exceed the measure in executing, and We, in letters directed to him on this matter, took care to inhibit the obstacle of appeal, no deference was to be given to an appeal of this sort—one to which indeed the Cardinal himself did not defer, but rather deferred it, so that elsewhere he might more conveniently fulfill Our mandate.

Interea non erat ipsorum nostrum interpretari mandatum nec interpretationem arguere cardinalis, cum ei potius credere debuissent, qui quum a Nobis recederet intellexit plenius nostrae super ipso mandato beneplacitum voluntatis, et nostrum mandatum recepit a nobis per quod ei liquidius mentis nostrae patuit intellectus. In dubio insuper via obedientiae tanquam tutior erat eligenda potius quam ad inobedientiae demum declinandum, quum iuxta propheticum testimonium crimen ariolandi sit nolle acquiescere et scelus idolatriae nolle obedire.] Quod nec sufficit, immo nec proficit ad excusationem praedicti Altissiodorensis episcopi, et aliorum similium, quod mandatum nostrum et cardinalis eiusdem, vel exsecutoris etiam ad se per speciales literas ad ipsos directas vel speciale mandatum non pervenisse proponunt; quum cardinalis idem sententiam interdicti, praesentibus multis archiepiscopis et episcopis, solenniter ac publice promulgaverit, et eadem interdicti sententia in regno Francorum iam a multis publice coeperit observari; nec sit necessarium, quum constitutio solenniter editur aut publice promulgatur, ipsius notitiam singulorum auribus per speciale mandatum vel literas inculcare; sed id solum sufficit, ut ad eius observantiam teneatur, qui noverit eam solenniter editam aut publice promulgatam; quum et contra quosdam, qui Sardicense concilium non servabant, tanquam illud non habuerint aut perceperint, canonica tradat auctoritas, quod eis non facile facultas credendi tribuitur, quum idem penes illos in suis regionibus actum fuerit et receptum. Nec valet, quod in Altissiodorensi dioecesi dictus rex terram propriam dicitur non habere, quum nos terram totam regis ipsius subiici mandaverimus interdicto, et cardinalis, nostrum interpretatus mandatum, in terram illam sententiam promulgaverit, quae regi tunc temporis adhaerebat.

Meanwhile it was not for them to interpret our mandate nor to arraign the cardinal’s interpretation, since they ought rather to have believed him, who, when he departed from Us, understood more fully the good-pleasure of our will concerning that very mandate, and received our mandate from us, through which the understanding of our mind became more clearly evident to him. In doubt, moreover, the way of obedience, as the safer, ought to have been chosen rather than at length to decline into disobedience, since, according to the prophetic testimony, it is the crime of divination to be unwilling to acquiesce and the crime of idolatry to be unwilling to obey.] Which neither suffices, nay nor profits, for the excuse of the aforesaid Bishop of Auxerre and of others like him, that they allege that our mandate and that of the same cardinal, or even of the executor, had not reached them by special letters directed to them or by a special mandate; since that same cardinal, many archbishops and bishops being present, solemnly and publicly promulgated the sentence of interdict, and the same sentence of interdict has already begun to be observed publicly by many in the kingdom of the Franks; nor is it necessary, when a constitution is solemnly issued or publicly promulgated, to inculcate knowledge of it into the ears of individuals by a special mandate or letters; but this alone suffices, that he is held to its observance who knows it to have been solemnly issued or publicly promulgated; since also against certain persons who were not keeping the Council of Sardica, as though they had not had or received it, canonical authority hands down that the faculty of believing is not easily granted to them, since the same had been transacted and received among them in their own regions. Nor has weight, that in the diocese of Auxerre the said king is said not to have his own land, since we have commanded that the whole land of that king be subjected to the interdict, and the cardinal, interpreting our mandate, promulgated the sentence upon that land which at that time adhered to the king.

Quodsi episcopatus eius ex alia causa fuerat interdictus, interdicti sententiam et tenebatur fortius, et poterat facilius observare. Sed inde liquido constat, saepe dictum episcopum sufficienter excusari non posse, quod suam metropolitanam ecclesiam generalis interdicti sententiam et recepisse noverat et servare. Ideoque unus eorum exstiterat, qui deliberantes super eadem sententia communi consilio decreverunt, sed erraverunt, ut ipsam sententiam non servarent, quum, si verbum Apostoli Petri de Clemente dicentis diligentius attendissent, commonitionem super hoc non debuerint exspectare, sed obsecundare prudenter et humiliter obedire.

But if his bishopric had been interdicted for another cause, he was both more strongly bound by the sentence of interdict and could more easily observe it. But from that it is manifest plainly that the oft-said bishop cannot be sufficiently excused, because he knew that his metropolitan church both had received and was observing the sentence of the general interdict. And so he had been one of those who, deliberating concerning the same sentence, decreed by common counsel—but erred—that they would not observe the sentence itself; since, if they had attended more diligently to the word of the Apostle Peter speaking about Clement, they ought not to have awaited an admonition on this, but to comply and prudently and humbly obey.

Nos igitur, qui secundum Apostolum prompti sumus inobedientiam omnem ulcisci, eiusdem episcopi Altissiodorensis inobedientiam attendentes, ne nil obedientia prodesse videretur humilibus, si contemptus contumacibus non obesset, quum iuxta canonicas sanctiones quaedam sint culpae, in quibus culpa est relaxare vindictam, habito cum fratribus nostris super hoc diligenti tractatu, quantumcunque vobis tanquam obedientiae filiis deferre vellemus, postulationem tamen huiusmodi non propter postulantem ecclesiam, sed propter postulatam personam repulimus ut indignam. Licet autem ex eo, quod hominem, qui vestro non conveniebat proposito, postulastis, quum vos interdicti sententiam servaretis, et ipse tamen eam contemneret observare, permissa vobis facile abusi fueritis potestate, ac ideo vos ea non immerito privare possemus, quum iuxta divinae legis edictum non liceat vestem induere de lana linoque contextam: ne tamen vestrae videamur devotionis ingrati, de solita tamen apostolicae sedis benignitate concedimus, ut vobis et eidem ecclesiae per postulationem indoneam seu electionem canonicam de persona congrua consulatis.

We therefore, who according to the Apostle are prompt to avenge every disobedience, considering the disobedience of that same bishop of Auxerre, lest obedience should seem to profit nothing to the humble if contempt did not harm the contumacious, since, according to the canonical sanctions, there are certain faults in which it is a fault to relax vengeance, having held with our brothers a diligent tractation on this, however much we might wish to defer to you as sons of obedience, nevertheless we repelled such a petition, not on account of the petitioning church, but on account of the person petitioned, as unworthy. Although, from the fact that you petitioned for a man who did not agree with your purpose, since you were observing the sentence of interdict and he nevertheless scorned to observe it, you may easily have abused the power permitted to you, and therefore we could not unjustly deprive you of it, since, according to the edict of the divine law, it is not permitted to put on a garment woven of wool and linen: nevertheless, lest we seem ungrateful to your devotion, yet out of the customary benignity of the Apostolic See we grant that you consult for yourselves and for that same church, by an appropriate postulation or canonical election, concerning a suitable person.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Qui postulationem cassatam vitio personae innovat est eligendi et postulandi potestate privatus.

Whoever renews a postulation quashed on account of a defect of the person is deprived of the power of electing and of postulating.

Idem Hostiensi Episcopo apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same, to the Bishop of Ostia, legate of the Apostolic See.

Gratum gerimus et acceptum, et fraternitatem tuam plurimum commendamus, quod ad promotionem venerabilis fratris nostri P. quondam Cameracensis episcopi, nunc autem archiepiscopi Senonensis, prudenter et efficaciter intendisti. Accepimus autem ex literis tuis, quod canonicis Senonensibus, quorum postulatio, quam fecerunt, nostra fuit auctoritate cassata, licet cassationis literas suppressissent in fraudem, ut concorditer et canonice ad electionem procederent, mandavisti, adiiciens etiam, quod, nisi forsitan in talem personam concorditer vota sua transferrent, pro qua merito tuum obtinere deberent consensum, de provisione ipsius ecclesiae postmodum faceres quod crederes expedire. Quumque plures eorum postulationem cassatam a nobis innovare denuo niterentur, quidam vero episcopum Cameracensem in archiepiscopum postularent, tu intelligens, eos, qui cassationem nostram quodammodo revocare volebant, eligendi privilegium amisisse, quia concessa sibi ex apostolicae sedis benignitate abuterentur temere potetaste, ac ideo ad alios, licet pauciores numero, quantum tamen ad hoc pertinet, consilio saniores, eligendi vel postulandi devolutam esse licentiam, praedictum Cameracensem ad eorum instantiam in pastorem auctoritate fretus apostolica providisti, et deputasti ad regimen ecclesiae Senonensis.

We hold it pleasing and acceptable, and we very greatly commend your fraternity, because you aimed prudently and efficaciously at the promotion of our venerable brother P., formerly bishop of Cambrai, but now archbishop of Sens. Moreover, we have received from your letters that you mandated to the canons of Sens—whose postulation, which they had made, had been quashed by our authority, although they had suppressed the letters of quashing in fraud—that they proceed concordantly and canonically to an election, adding also that, unless perchance they were to transfer their votes in concord to such a person for whom they ought deservedly to obtain your consent, you would thereafter make concerning the provision of that church what you believed to be expedient. And when several of them were striving anew to renew the postulation quashed by us, while certain indeed were postulating the bishop of Cambrai as archbishop, you—understanding that those who wished in some way to revoke our quashing had lost the privilege of electing, because they were rashly abusing the power granted to them by the benignity of the apostolic see, and therefore that the license of electing or postulating had devolved upon others, although fewer in number, yet, as far as this pertains, sounder in counsel—relying on apostolic authority, provided the aforesaid bishop of Cambrai as pastor at their instance, and deputed him to the governance of the church of Sens.

Nos igitur, tanto id magis gratum et ratum habentes, quanto in eius promotione de mandato nostro et beneplacito potius processisti, a sollicitudine Cameracensis ecclesiae ipsum reddidimus absolutum, ut liberius gerat curam metropolis Senonensis, quod a te de mandato nostro factum est auctoritate apostolica confirmantes.

We therefore, holding this so much the more pleasing and ratified, inasmuch as in his promotion you proceeded rather by our mandate and good-pleasure, have rendered him absolved from the solicitude of the church of Cambrai, that he may more freely bear the care of the metropolis of Sens, confirming by apostolic authority what was done by you by our mandate.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Postulatio, per quam privata vel minor utilitas communi vel maiori praefertur, vel quae fit a minori quam a tertia parte collegii, admitti non debet.

A postulation, by which private or lesser utility is preferred to the common or greater, or which is made by less than a third part of the college, ought not to be admitted.

Idem Clericis Ravennatis ecclesiae.

The same to the Clerics of the church of Ravenna.

Bonae memoriae Guil. archiepiscopo vestro viam universae carnis ingresso, eius nobis obitum per vestras literas intimastis. Nos autem vobis dedimus in mandatis, ut personam idoneam, quae in nostra devotione persisteret, vobis eligeretis canonice in pastorem.

Your archbishop William, of good memory, having entered the way of all flesh, you intimated his death to us through your letters. We, however, gave you in mandate that you should canonically choose for yourselves as pastor a suitable person who would persist in our devotion.

Quumque vos postmodum, receptis literis nostris, super electione substituendi pontificis tractaretis, vota vestra fuerunt in diversa divisa. Nam quidam vestrum dilectum filium nostrum S. tituli sanctae Praxedis presbyterum cardinalem, quidam vero venerabilem fratrem nostrum Imolensem episcopum postulaverunt. Quumque partes postulationes suas per nuncios suos nobis praesentassent, proponebatur ab iis, qui cardinalem postulaverant memoratum, quod plures, quam duae partes vestrum, convenerant in eundem.

And when afterwards you, upon receiving our letters, were deliberating concerning the election of a pontiff to be substituted, your votes were divided in diverse ways. For some of you postulated our beloved son S., presbyter cardinal of the title of Saint Praxedes, while others indeed postulated our venerable brother, the Bishop of Imola. And when the parties had presented their postulations to us through their nuncios, it was put forward by those who had postulated the aforesaid cardinal that more than two-thirds of you had agreed upon the same.

Verum pars altera proponebat, quod digniores personae postularant episcopum Imolensem, et quod in postulatione ipsius et forma canonica et tenor compromissionis fuerat observatus, quum tanquam suffraganeus Ravennatis ecclesiae postulatus de ipsius gremio exstitisset. Fuerat enim compromissum, ut de corpore Ravennatis ecclesiae vel archiepiscopatu personam eligerent congruentem: quod pars altera frivolum asserebat, quum, etsi talis conditio fuisset adiecta, poterat tamen de Romanae sedis collegio propter ipsius privilegium praefata postulari persona, quum membra capitis a membris corporis censeri non debeant aliena. Nos igitur, auditis, quae de facto hinc inde proposita et de iure insuper fuerant allegata, deliberavimus cum fratribus nostris, et plenius etiam pro utralibet partium curavimus allegare.

But the other party was proposing that more dignified persons had postulated the bishop of Imola, and that in his postulation both the canonical form and the tenor of the compromise had been observed, since, having been postulated as a suffragan of the Church of Ravenna, he had arisen from its bosom. For it had been compromised that they should elect a congruent person from the body of the Church of Ravenna or the archiepiscopate; which the other party asserted was frivolous, since, even if such a condition had been added, nevertheless the aforesaid person could be postulated from the college of the Roman See on account of its privilege, since the members of the head ought not to be considered alien from the members of the body. We therefore, having heard what on either side had been proposed de facto and, moreover, what had been alleged de iure, deliberated with our brothers, and also took care to argue more fully on behalf of either party.

Consideravimus vero, quod eiusdem cardinalis praesentia utilior sit non solum Romanae, sed etiam ecclesiae generali, tam apud apostolicam sedem, quam apud ecclesiam Ravennatem, et quod maioris meriti sit in huiusmodi necessitatis articulo praeire in sanctae terrae subsidium exercitui Iesu Christi, quam suscipere pondus pastoralis officii. Unde non immerito praeferentes speciali utilitati communem et minori maiorem, praedictum cardinalem postulationi vestrae non duximus concedendum. Attendentes autem ex altera parte, quod praedictus episcopus Imolensis, a minori quam tertia parte fuerit postulatus, et quod apostolica sedes postulationes huiusmodi non consueverit in tanta divisione ac contradictione recipere, quum etiam quando aliquis ab aliis unanimiter postulatur, ad admittendam postulationem earum non tam ex iustitia, quam ex gratia moveatur, postulationem ipsius non duximus admittendam.

We have considered, in truth, that the presence of the same cardinal is more useful not only to the Roman Church, but also to the general church, both at the Apostolic See and at the Church of Ravenna, and that it is of greater merit, in such an article of necessity, to go before in succor of the Holy Land for the army of Jesus Christ, than to undertake the weight of the pastoral office. Whence, not without reason preferring the common utility to the special and the greater to the lesser, we have not deemed the aforesaid cardinal to be granted to your postulation. Considering, however, on the other hand, that the aforesaid Bishop of Imola was postulated by less than a third part, and that the Apostolic See has not been accustomed to receive postulations of this kind in so great a division and contradiction, since even when someone is unanimously postulated by others, for admitting their postulation it is moved not so much by justice as by grace, we have not deemed his postulation to be admitted.

Monemus igitur discretionem vestram et exhortamur attentius, et per apostolica scripta Mandantes, quatenus infra mensem post susceptionem praesentium cum his, qui vocem in electione habere noscuntur, per electionem, postulationem seu nominationem canonicam in personam idoneam, quae in ecclesiae Romanae devotione persistat, concorditer convenire curetis, et electionem, postulationem seu nominationem vestram per idoneos nuncios sedi apostolicae praesentetis. Veniant autem iidem nuntii parati, ut si forte, quod absit, factum vestrum fuerit exigente iustitia reprobandum, illum recipiunt, quem nos vobis providebimus in pastorem. Alioquin quum eidem.

We therefore admonish your discretion and exhort you more attentively, and by apostolic writings we mandate, that within a month after the receipt of the present letters you take care, with those who are known to have a voice in the election, through a canonical election, postulation, or nomination, to come together concordantly upon a suitable person, who may persist in devotion to the Church of Rome, and that you present your election, postulation, or nomination to the Apostolic See by suitable envoys. But let the same envoys come prepared, so that if perchance—which God forbid—your act should, justice requiring, be to be disapproved, they may receive him whom we shall provide for you as pastor. Otherwise since to the same.

ecclesiae cupiamus sollicitius providere, nullatenus omittemus, quin ei auctoritate apostolica postorem idoneum assignare curemus.

since we desire to provide for the church more solicitously, we will by no means fail, but will take care to assign to it, by apostolic authority, a suitable pastor.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Archiepiscopus in archiepiscopum postulatur. Et ex quo postulatio praesentata est Papae, non possunt postulantes ab ea recedere; sed debet superioris iudicium exspectari. H. d. quoad titulum.

An archbishop is postulated as archbishop. And from the time when the postulation has been presented to the Pope, the postulants cannot withdraw from it; but the judgment of the superior ought to be awaited. H. d. as to the title.

Idem Praeposito et Capitulo Strigonensi.

The same, to the Provost and Chapter of Esztergom.

Bonae memoriae Guil. archiepiscopo vestro viam universae carnis ingresso, quum in venerabilem fratrem nostrum Colocensem archiepiscopum postulandum a nobis contulissetis unanimiter vota vestra, et regium super hoc obtinuissetis assensum, suffraganei Strigonensis ecclesiae, Quinqueecclesiensis episcopus videlicet et quidam alii, postulationi vestrae se opponere curaverunt, asserentes, quod eis contemptis, qui ius habebant eligendi vobiscum, postulatio eadem fuerat attentata; licet vestri nuncii proponerent ex adverso, quod super praeficiendo vobis pontifice de gratia multotiens suffraganeorum fuerat requisitus assensus, sed ipsi vobis consilium [et auxilium] denegaverunt. Nunciis igitur in nostra praesentia constitutis, et proponentibus adversariis quaedam alia contra postulationis vestrae processum, quae in prioribus literis meminimus nos plenius expressisse, quia nobis de propositis non constabat, ita duximus providendum, ut, si suffraganeis persistentibus in contradictione sua, vos postulationi vestrae velletis instare, usque ad septuagesimam tunc primo venturam per procuratores idoneos, ad omnia sufficienter instructos, ad sedem apostolicam veniretis, ut statueremus utraque parte praesente quod iustitia suaderet; si autem illi a contradictione sua cessarent, et vos instaretis proposito vestro, ad praesentiam nostram mitteretis personas idoneas infra terminum supra dictum, quae super his, quae opportuna forent, nos redderent certiores.

After your archbishop William, of good memory, had entered the way of all flesh, when you had unanimously conferred your votes upon our venerable brother the archbishop of Colocsa to be postulated by us, and had obtained the royal assent concerning this, the suffragans of the church of Strigonium, namely the bishop of Quinqueecclesiae and certain others, took care to oppose your postulation, asserting that, they being disregarded, who had the right of electing together with you, that same postulation had been attempted; although your envoys were putting forward on the other side that, concerning appointing a pontiff over you, the assent of the suffragans had many times been asked as a matter of grace, but they denied you counsel [and aid]. The envoys therefore being set in our presence, and the adversaries proposing certain other things against the process of your postulation, which in earlier letters we recall that we have expressed more fully, because it was not clear to us concerning the matters proposed, we judged it should be provided thus: that, if the suffragans persisted in their contradiction, and you were willing to press your postulation, up to Septuagesima then first to come you should come to the Apostolic See by suitable procurators, sufficiently instructed for all things, that, with each party present, we might determine what justice would suggest; but if they should cease from their contradiction, and you should press your plan, you should send to our presence suitable persons within the term above said, who would make us more certain concerning those things which would be opportune.

Quodsi contradicentibus episcopis memoratis vos contingeret de iure vestro diffidere, ne laborem et dolorem subiretis incassum, aliam personam idoneam provideretis vobis canonice in pastorem. Ceterum, quum inclytae recordationis [H,] rex Hungariae viam fuisset universae carnis ingressus, quidam vestrum, a postulatione vestra, quam nobis praesentaveratis communiter, temere recedentes, aliis persistentibus in eadem, et ad sedem apostolicam appellantibus, praedictum Quinqueecclesiensem episcopum in archiepiscopum postulaverunt. Quorum votis nullus suffraganeorum assensit, excepto duntaxat episcopo Nitriensi.

But if, with the aforementioned bishops contradicting, it should befall you to distrust your right, lest you undergo toil and pain in vain, you should canonically provide for yourselves another suitable person as pastor. Moreover, when the king of Hungary of illustrious memory [H,] had entered the way of all flesh, some of you, rashly withdrawing from your petition which you had jointly presented to us, while others persisted in the same and appealed to the Apostolic See, postulated the aforesaid Bishop of Quinque Ecclesiae as archbishop. To whose votes none of the suffragans assented, except only the Bishop of Nitra.

Et licet carissimus in Christo filius noster A. Hungariae rex illustris, tunc dux et regni Hungarici, L. nepotis sui regis nomine, cuius tutelam et regni curam ipsi frater eius commiserat, gubernator, precum suarum primitias ad nos pro praedicti Colocensis postulatione transmiserit, postmodum tamen pro Quinqueecclesiensi episcopo ad Strigoniensem metropolin transferendo nobis per literas suas humiliter supplicavit. Nos igitur, postulationem ipsam, quam invenimus post appellationes interpositas in multa discordia, non solum suffraganeorum, verum etiam canonicorum Strigonensis ecclesiae, ac contra formam mandati nostri regulari ordine praetermisso temere celebratam, illam exigente iustitia non duximus admittendam; sed vobis dedimus in mandatis, ut ad providendum vobis pastorem idoneum per electionem canonicam vel postulationem concordem, requisito suffraganeorum assensu, si esset de antiqua et approbata consuetudine requirendus, infra mensem post susceptionem literarum nostrarum procedere curaretis; alioquin ex tunc, ne gregi dominico deesset diutius cura pastoralis, nos ipsi provideremus ecclesiae viduatae, secundum officii nostri debitum ex plenitudine apostolicae potestatis. Verum antequam ad vos literae nostrae pervenissent, innitentes mandato priori, suffraganeos, qui erant in regno praesentes, praeter praedictum Quinqueecclesiensem ad concordiam revocastis ita, quod Watiensis, Wesprimiensis et Ianviensis episcopi pro translatione Colocensis archiepiscopi, salvo iure suo in posterum, cui propter afflictionem et necessitatem Strigoniensis ecclesiae supersedebant, ad praesens nos humiliter rogaverunt, praedicto Nitriensi scribente, quod, si non placeret nobis electionem factam de Quinqueecclesiensi admittere, pro postulatione alterius sine praeiudicio iuris sui nos suppliciter exorabat.

And although our dearest son in Christ, A., the illustrious king of Hungary, then duke and governor of the Hungarian realm in the name of L., his grandson the king, whose tutelage and care of the realm his brother had committed to him, sent to us the first-fruits of his prayers on behalf of the aforesaid postulation of the Colocensian, afterwards, however, he humbly besought us by his letters for transferring the bishop of Quinqueecclesiensis to the Strigonian metropolis. We therefore found that postulation, after appeals had been interposed, amid much discord not only of the suffragans but also of the canons of the Strigonian church, and rashly celebrated contrary to the form of our mandate, the regular order having been passed over; and, justice requiring it, we did not deem it to be admitted; but we gave you in mandates that, to provide you with a suitable pastor by canonical election or concordant postulation, with the assent of the suffragans required, if it ought to be required by ancient and approved custom, you should take care to proceed within a month after the reception of our letters; otherwise, from then, lest the Lord’s flock should be lacking longer in pastoral care, we ourselves would provide for the widowed church, according to the duty of our office from the plenitude of apostolic power. But before our letters had come to you, relying on the prior mandate, you recalled to concord the suffragans who were present in the kingdom, except the aforesaid Quinqueecclesiensis, in such wise that the bishops of Watiensis, Wesprimiensis, and Ianviensis, for the translation of the Colocensian archbishop—with their own right for the future saved, which they were foregoing on account of the affliction and necessity of the Strigonian church—did for the present humbly petition us; the aforesaid Nitriensis writing that, if it did not please us to admit the election made concerning the Quinqueecclesiensis, he was humbly beseeching us for the postulation of another without prejudice to his own right.

Post haec autem mandato nostro recepto, hi, qui in archiepiscopum Colocensem covenerant, ab eius postulatione, sicut fuit propositum coram nobis, recedere noluerunt, sed innovaverunt eandem, reversis ad eos quibusdam canonicorum, qui in partem alteram declinarant, cum praedicti regis et suffraganeorum literis dilecti filii A. magistrum scholarum, M. thesauranium, A. archidiaconum, et F. et N. canonicos Strigonienses ad sedem apostolicam destinarunt, super postulatione sua dispensationis gratiam petituros. Ceteri vero, qui Quinqueecclesiensem episcopum postularunt, sicut ex eorum parte fuit propositum coram nobis, convenientes in unum, ceteros canonicos ad capitulum convocarunt, ad postulationem concordem vel electionem canonicam iuxta mandatum apostolicum infra praefixum terminum sibi procedere cupientes. Sed, illis nolentibus convenire, intelligentes, penes se tantum remansisse facultatem liberam eligendi, quia reliqui ius suum prosequi negligebant, praedictum Quinqueecclesiensem episcopum, licet ne id fieret fuisset ab aliis appellatum, denuo postularunt.

After these things, however, our mandate having been received, those who had come together for the Colocensian archbishop did not wish to withdraw from his postulation, as was set forth before us, but renewed the same, certain of the canons who had declined to the other party having returned to them; and, with the letters of the aforesaid king and the suffragans, they dispatched to the apostolic see the beloved son A., master of the schools, M., the treasurer, A., the archdeacon, and F. and N., canons of Strigonium, to seek the grace of dispensation concerning their postulation. But the others, who postulated the bishop of Quinque-Ecclesiae, as was set forth on their part before us, coming together into one, summoned the other canons to chapter, wishing to proceed for themselves, according to the apostolic mandate, within the prefixed term, to a concordant postulation or a canonical election. But, as those were unwilling to assemble, understanding that the free faculty of electing had remained with them alone, because the rest were neglecting to pursue their right, they again postulated the aforesaid bishop of Quinque-Ecclesiae, although an appeal had been lodged by others that it not be done.

Quum ergo utriusque partis nuncii ad sedem apostolicam pervenissent, hi, qui pro Quinqueecclesiensi episcopo venerant, proponebant, partem suam iuxta mandatum apostolicum processisse, nec obstare discordiam vel contradictionem eorum, qui iuxta formam mandati nostri procedere contemnentes, illo recepto nec elegerant quenquam canonice, nec concorditer postularant. Unde concors debebat eorum postulatio reputari, quum ceteri, tanquam iussionis apostolicae contemptores, eligendi et postulandi se iure privassent, dum nec postulare nec eligere voluerunt, immo nec etiam ad capitulum convenire. Ad haec autem ex adverso poterat responderi, quod illi, qui Colocensem archiepiscopum postularant, formam secuti fuerant per nostras literas sibi datam, quoniam innitentes postulationi priori, iuxta tenorem priorum literarum nostrarum concordem fecerant, quae fuerat prius discors, dum suffraganeos ad concordiam revocarunt.

When therefore the envoys of both parties had come to the apostolic see, those who had come on behalf of the Quinqueecclesiensis bishop maintained that their side had proceeded according to the apostolic mandate, and that the discord or contradiction of those who, scorning to proceed according to the form of our mandate, after receiving it had neither canonically elected anyone nor concordantly postulated, did not stand in the way. Whence their postulation ought to be reckoned concordant, since the others, as contemners of the apostolic command, had deprived themselves of the right of electing and postulating, in that they were willing neither to postulate nor to elect, indeed not even to convene to chapter. To these things, however, on the contrary it could be answered that those who had postulated the Colocensis archbishop had followed the form given to them through our letters, since, relying on the prior postulation, according to the tenor of our earlier letters they had made concordant what had previously been discordant, when they recalled the suffragans to concord.

Nec obstabat eorum discordia, qui alium postularunt, quum prius in postulatione archiepiscopi supradicti convenissetis pariter universi, et consensum vestrum annotatum literis, et subscriptionibus propriis roboratum, petiissetis a nobis per communes nuncios confirmari, nosque vestram recepissemus postulationem diiudicandam, si suffraganei forsitan in contradictione persisterent, vel, si consentirent, aut etiam cederent, approbandam. Si enim, postquam postulatio subscriptionibus postulantium roboratur, et praesentatur Romano Pontifici approbanda, possent ab ea recedere postulantes, nobis frequenter illuderent, et iudicium nostrum ex eorum pendere arbitrio videretur. Poterat quoque addi, quod pars altera mandatum apostolicum non servarat, utpote quae nec postulationem concordem, nec electionem canonicam celebrarat, quum in maiori contradictione quam prius, non solum canonicorum, sed suffraganeorum etiam, ipso rege adversae parti favente, praedictum Quinqueecclesiensem episcopum postulasset.

Nor did the discord of those who petitioned another stand in the way, since previously you all together had agreed in the postulation of the aforesaid archbishop, and had requested from us through common envoys that your consent, noted in letters and strengthened by your own subscriptions, be confirmed, and we had received your postulation to be adjudicated, if perhaps the suffragans should persist in contradiction, or, if they should consent, or even yield, to be approved. For if, after the postulation is strengthened by the subscriptions of the postulants and is presented to the Roman Pontiff for approval, the postulants could withdraw from it, they would be making a mockery of us repeatedly, and our judgment would seem to hang upon their discretion. It could also be added that the other party had not observed the apostolic mandate, inasmuch as it had celebrated neither a concordant postulation nor a canonical election, since, in a greater contradiction than before, not only of the canons but even of the suffragans, with the king himself favoring the adverse party, it had postulated the aforesaid Bishop of Quinqueecclesiae.

Auditis igitur his et aliis, quae fuerunt hinc inde proposita, et habito super his cum fratribus nostris diligenti tractatu, Intelleximus itaque quod, etsi neutra esset postulatio approbanda, iuxta tenorem tamen posterioris rescripti ad nos de cetero Strigonensis ecclesiae provisio pertineret. Quia vero non plenam de personis illius regni notitiam habebamus, ideoque non poteramus salva conscientia nostra eidem ecclesiae in alia persona, quae de regno Hungariae originem duceret, congrue providere, nec vellemus ei praeficere alienum, quamvis regularius et honestius videretur, si suffraganeus ad metropolim suam accederet, quam archiepiscopus a metropoli ad metropolim transferretur, partem tamen elegimus potiorem, et eundem archiepiscopum, in quem omnes, quorum consensus in electione vel postulatione pastoris requiritur, licet diversis temporibus convenerant, a vinculo, quo tenebatur Colocensi ecclesiae, absolventes, ad metropolim Strigonensem transferimus, et ei licentiam tribuimus transeundi, pallium ei ad nomen et usum eiusdem ecclesiae transmissuri. [Monemus igitur etc.

Therefore, these and other things having been heard which were proposed on this side and that, and a diligent tractate held with our brothers concerning these, we understood accordingly that, although neither petition was to be approved, nevertheless according to the tenor of the later rescript the provision for the Church of Esztergom would henceforth pertain to us. But because we did not have full knowledge of the persons of that kingdom, and therefore could not, with our conscience safe, suitably provide that same church in another person who drew origin from the kingdom of Hungary, nor would we wish to set over it an outsider—although it would seem more regular and more honest that a suffragan should accede to his own metropolis than that an archbishop be transferred from metropolis to metropolis—nevertheless we chose the preferable course, and the same archbishop, upon whom all those whose consent is required in the election or petition of a pastor had agreed, albeit at different times, we, absolving him from the bond by which he was held to the Church of Kalocsa, transfer to the metropolitan see of Esztergom, and we grant to him license of passing over, being about to send the pallium to him in the name and for the use of the same church. [We therefore admonish etc.

Dat. Romae II. Non. Oct.

Given at Rome, October 6.

1205.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Postulatio, contra quam agitur de contempto, potest sine praeiudicio alicuius reiici; potest tamen de speciali gratia admitti. Hoc dicit.

A petition, against which proceedings are had for contempt, can be rejected without prejudice to anyone; yet it can be admitted by special grace. He says this.

Idem Capitulo Strigonensi.

The same to the Chapter of Strigonium.

Postulationem, quam celebrastis [de venerabili fratre nostro I. Colocensi archiepiscopo ad Strigoniensem metropolim transferendo, venerabiles fratres nostri eiusdem metropolis suffraganei, videlicet C. Quinqueecclesiensis, B. Watiensis, R. Vesprimiensis et I. Nitriensis episcopi penitus contradicunt, per suas nobis literis intimantes, quod V. bonae memoriae archiepiscopo vestro viam universae carnis ingresso, eis inconsultis vos, habito ad invicem consilio diligenti, quosdam de concanonicis vestris ad carissimi in Christo filii nostri Ungarorum regis illustris praesentiam destinastis, et quem vobis praefici volebatis nominetenus expressistis. Post dilationem vera non longam, quum ad festum B. Stephani regis iidem episcopi solenniter convenissent, ut super electione Strigoniensis ecclesiae unanimi deliberatione tractarent, vos, ab eisdem episcopis requisiti, quem illi sedi velletis praefici ac praeponi, taliter respondistis, quod nullum auderetis eligere, nisi qui plenam regis gratiam obtineret, et protinus praedictum Colocensem archiepiscopum nominare curastis, adiicientes, quod in electione archiepiscopi suffraganei nihil iuris haberent, quibus ipsi suffraganei responderunt, quod a prima Christianitatis institutione in regno Ungariae usque ad ista tempora nullus ad sedem Strigoniensem fuerat electus, nisi suffraganeis una cum canonicis eligentibus iuxta consuetudinem canonicam et consuetudinem approbatam. Dixerunt etiam, quad prius inquiri deberet, utrum de gremio illius ecclesiae posset utilis et idoneus reperiri, asserentes, quod in ea multi sunt viri honesti, discreti et literati, qui possent illi ecclesiae decentius praesidere.

The petition which you have carried out [concerning our venerable brother I., the archbishop of Colocum, to be transferred to the Strigonian metropolis, the suffragans of our same metropolis—namely C., bishop of Quinqueecclesiensis, B. of Watiensis, R. of Vesprimiensis, and I. of Nitriensis—utterly contradict, intimating to us by their letters that, your archbishop V. of good memory having entered the way of all flesh, you, without consulting them, having held diligent counsel with one another, dispatched certain of your co‑canons to the presence of our dearest son in Christ, the illustrious king of the Hungarians, and specified by name whom you wished to set over you. After a delay indeed not long, when on the feast of Blessed King Stephen the same bishops had solemnly come together, that they might treat with unanimous deliberation about the election of the Church of Strigonium, you, being asked by those same bishops whom you wished to be set over and put in charge of that see, answered in such wise that you would dare to elect no one unless he obtained the full favor of the king, and straightway you took care to nominate the aforesaid archbishop of Colocum, adding that in the election of an archbishop the suffragans had no right; to which the suffragans themselves replied that from the first establishment of Christianity in the kingdom of Hungary down to these times no one had been elected to the see of Strigonium unless the suffragans together with the canons were electing according to canonical custom and approved custom. They also said that it ought first to be inquired whether from the bosom of that church a useful and suitable man could be found, asserting that in it there are many men honorable, discreet, and lettered, who could more becomingly preside over that church.

Illud insuper per easdem nobis literas instimarunt, quod, quum praedictus Colocensis archiepiscopus usque ad haec tempora Colocensem ecclesiam Strigoniensi metropoli asseruerit esse parem, eique tam verbo quam opere varias et intolerabiles iniurias irrogarit, non modicum formidabant, ne, si ad memoratam metropolim transferretur, propriae confessionis et assertionis non immemor, quasi rubore perfusus, ne sibi ipsi contrarius videretur, negotia Strigoniensis ecclesiae minus efficaciter assumeret promovenda, et ipsos episcopos, qui eius verbis et actibus iuxta debitum suum dure quandoque restiterant, opprimere non cessaret, quum tamen, iuxta canonicas sanctiones, iudex aliquibus non debeat dari suspectus. Porro dilecti filii, Ö abbas de Bucco et magister Petrus pro rege praedicto, nec non et Ö praepositus Posonensis et Ö thesaurarius ecclesiae vestrae pro vobis in contrarium allegantes asseruere constantes, ea, quae ab ipsis episcopis proposita fuerant, penitus esse falsa, firmiter proponendo, quod per eundem praepositum et alios ante communem tractatum vocati fuerunt solenniter, et venerunt, eorumque de gratia multoties fuit requisitus assensus; sed, quum super ecclesiae vestrae provisione consilium et auxilium vobis congruum denegarent, vos, ipsi ecclesiae desolatae providere volentes, vocatis praedictis episcopis, convenistis in unum, et vota vestra in praedictum Colocensem archiepiscopum, ut ipsum postularetis a nobis, unanimiter eis praesentibus contulistis, suppliciter exorantes, ut nos suis literis pro postulatione vestra rogarent, quod ipsi facere penitus recusarunt. Praenominatis autem nunciis asserentibus, quod translationem ipsius archiepiscopi urgens necessitas et evidens utilitas exigebant, in ipsa disceptatione fuit propositum coram nobis, quod memoratus archiepiscopus Colocensis, in grave Strigoniensis ecclesiae praeiudicium, vobis reclamantibus et confirmationes sedis apostolicae ostendentibus, filium praedicti regis coronavit in regem, quum non ad Colocensem ecclesiam, sed ad metropolim vestram coronatio regis Ungariae pertinere noscatur; unde tamquam alieni iuris invasor et apostolici statuti contemptor debebat graviter castigari, poteratque verisimili coniectura praesumi, quod, quum ipse querelam contra se ipsum et contra factum proprium non esset moturus, ius ecclesiae vestrae super hoc praetermitteret indefensum, per quod ei grave posset praeiudicium generari, quamvis e contrario fuerit replicatum, quod absque contradictione cuiuslibet et praeiudicio alicuius praescripta coronatio ab universitate fuerat celebrata.] Licet ergo per postulationem huiusmodi nullum ius sit alicui acquisitum, ideoque sine praeiudicio alicuius postulationem potuissemus repellere memoratam; ut tamen vobis, quantum cum Deo possumus, de speciali gratia consulamus, ita duximus providendum, quod, si praedicti pontifices in contradictione persisterent, et vos ad postulationem institeritis obtinendam, quia nobis non constitit de praemissis, usque ad septuagesimam proximo venturam per procuratores idoneos, ad omnia sufficienter instructos, nostro vos conspectui praesentetis, quatenus utraque parte praesente quod iustum fuerit decernamus.

They further intimated to us through those same letters that, since the aforesaid archbishop of Colocsa, down to these times, has asserted that the Colocsan church is equal to the Strigonian metropolis, and has inflicted upon it various and intolerable injuries, both by word and by deed, they greatly feared lest, if he were transferred to the aforesaid metropolis, not unmindful of his own confession and assertion, as if suffused with blush, lest he seem contrary to himself, he would take up the business of the Strigonian church to be promoted less efficaciously, and would not cease to oppress those bishops themselves who at times, according to their duty, had sturdily resisted his words and acts, since nevertheless, according to canonical sanctions, a judge suspected by some ought not to be assigned. Moreover, the beloved sons, Ö abbot of Bucco and Master Peter on behalf of the aforesaid king, and also Ö the provost of Poson and Ö the treasurer of your church on your behalf, alleging to the contrary, steadfastly asserted that the things which had been proposed by those bishops were utterly false, firmly stating that through that same provost and others, before the common discussion, they had been solemnly summoned and came, and that their assent was many times asked by favor; but when, regarding provision for your church, they denied to you counsel and assistance congruent, you, wishing to provide for the desolate church itself, the aforesaid bishops having been called, came together into one, and unanimously, with them present, conferred your votes upon the aforesaid archbishop of Colocsa, that you might petition him from us, humbly beseeching that they would by their letters entreat us on behalf of your postulation, which they utterly refused to do. But the aforesaid envoys asserting that urgent necessity and evident utility required the translation of that archbishop, it was set forth before us in the very disputation that the said archbishop of Colocsa, to the grave prejudice of the Strigonian church, while you were protesting and showing confirmations of the Apostolic See, crowned the son of the aforesaid king as king, whereas it is known that the coronation of the king of Hungary pertains not to the Colocsan church but to your metropolis; whence, as an invader of another’s right and a contemner of an apostolic statute, he ought to be severely chastised, and it could be presumed by a likely conjecture that, since he would not be about to move a complaint against himself and his own deed, he would leave your church’s right on this point undefended, whereby grave prejudice could be generated to it, although, on the contrary, it was replied that the aforesaid coronation had been celebrated by the whole body without anyone’s contradiction and to the prejudice of no one.] Although therefore by a postulation of this kind no right has been acquired to anyone, and therefore we could, without prejudice to anyone, have repelled the aforesaid postulation; yet that we may, as far as with God we can, consult for you by special grace, we have deemed it to be provided thus: that, if the aforesaid pontiffs persist in contradiction, and you press to obtain the postulation, since it has not been established to us concerning the aforesaid matters, up to Septuagesima next to come you should present yourselves to our sight through suitable procurators, sufficiently instructed for all things, so that, both parties being present, we may decree what shall be just.

[Si autem illi etc. Dat. Romae ap. S. Petr.

[But if they, etc. Given at Rome at St. Peter’s.

X. Kal. Dec. 1204.]

10th day before the Kalends of December 1204.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Episcopus non est eligendus ad aliam dignitatem, sed postulandus.

A bishop is not to be elected to another dignity, but to be postulated.

Honorius III. Capitulo Calaritano.

Honorius 3. To the Chapter of Cagliari.

Etsi unanimiter vota vestra concurrerint ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum Sutrinum episcopum in ecclesiae vestrae archiepiscopum eligendum, quum suae alligatus ecclesiae liberum non habeat sine nostra permissione volatum, electionem de ipso factam, tanquam contra canones minus licite attentatam, de fratrum nostrorum consilio duximus irritandam, quum eligi nullo iure potuerit, sed potius postulari. Volentes tamen quantum cum Deo possumus vestris desideriis concurrere benigno favore dilectis filiis subdiacono et B. Capellano nostris, apostolicae sedis legatis, duximus iniungendum, ut et vota vestra circa ipsum exquirant, et personae merita vice nostra examinent diligentes, eundem ad nos cum literis suis veritatem continentibus destinando, ut si idoneus repertus fuerit, disponente Domino, et ipsi in ecclesia et ecclesiae vestrae utiliter provideatur in ipso.

Although your votes have unanimously concurred upon our venerable brother, the bishop of Sutri, to be chosen as archbishop of your church, since, being bound to his own church, he does not have free flight without our permission, we have deemed the election made of him, as attempted less lawfully and against the canons, to be annulled by the counsel of our brothers, since he could by no law have been elected, but rather postulated. Willing nevertheless, so far as with God we can, to concur with your desires in kindly favor, we have seen fit to enjoin upon our beloved sons, our subdeacon and B., our chaplain, legates of the apostolic see, that they both ascertain your votes concerning him and diligently examine the merits of the person in our stead, sending the same to us with their letters containing the truth, so that, if he shall be found suitable, the Lord disposing, both for him in the church and for your church provision may usefully be made in his person.

TITULUS VI. DE ELECTIONE ET ELECTI POTESTATE.

TITLE 6. ON ELECTION AND THE POWER OF THE ELECT.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Ecclesiae collegiatae non debet provideri de praelato per collationem seu provisionem, sed per electionem canonicam fiendam per ipsum collegium. H. d. Abbas.

A collegiate church ought not to be provided with a prelate by collation or provision, but by a canonical election to be made by the college itself. H. d. Abbot.

Lucius Papa.

Pope Lucius.

Nullus in ecclesia, ubi duo vel tres fratres fuerint in congregatione, nisi eorum electione canonica presbyter eligatur, et eisdem convocatis, et parochianis, atque in unum consentientibus. Si vero aliter quis ecclesiam adeptus fuerit, eo, quod per cupiditatem illam acquisierit, atque contra canonicae regulae disciplinam egerit, expellatur.

Let no presbyter in a church, where two or three brothers shall be in the congregation, be elected except by their canonical election, with the same men convened, and the parishioners, and consenting together as one. But if anyone shall have obtained a church otherwise, for this reason—that he acquired it through cupidity—and has acted against the discipline of the canonical rule, let him be expelled.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Electus ad clamorem populi, non debet per superiorem confirmari.

One elected by the acclamation of the people ought not to be confirmed by a superior.

Ex concilio Sardicensi.

From the Council of Sardica.

Osius episcopus dixit: Si quis ita temerarius exstiterit, ut fortasse talem excusationem afferens, asseveret, quod literas populi acceperit, quum manifestum sit potuisse plures eorum qui sinceram fidem non habent, praemio et mercede corrumpi, ut clamarent in ecclesia, et ipsum petere viderentur episcopum, omnino fraudes has damnandas esse arbitror ita, ut nec laicam in fine communionem, nisi de hoc poenituerit, talis accipiat. Si vero omnibus placet, statuite. Synodus respondit: Placet.

Bishop Osius said: If anyone should have been so rash as, perhaps bringing forward such an excuse, to assert that he has received letters from the people, since it is manifest that many of those who do not have sincere faith could be corrupted by reward and hire, so that they would shout in the church and seem to be requesting him as bishop, I judge that these frauds are altogether to be condemned, in such a way that such a man should not receive even lay communion at the end, unless he has repented of this. But if it pleases all, decree it. The synod replied: It pleases.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Electio canonica confirmanda est; debet tamen superior ante confirmationem inquirere de conversatione et vita electi, ubi fuit conversatus.

A canonical election must be confirmed; however, the superior ought, before the confirmation, to inquire into the conduct and life of the elected, where he has lived.

Gregorius III.

Gregory 3.

Postquam [is, qui ad episcopatum Surrentinae civitatis electus fuerat, aptus nobis visus non est, Amandum presbyterum oratorii S. Severini, quod in castro Lucullano situm est, elegerunt. Ea propter experientiae tuae praecipimus, ut eundem presbyterum excusatione postposita sub omni ad nos studeat festinatione transmittere, quatenus] Confirmationem petentium desideria, [cum Christi auxilio,] si nihil est, quod electum impediat, impleantur. Cuius vita vel actus, quia melius possunt illic, ubi [diu] est conversatus, cognosci, inquirantur ibidem.

After [he who had been elected to the bishopric of the city of Surrentum did not seem apt to us, they chose Amandus, presbyter of the oratory of St. Severinus, which is situated in the Lucullan castle. For that reason we enjoin upon your experience that, the excuse set aside, you strive to transmit the same presbyter to us with all haste, in order that] the desires of those seeking Confirmation, [with the aid of Christ,] if there is nothing that impedes the elect, may be fulfilled. Whose life or deeds, because they can be better known there where he has [long] resided, let them be inquired into in that same place.

[Et si nulla etc.]

[And if nothing etc.]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Electo in archiepiscopum sedes apostolica pallium non tradet, nisi prius praestet fidelitatis et obedientiae iuramentum.

To one elected as archbishop, the Apostolic See will not hand over the pallium unless he first furnishes the oath of fidelity and obedience.

Paschalis Panormitano Archiepiscopo.

Paschal to the Archbishop of Palermo.

Significasti, frater carissime, reges et regni maiores admiratione permotos, quod pallium tibi ab apocrisariis nostris tali conditione oblatum fuerit, si sacramentum, quod a nobis scriptum detulerant, exhiberes. In pallio, frater, plenitudo conceditur pontificalis officii, quia iuxta sedis apostolicae et totius Europae consuetudinem ante acceptum pallium metropolitanis minime licet aut consecrare episcopos, aut synodum celebrare. Mirentur in hac causa et Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, qui, quum ovium suarum curam Simoni Petro committeret, conditionem posuit, dicens: "Si diligis me, Simon Petre, pasce oves meas." Si conscientiarum factor et cognitor secretorum conditione hac usus est, nec semel tantum, sed et secundo, et usque ad contristationem: qua nos sollicitudine, qua provisione oportet tantam ecclesiae praelationem, tantam Christi ovium curam imponere fratribus, quorum conscientias non videmus?

You have signified, dearest brother, that kings and the greater men of the kingdom were moved with admiration, because the pallium was offered to you by our apocrisiaries on such a condition, if you should exhibit the oath which they had brought, written by us. In the pallium, brother, the plenitude of the pontifical office is granted, because according to the custom of the Apostolic See and of all Europe, before the pallium has been received it is by no means permitted to metropolitans either to consecrate bishops or to celebrate a synod. Let them marvel in this matter even at our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when he was entrusting the care of his sheep to Simon Peter, set a condition, saying: "If you love me, Simon Peter, feed my sheep." If the maker of consciences and the knower of secrets used this condition, not only once, but also a second time, and even unto sadness: with what solicitude, with what provision ought we to impose so great a prelation of the Church, so great a care of Christ’s sheep upon brothers whose consciences we do not see?

illis maxime, quos nullo usu novimus, quorum dilectionem penitus ignoramus? Aiunt omne iusiurandum in evangelio a Domino Deo esse prohibitum, nec ab [ipsis] Apostolis post Dominum, nec in conciliis inveniri posse statutum. Quid est ergo, quod idem Dominus subsequenter ait: "Quod amplius est, a malo est?" Hoc enim amplius ut exigamus, malum nos illo permittente compellit.

especially those whom we know by no familiarity, whose affection we utterly ignore? They say that every oath is prohibited in the Gospel by the Lord God, and that it can be found to have been established neither by the Apostles [themselves] after the Lord, nor in councils. What then is it that the same Lord subsequently says: "What is more, is from evil?" For, that we exact this "more," evil compels us, he permitting it.

Nonne malum est ab ecclesiae unitate et a sedis apostolicae obedientia resilire, et nonne malum est contra [sacrorum] canonum statuta prorumpere? Quod quam multi etiam post sacramentum praestitum praesumpserunt? Nonne praedecessor tuus praeter Romani Pontificis conscientiam damnavit episcopum?

Is it not an evil to fall back from the unity of the Church and from obedience to the Apostolic See, and is it not an evil to break out against the statutes of the [sacred] canons? How many have presumed this even after the oath was rendered? Did not your predecessor condemn a bishop without the knowledge of the Roman Pontiff?

Quibus hoc canonibus, quibus hoc conciliis legitur esse permissum? Quid super episcoporum translationibus loquar, quae apud vos non auctoritate apostolica, sed nutu regio praesumuntur? Propter haec mala et alia evitanda huiusmodi iuramentum exigitur.

In which canons, in which councils is it read that this is permitted? What shall I say about the translations of bishops, which among you are presumed not by apostolic authority but at a royal nod? Because of these evils, and to avoid others, an oath of this sort is exacted.

Cur autem Dominus iuramentum prohibuerit, Apostolus Iacobus manifeste adiiciens docet, ut non sub iudicium incidatis, ne quisquam, sicut et Augustinus exponit, assiduitate iurandi ad periurium per consuetudinem dilabatur. Quapropter iuratione [quis] non utatur, nisi necessitate, quum videt pigros homines esse ad credendum quod eis utile est credere, nisi iuratione firmetur. Hoc nimirum malo ac necessitate compellimur iuramentum pro fide, pro obedientia, pro unitate requirere.

Why moreover the Lord forbade the oath, the Apostle James, adding, teaches plainly: so that you may not fall under judgment, lest anyone, as Augustine also explains, by the assiduity of swearing should by custom slip into perjury. Wherefore let [anyone] not make use of an oath, unless from necessity, when he sees men to be slow to believe that which it is useful for them to believe, unless it be confirmed by an oath. By this evil and necessity, to be sure, we are compelled to require an oath for faith, for obedience, for unity.

Porro pro auditorum diffidentia Apostolum Paulum iurasse, ipsius epistolae testantur. Aiunt in conciliis statutum non inveniri, quasi Romanae ecclesiae legem concilia ulla praefixerint, quum omnia concilia per Romanae ecclesiae auctoritatem et facta sint, et robur acceperint, et in eorum statutis Romani Pontificis patenter excipiatur auctoritas. [Nonne in Chalcedonensis concilii actione decima sexta slatutum est, ante omnia quidem primatus honorem praecipuum secundum canones antiquae Romae reverendissimo archiepiscopo conservari?

Moreover, on account of the hearers’ diffidence, the Apostle Paul swore—his own epistles bear witness. They say that in the councils no statute is found, as if any councils had prescribed a law to the Roman Church, since all councils both were brought about through the authority of the Roman Church and received their strength, and in their statutes the authority of the Roman Pontiff is openly reserved. [Was it not decreed in the sixteenth session of the Council of Chalcedon that, before all things, the principal honor of primacy, according to the canons, be preserved to the most reverend archbishop of ancient Rome?

Itaque quod censuerunt rex et magnates a supradicta sacramenti conditione te quiescere, videturne vobis iudicium evangelicum? Videturne primatus nostri honor praecipuus? Numquid animo cecidit illa sententia Domini: non est discipulus super magistrum?

Therefore, does that which the king and the magnates have decreed—that you be exempt from the aforesaid condition of the oath—seem to you an Evangelical judgment? Is the preeminent honor of our primacy apparent? Has that saying of the Lord fallen from your mind: “the disciple is not above the master”?

Numquid Hungarico principi dictum est: et tu conversus confirma fratres tuos? Numquid haec nos commodi nostri profectione requirimus, et non unitatis catholicae statuimus firmamentum?] Possunt apostolicam sedem contemnere, possunt adversum nos calcaneum elevare, datum a Deo privilegium evertere vel auferre non possunt, quo Petro dictum est: "Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam, et tibi dabo claves regni coelorum." Quibus tamen quatuor conciliorum decretis dandi pallii modus praescriptus est, et professionis vel obedientiae ordo sancitus [est]. Quum igitur a sede apostolica vestrae insignia dignitatis exigitis, quae a beati Petri tantum corpore assumuntur, iustum est, ut vos quoque sedi apostolicae subiectionis debitae signa solvatis, quae vos cum beato Petro tanquam membra de membro habere, et catholici capitis unitatem servare declarent. In quibus a praedecessoribus nostris ea est adhibita moderatio, ut nihil iniuriosum, nihil difficile sit appositum, quod non etiam praeter exactionem nostram ab omnibus debeat Episcopis observari, qui sub Apostolorum Petri et Pauli obedientia decreverunt, et unitate persistere.

Has it been said to the Hungarian prince: and you, when you have been converted, strengthen your brothers? Do we seek these things by the setting-out of our own convenience, and do we not establish the firmament of Catholic unity?] They can despise the apostolic see, they can lift up the heel against us; the privilege given by God they cannot overturn or remove, whereby it was said to Peter: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Yet by the decrees of the four councils the manner of giving the pallium has been prescribed, and the order of profession or obedience has been sanctioned [is]. Therefore, when from the apostolic see you demand the insignia of your dignity, which are assumed only from the body of blessed Peter, it is just that you also render to the apostolic see the signs of due subjection, which declare that you have them with blessed Peter as members from the member, and that you preserve the unity of the catholic head. In these matters such moderation has been applied by our predecessors, that nothing injurious, nothing difficult has been added, which ought not also, even apart from our exaction, to be observed by all bishops, who have decreed to be under the obedience of the Apostles Peter and Paul, and to persist in unity.

Numquid non ultra vos Saxones, Danique consistunt? Et tamen eorum Metropolitani et idem iuramentum asserunt, et legatos sedis Apostolicae honorifice tractant, et in suis necessitatibus adiuvant et Apostolorum limina per legatos suos non tantum per triennium sed annis singulis visitant. [Ita te etc.].

Are not the Saxons and the Danes situated beyond you? And yet their Metropolitans both assert the same oath, and they treat the legates of the Apostolic See with honor, and they aid them in their necessities, and they visit the thresholds of the Apostles by their own legates not only every three years but every single year. [Thus you etc.].

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Si schismaticus ad unionem ecclesiae reversus, eligitur in episcopum, electio non tenet, sed ex dispensatione potest confirmari.

If a schismatic, having returned to the union of the Church, is elected into a bishop, the election does not hold, but by dispensation it can be confirmed.

Alexander III. Petro Presbytero cardinali apostolicae sedis Legato.

Alexander 3. To Peter, presbyter cardinal, legate of the Apostolic See.

Quia diligentia tua per dilectum filium nostrum S. a nobis sollicite requisivit, an electionem electi, qui nuper abiurato scismate ad unitatem ecclesiae et devotionem nostram rediit, debeas confirmare: id tibi duximus respondendum, quod, si a schismatico nullum ordinem susceperit, et eius electio unanimiter et concorditer secundum formam canonum fuerit celebrata, eum, dummodo alia non impediant, dispensative permittimus confirmari, mandantes, ut eum facias a catholicis episcopis suffraganeis Aquilegiensi ecclesiae in episcopum ordinari, salva tamen debita iustitia et reverentia eiusdem ecclesiae, quum ad catholicam redierit unitatem.

Because your diligence, through our beloved son S., has diligently inquired of us whether you ought to confirm the election of the elect, who lately, the schism abjured, returned to the unity of the church and to our devotion: this we have deemed should be answered to you, that, if he has received no order from a schismatic, and his election has been celebrated unanimously and concordantly according to the form of the canons, him, provided other things do not impede, we permit to be confirmed by dispensation, ordering that you have him ordained as bishop by the catholic bishops, suffragans of the Aquileian church, saving however the due justice and reverence of the same church, when it has returned to Catholic unity.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Electus in Romanum Pontificem a duabus partibus cardinalium, nulla exceptione obstante est Papa; electus autem a minori numero gerens se pro Papa, incidit una cum sibi adhaerentibus in poenas hic contentas.

One elected as Roman Pontiff by two parts of the cardinals, with no exception standing in the way, is Pope; but one elected by the lesser number, conducting himself as Pope, falls, together with those adhering to him, under the penalties contained herein.

Idem in concilio Lateranensi.

The same in the Lateran Council.

Licet de vitanda discordia in electione Romani Pontificis manifesta satis a praedecessoribus nostris constituta manaverint, quia tamen saepe post illa per improbae ambitionis audaciam gravem passa est ecclesia scissuram: nos etiam ad malum hoc evitandum de consilio fratrum nostrorum et sacri approbatione concilii aliquid decrevimus adiungendum. § 1. Statuimus ergo, ut, si forte, inimico homine superseminante zizaniam, inter cardinales de substituendo summo Pontifice non poterit esse plena concordia, et duabus partibus concordantibus pars tertia concordare noluerit, aut sibi alium praesumpserit nominare, ille absque ulla exceptione ab universali ecclesia Romanus Pontifex habeatur, qui a duabus partibus concordantibus electus fuerit et receptus. § 2. Si quis autem de tertiae partis nominatione confisus, quia de ratione esse non potest, sibi nomen episcopi usurpaverit, tam ipse, quam ii, qui eum receperint, excommunicationi subiaceant, et totius sacri ordinis privatione mulctentur ita, ut viatici etiam eis, nisi tantum in ultimis, communio denegetur, et si non resipuerint, cum Dathan et Abiron, quos terra vivos absorbuit, accipiant portionem.

Although concerning the avoiding of discord in the election of the Roman Pontiff sufficiently manifest constitutions have flowed forth from our predecessors, because nevertheless often after those the church has suffered a grave schism through the audacity of depraved ambition: we also, to avoid this evil, by the counsel of our brothers and with the approbation of the sacred council, have decreed that something be added. § 1. We therefore ordain that, if perchance, the enemy man over-sowing zizania (tares), there cannot be full concord among the cardinals about appointing the supreme Pontiff, and, with two parts being in concord, the third part is unwilling to agree, or presumes to nominate another for itself, he, without any exception, is to be held by the universal church as Roman Pontiff who shall have been elected and received by the two agreeing parts. § 2. But if anyone, trusting in the nomination of the third part—since it cannot be according to reason—shall have usurped to himself the name of bishop, both he and those who shall have received him are to lie under excommunication, and let them be mulcted with privation of the whole sacred order, such that even the communion of the viaticum is denied to them, except only in the last extremities, and, if they do not come to their senses, let them receive their portion with Dathan and Abiron, whom the earth swallowed alive.

§ 3. Praeterea si a paucioribus quam a duabus partibus aliquis electus fuerit ad apostolatus officium, nisi maior concordia intercesserit, nullatenus assumatur, et praedictae poenae subiaceat, si humiliter noluerit abstinere. Ex hoc tamen nullum canonicis constitutionibus et aliis ecclesiis praeiudicium generetur, in quibus debet maioris et sanioris partis sententia praevalere, quia quod in eis dubium venerit superioris poterit iudicio diffiniri. In Romana vero ecclesia speciale aliquid constituitur, quia non poterit ad superiorem recursus haberi.

§ 3. Moreover, if by fewer than by two parts someone shall have been elected to the office of the apostolate, unless a greater concord shall have intervened, let him by no means be assumed, and let him be subject to the aforesaid penalties, if he will not be willing humbly to abstain. From this, however, let no prejudice be generated to the canonical constitutions and other churches, in which the sentence of the greater and sounder part ought to prevail, because whatever shall have come as doubtful in them can be defined by the judgment of a superior. But in the Roman church something special is established, because recourse cannot be had to a superior.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Electio ad episcopatum fieri debet de digno scientia, moribus et aetate, et quod habeat trigesimuro annum completum, et sit de legitimo matrimonio natus. Hoc dic. usque ad § Quum vero.

The election to the episcopate ought to be made of one worthy in knowledge, morals, and age, and who has completed the thirtieth year, and is born of lawful marriage. This is said up to § “Quum vero.”

ñ § 1. Beneficia electi in episcopum vacant per confirmationem, adeptionem possessionis, et consecrationem secutam, vel postquam praefixum tempus ad petendam consecrationem lapsum fuerit. Hoc dic. usque ad § Inferiora.

ñ § 1. The benefices of one elected to the bishopric fall vacant by confirmation, by adeption of possession, and by ensuing consecration, or after the prefixed time for seeking consecration shall have elapsed. Say this up to § Inferiora.

Abbas Siculus. ñ § 2. In dignitatibus et officiis citra episcopatum ac curatis beneficiis debet assumendus vigesimum quintum annum attigisae, et alias esse idoneus scientia et moribus; et si non est in ordine requisito, debet se facere promoveri in proximis temporibus; alias monitus non parens privatur beneficio, non obstante appellatione, nisi ex causa legitima excusetur. Hoc dic.

The Sicilian Abbot. ñ § 2. In dignities and offices short of the episcopate and in benefices with cure, one ought to be appointed who has reached the twenty-fifth year, and otherwise is suitable in knowledge and morals; and if he is not in the required order, he must have himself promoted at the nearest times; otherwise, being warned and not obeying, he is deprived of the benefice, notwithstanding an appeal, unless he be excused by a legitimate cause. Say this.

usque ad § Clerici. Abb. Siculus.

up to § Clerics. The Sicilian Abbot.

ñ § 3. Eligentes indignum contra formam huius c. privati sunt pro prima vice potestate eligendi, et idem in collatore; et defectum capituli supplet episcopus, et e converso. Et si capitulum negligit, fit devolutio ad metropolitanum. Hoc dic.

ñ § 3. Those choosing an unworthy person contrary to the form of this canon are deprived, for the first time, of the power of electing, and the same applies to the collator; and the defect of the chapter is supplied by the bishop, and conversely. And if the chapter neglects, devolution takes place to the metropolitan. Say this.

usque ad finem.

up to the end.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Quum in cunctis sacris ordinibus et ecclesiasticis ministeriis sint et aetatis maturitas, et gravitas morum, et literarum scientia inquirenda, multo fortius in episcopo haec oportet inquiri, qui ad curam aliorum positus in se ipso debet ostendere, qualiter alios in domo Dei oporteat conversari. Ea propter, ne quod de quibusdam pro necessitate temporis factum est trahatur a posteris in exemplum, praesenti decreto statuimus, ut nullus in episcopum eligatur, nisi qui iam trigesimum annum aetatis exegerit, et de legitimo matrimonio sit natus, qui etiam vita et scientia commendabilis demonstretur. § 1. Quum vero electus fuerit, et confirmationem electionis acceperit, et ecclesiasticorum bonorum administrationem habuerit, decurso tempore de consecrandis episcopis a canonibus diffinito, is, ad quem spectant beneficia, quae habebat, de illis disponendi liberam habeat facultatem.

When in all sacred orders and ecclesiastical ministries both maturity of age, gravity of morals, and knowledge of letters are to be inquired into, much more strongly in a bishop ought these to be inquired, who, set for the care of others, ought to show in himself how it is fitting that others should conduct themselves in the house of God. For that reason, lest what has been done concerning certain persons by necessity of the time be drawn by posterity into an example, by the present decree we establish that no one be elected to the episcopate unless he has already completed the thirtieth year of age, and be born of legitimate marriage, who also is shown commendable in life and in knowledge. § 1. But when he shall have been elected, and shall have received confirmation of the election, and shall have had the administration of ecclesiastical goods, after the time defined by the canons concerning the consecration of bishops has elapsed, let the one to whom the benefices which he had pertain have the free faculty of disposing of them.

§ 2. Inferiora etiam ministeria, ut puta decanatum, archidiaconatum, et alia, quae curam animarum habent annexam, nullus omnino suscipiat, sed nec parochialis ecclesiae regimen, nisi qui iam vigesimum quintum annum aetatis attigerit, et scientia et moribus commendandus exsistat. Quum autem assumptus fuerit, si archidiaconus in diaconum, et decanus et reliqui admoniti non fuerint praefixo a canonibus tempore in presbyteros ordinati, et ab illo removeantur officio, et aliis conferatur, qui et velint et possint illud convenienter implere. Nec prosit eis appellationis refugium, si forte in constitutionis istius transgressionem per appellationem voluerint se tueri.

§ 2. Let no one at all undertake the lower ministries likewise, for instance the deanery, the archdeaconry, and others which have the cure of souls annexed, nor the regimen of a parochial church, unless he has already reached the twenty-fifth year of age and is shown to be commendable in learning and morals. But when he has been taken up, if the archdeacon has not been ordained into the diaconate, and the dean and the rest, having been admonished, have not been ordained priests within the time prefixed by the canons, both let them be removed from that office, and let it be conferred on others who both wish and are able to fulfill it suitably. Nor let the refuge of appeal profit them, if perchance by an appeal they should wish to protect themselves in the transgression of this constitution.

Hoc sane non solum de promovendis, sed etiam de his, qui iam promoti sunt, si canones non obsistant, praecipimus observari. § 3. Clerici sane, si contra formam istam quemquam elegerint, et eligendi tunc potestate privatos, et ab ecclesiasticis beneficiis triennio noverint se [esse] suspensos. Dignum est enim, ut quos Dei timor a malo non revocat ecclesiasticae saltem coerceat severitas disciplinae.

This, indeed, we prescribe to be observed not only concerning those to be promoted, but also concerning those who have already been promoted, if the canons do not stand in the way. § 3. Clerics, indeed, if they shall have elected anyone contrary to this form, let them then know themselves both deprived of the power of electing, and [to be] suspended from ecclesiastical benefices for 3 years. For it is fitting that those whom the fear of God does not call back from evil should at least be coerced by the ecclesiastical severity of discipline.

Episcopus autem si contra haec fecerit aut consenserit fieri, in conferendis praedictis officiis et beneficiis potestatem [suam] amittat, et per capitulum, aut per metropolitanum, si capitulum concordare nequiverit, ordinetur.

But if the bishop acts contrary to these things or consents that they be done, let him lose his [own] power in conferring the aforesaid offices and benefices, and let it be arranged by the chapter, or by the metropolitan if the chapter is unable to agree.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Compromittentes super electione tenentur recipere electum a compromissario, si est idoneus.

The compromitters concerning the election are bound to receive the person elected by the compromissary, if he is idoneous.

Idem Ravennati Archiepiscopo.

The same, to the Archbishop of Ravenna.

Causam, quae inter moniales sanctae Margaretae super discordia et dissensione electionis, quam fecerunt, agitari dignoscitur, experientiae tuae iam pridem commisimus terminandam. Verum quoniam ipsa causa in tantum protrahitur, et nondum, sicut accepimus, processisti, et periculosum et damnosum est monasterio, quod causa ipsa in tantum protrahitur, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus infra XL. dies, vel duos menses ad plus, secundum tenorem aliarum nostrarum literarum in eadem causa procedas, ita videlicet, quod si sorores ipsae in episcopum electionem contulerint, promittentes, quod illam, quam episcopus eis provideret, reciperent, ipsam, quam episcopus illis providerit, facias ab eis, appellatione remota, si tamen exsistat idonea, in suam recipi abbatissam. Si autem in causa procedere non poteris, dilectis filiis I. basilicae duodecim Apostolorum, presbytero Cardinali, Apostolicae sedis Legato et Priori S. Victoris ex parte nostra significes, ut in eadem causa procedant, et eam debito fine decidant.

We long ago committed to your experience the case which is recognized to be litigated between the nuns of Saint Margaret concerning the discord and dissension of the election which they made, to be brought to an end. But since the case itself is being prolonged to such an extent, and you have not yet, as we have learned, proceeded, and it is dangerous and damaging to the monastery that the case itself is so prolonged, we command your fraternity by apostolic writings that within 40 days, or at most two months, you proceed in the same cause according to the tenor of our other letters, namely thus: that if the sisters themselves have conferred the election upon the bishop, promising that they would receive the one whom the bishop should provide for them, you cause that the one whom the bishop shall have provided to them be received by them, appeal removed, if indeed she be suitable, as their abbess. But if you are not able to proceed in the case, signify on our part to our beloved sons, I., presbyter cardinal of the basilica of the Twelve Apostles and Legate of the Apostolic See, and to the Prior of St. Victor, that they proceed in the same cause and bring it to its due end.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Electus ante confirmationem beneficia conferre vel aliter administrare non potest.

An elected person cannot confer benefices or otherwise administer before confirmation.

Idem Wigorensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Worcester.

Nosti, sicut vir prudens et sapiens, quomodo dilectus filius noster G. Linconensis electus concedendi honores vel praebendas, aut alias disponendi de rebus ecclesiae, quum sua non sit electio confirmata, non habeat facultatem. Inde est, quod fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, ut praedicto electo ex parte nostra non differas arctius inhibere, ne archidiaconatum de Norantine, vel praebendam, quam W. eiusdem loci archidiaconus tenuit, alicui conferre praesumat. Et si eundem archidiaconatum vel praebendam cuiquam, quod non arbitramur, concessit, Mandamus igitur, quatenus ei auctoritate nostra praecipias, ut concessionem suam quam citius, omni contradictione et appellatione cessante, si quam fecit de praedictis, studeat revocare.

You know, as a prudent and wise man, how our beloved son G., the elected of Lincoln, does not have the faculty of conceding honors or prebends, or otherwise disposing of the affairs of the church, when his own election has not been confirmed. Hence it is that by apostolic writings we command, by enjoining, your fraternity, that you do not delay more strictly to inhibit the aforesaid elect on our part, lest he presume to confer upon anyone the archdeaconry of Norantine, or the prebend which W., archdeacon of the same place, held. And if he has granted that same archdeaconry or prebend to anyone—which we do not suppose—we therefore command that you, by our authority, enjoin him to strive to revoke his concession as quickly as possible, all contradiction and appeal ceasing, if he has made any regarding the aforesaid.

[Quodsi distulerit etc.]

[But if he shall have delayed, etc.]

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Electio facta post appellationem, et prima non cassata, et contra privilegia ecclesiae, cassanda est.

An election made after an appeal, with the first not quashed, and contrary to the privileges of the church, must be quashed.

Idem.

The same.

Consideravimus, quod electio Ioannis Frontini post appellationem ad nos interpositam et contra tenorem privilegiorum ecclesiae vestrae fuerit celebrata. Perpendimus etiam, quod electio B. post illam qualemcunque electionem non cassatam, nec non et post appellationem, per quam ad suum statum omnia debent reduci, facta fuit, et illata violentia, quanquam rex penitus inficietur, violentiam aliquam in hoc de assensu vel conscientia sua unquam perpetratam fuisse. Quapropter nos utriusque electionem de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio omnino cassamus, et vobis in aliam personam idoneam et honestam conveniendi liberam tribuimus facultatem; ita tamen, quod utrique praedictorum fama sua non minus propter hoc integre conservetur, et quod in aliis ecclesiis possint, si Deus dederit, ad dignitatem promoveri.

We have considered that the election of John Frontinus was celebrated after an appeal had been interposed to us and against the tenor of the privileges of your church. We have also weighed that the election of B. was made after that, of whatever sort, election not quashed, and likewise after the appeal, through which all things ought to be reduced to their own status, and with violence brought to bear, although the king utterly denies that any violence in this matter was ever perpetrated with his assent or conscience. Wherefore we, by the common counsel of our brethren, utterly annul the election of each, and we grant to you the free faculty of agreeing upon another person suitable and honorable; yet in such a way that the fame of each of the aforesaid be no less preserved intact on this account, and that in other churches they may, if God shall grant, be promoted to dignity.

Vobis autem liceat praeter istam ecclesiae vestrae ordinationem in eorum alterum, si voluntas fuerit, iterum convenire, et eum vobis in abbatem atque magistrum canonice providere.

But let it be permitted to you, besides this ordination of your church, to convene again upon either of them, if there be will, and to provide him for yourselves as abbot and master canonically.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Metropolitanus confirmatus, licet nondum receperit pallium, potest suum suffraganeum consecrari facere.

The Metropolitan, confirmed, although he has not yet received the pallium, can have his suffragan consecrated.

Idem.

The same.

Suffraganeis alicuius metropolitani, ad mandatum ipsius metropolitani, post confirmationem electionis suae, etiamsi pallium non receperit, licitum est aliquem electum, qui ad eius iurisdictionem pertinet, consecrare, et metropolitano aegritudine laborante vel alias praepedito, post susceptionem pallii, et etiam ante si eius est electio confirmata suffraganei sui ad mandatum ipsius possunt electo munus consecrationis conferre.

To the suffragans of some metropolitan, at the mandate of the metropolitan himself, after the confirmation of his election, even if he has not received the pallium, it is licit to consecrate some elected person who pertains to his jurisdiction; and, the metropolitan laboring under sickness or otherwise impeded, after the reception of the pallium, and even before if his election is confirmed, his suffragans, at his mandate, can confer upon the elect the office of consecration.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Is, cuius electio fuit cassata, non vitio personae, sed electionis modo, iterum eligi potest; secus, si vitio personae.

He whose election was annulled, not by a vice of the person but by the mode of the election, can be elected again; otherwise, if by a vice of the person.

Clemens III.

Clement III.

Super eo vero, quod quaerere voluisti, si alicuius electione cassata idem ad alterius ecclesiae regimen electus fuerit, an eius electio debeat confirmari, hoc tuam volumus discretionem tenere, quod, si prior electio non vitio personae, sed modo electionis cassatur, promotionem eius in eadem etiam ecclesia, nisi forte simoniacae pravitatis aliquid intercessisse constiterit, non debeat impedire.

Concerning that, indeed, which you wished to inquire—if, with someone’s election cassated, the same person should be elected to the regimen of another church, whether his election ought to be confirmed—we wish your discretion to hold this: that, if the prior election is cassated not by a fault of the person but by the mode of the election, his promotion even in the same church ought not to be impeded, unless perhaps it has been established that something of simoniacal depravity has interceded.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Non professus potest postulari in abbatem, si ex aliqua bona causa fiat talis postulatio. Hoc dic. secundum lecturam, quae est magis singularis.

One not professed can be postulated as abbot, if such a postulation is made for some good cause. Say this according to the reading, which is more singular.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

Quum monasterium de Pellicia in tuo situm episcopatu, ad eam dissolutionem devenerit, sicut tuarum literarum insinuatio patefecit, quod fratres eiusdem domus observantiam religionis et ordinem abiecerunt, et, bonis eius dilapidatis atque consumptis, ad eligendum sibi abbatem de ipsius ecclesiae gremio non potuerunt hactenus convenire, ad tuae tamen admonitionis et exhortationis instantiam in unum convenientes, in quendam, qui cum fratribus suis in eremo est laudabiliter conversatus, boni testimonii virum unanimiter consenserunt, et eum in abbatem totis desideriis postulantes, eius subiici disciplinis et habitui postulabant. Tu vero postulationi eorum de prudentum et discretorum virorum consilio praebuisti assensum, et humiliter postulasti eandem ordinationem a sede apostolica confirmari. Nos autem petitioni tuae facorem nostrum et assensum liberaliter impertientes ordinationem ipsam, sicut facta est canonice, confirmamus et praesentis scripti patrocinio communimus.

Since the monastery of Pellicia, situated in your bishopric, has come down to such dissolution, as the intimation of your letters laid bare, that the brothers of the same house have cast off the observance of religion and of order, and, its goods squandered and consumed, have not hitherto been able to agree to elect for themselves an abbot from the bosom of that church, yet at the urgency of your admonition and exhortation, coming together into one, they unanimously consented upon a certain man, who with his brothers in the desert has conducted himself laudably, a man of good testimony; and, petitioning him as abbot with all their desires, they were requesting to be subjected to his disciplines and habit. You indeed, with the counsel of prudent and discreet men, gave assent to their petition, and humbly asked that the same ordination be confirmed by the Apostolic See. We, however, freely bestowing our favor and assent to your petition, confirm the ordination itself, as it has been done canonically, and we strengthen it by the patronage of the present writing.

[Super eo vero etc. (cf. c. 1. de confessis II. 18)]

[Concerning that matter indeed, etc. (cf. c. 1. on the confessed 2. 18)]

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Electio debet esse in libertate eligentium, nec valet contraria consuetudo.

The election ought to be in the liberty of the electors, nor is a contrary custom valid.

Idem.

The same.

Quum terra, quae funiculus hereditatis Domini censebatur (Et infra:) Sicut autem ex quarundam literarum tenore pluriumque relatione accepimus, quidam olim in electionibus pravae consuetudinis morbus irrepsit, ut videlicet, quum alicuius praelati electio debet celebrari, conventus, ad quem pertinere dignoscitur, duas personas nominet latenter auribus patriarchae vel principis exprimendas, ut sic illarum alterius eligendae, vel totius electionis penitus irritandae idem patriarcha vel princeps plenariam habeat facultatem. Quia igitur hoc redundat in gravamen et perniciem ecclesiasticae libertatis, praescriptam consuetudinis pravitatem sancimus penitus abolendam, statuentes, ut forma electionis canonicae in omnibus conventualibus ecclesiis observetur, videlicet, ut, quum debet ecclesiae consuli pastoris regimine destitutae, electores in unum locum, in quo fuerit electio celebranda, conveniant, et invocata Spiritus sancti gratia personam solemniter nominent, in qua omnes, vel [maior] pars sanioris consilii potuerint convenire, et ea sine ullius contradictione, dummodo persona idonea fuerit, et electio sine simoniaca pravitate celebrata, ad illius regimen ecclesiae admittatur. Quod si in persona fuerit vel in electionis modo peccatum, tamdiu electores in electione diligentiam inquisitionis apponant, donec secundum praescriptam formam vacanti ecclesiae de persona idonea valeant providere.

When the land, which was reckoned the cord of the Lord’s inheritance (And below:), as moreover from the tenor of certain letters and the report of many we have learned, at some time a disease of depraved custom crept into elections: namely, that, when the election of some prelate ought to be celebrated, the convent, to which it is recognized to pertain, should secretly name two persons, to be whispered into the ears of the patriarch or of the prince, so that the same patriarch or prince might thus have full faculty either of choosing one of them, or of utterly annulling the whole election. Since therefore this redounds to the burden and ruin of ecclesiastical liberty, we decree that the aforesaid depravity of custom be utterly abolished, establishing that the form of canonical election be observed in all conventual churches, namely, that, when a church deprived of a pastor’s governance must be provided for, the electors come together into one place in which the election is to be celebrated, and, the grace of the Holy Spirit invoked, solemnly name a person upon whom all, or the [greater] part of the sounder counsel, shall have been able to agree; and let that person, without anyone’s contradiction—provided the person shall have been suitable, and the election celebrated without simoniacal depravity—be admitted to the governance of that church. But if there shall have been a fault either in the person or in the mode of the election, let the electors apply diligence of inquiry in the election until, according to the prescribed form, they can provide for the vacant church with a suitable person.

Quo facto non prohibemus, quin regis seu patriarchae, qui pro tempore fuerit, requiratur assensus; sed propter hoc ipsam electionem nolumus impediri.

This having been done, we do not forbid that the assent of the king or of the patriarch, who shall be for the time being, be required; but on this account we do not wish the election itself to be impeded.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Per confirmationem electionis non transfertur potestas exercendi ea, quae sunt ordinis. Illa enim transferuntur per consecrationem. Abbas.

By the confirmation of the election the power of exercising those things which are of the order is not transferred. For those are transferred through consecration. Abbot.

Idem.

The same.

Transmissam dudum, sicut insinuare curasti, ad nostram audientiam quaestionem, tua nunc dilectio replicavit. Quaesivisti, quid faciendum sit tibi super eo, quod clerici tuae dioecesis, quum pro suis excessibus suspensionis, vel interdicti, vel excommunicationis sententia percelluntur, parvipendentes eam, dimittunt ecclesias, et transferunt se ad mercimonia laicorum; nonnulli quoque ipsorum habitu clericali postposito vestes induunt laicales, et sicut laici mercatores se turpibus quaestibus implicantes, consimilium sibi laicorum manus associant, et correctionem ecclesiasticam per contemptum eludunt, dicentes, quod potestatem non habeas eos, nisi tibi specialiter apostolica sedes indulserit, corrigendi? Respondemus igitur, quod, si quando tales repereris, si commoniti noluerint a tam turpibus actibus revocari, et de contemptu satisfacientes plenarie ad clericale schema redire, tu eos auctoritate nostra suffultus excommunicationi appellatione cessante subiicias, faciasque eos arctius ab omnibus evitari, donec reatum suum congrua satisfactione diluerint, praesertim si qui eorum in sacris sunt ordinibus constituti.

The question sent long ago to our hearing, as you took care to intimate, your love has now reiterated. You have asked what you should do in regard to this: that the clerics of your diocese, when for their excesses they are struck by the sentence of suspension, or interdict, or excommunication, making light of it, abandon the churches and transfer themselves to the merchandises of laymen; some of them too, setting aside the clerical habit, put on lay garments, and, like lay merchants, entangling themselves in base gains, associate to themselves the bands of laymen like unto them, and, by contempt, evade ecclesiastical correction, saying that you do not have the power of correcting them unless the Apostolic See has specially granted it to you? We therefore answer that, if ever you find such men, if, when warned, they are unwilling to be called back from such base acts, and, making full satisfaction for the contempt, to return to the clerical schema, you, supported by our authority, should subject them to excommunication, appeal ceasing, and should cause them to be more strictly avoided by all until they shall have washed away their guilt by fitting satisfaction, especially if any of them are constituted in sacred orders.

Etiam haec sine speciali mandato exsequi posses, quum ex quo electionis tuae confirmationem accepisti, de talibus et consimilibus, praeter ea, quae maioris inquisitionis discussionem exigunt, et ministerium consecrationis desiderant, quod iustum est et ecclesiasticae convenit utilitati statuendi habeas liberam facultatem.

You could also execute these without a special mandate, since from the time you received the confirmation of your election, in matters such as these and the like—apart from those which require the discussion of a greater inquisition and desire the ministry of consecration—you have the free faculty of establishing what is just and accords with ecclesiastical utility.

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Qui electioni de se factae renunciat appellare nequit ad impediendam electionem alterius. Et electio, quae est a suspensis celebrata, non tenet.

He who renounces the election made concerning himself cannot appeal to impede the election of another. And an election which has been celebrated by those who are suspended does not hold.

Innocentius III. de Cella sancti Petri et Mutinensi Abbatibus.

Innocent III. To the Abbots of Cella of St. Peter and of Modena.

Quum inter dilectum filium R. seniorem, et R. iuniorem super abbatia Scaphusensi quaestio verteretur, eis in nostra praesentia constitutis dilectos filios G. SS. Cosmae et Damiani, et G. S. Mariae in Aquiro diaconos cardinales dedimus auditores, in quorum praesentia [pro R. seniore] fuerunt proposita [quae sequuntur. Quod quum H., quondam abbas ipsius coenobii onus regiminis invito capitulo suo spontanee resignasset, et ab obedientia sua monachos absolvisset, ipsi praedictum R. seniorem, etiam dicto H. consentiente, sibique obediente cum aliis, in abbatem unanimiter elegerunt. Postea vero electus dioecesano episcopo praesentatus, munus ab eo benedictionis accepit, ecclesiam ipsam per biennium et amplius sicut abbas proprius administrans.

Since between the beloved son R. the elder and R. the younger a dispute was pending over the abbacy of Scaphusense, with them set in our presence we appointed as auditors the beloved sons G., cardinal deacons of SS. Cosmas and Damian, and G., cardinal deacon of S. Mary in Aquiro, in whose presence [on behalf of R. the elder] there were proposed [the following. That when H., formerly abbot of that coenobium, had spontaneously resigned the burden of governance with his chapter unwilling, and had absolved the monks from his obedience, they unanimously elected the aforesaid R. the elder—H. himself also consenting and being obedient to him with the others—as abbot. Afterwards indeed, the elect having been presented to the diocesan bishop, he received from him the gift of benediction, administering that same church for two years and more as its proper abbot.

Verum quoniam moniales S. Agnetis eiusdem villae, quae peccandi materiam iunioribus monachis ministrabant, arctiori custodiae mancipavit, exinde occasione inventa iuvenes monachi contra ipsum alios concitarunt, tanquam praedicti H. resignatio minus canonica exstitisset. Quod audiens episcopus antedictus ad locum accessit, causam dissensionis requirens, et praedictum H. paterne redarguens, tanquam odii fomitem in ecclesia seminasset, accepit ab eo, quod per ipsum talia non fiebant. Et quum quidam de monachis ipso episcopo praesente se dicerent ab obedientia praefati H. nullatenus absolutos, idem H. quod eos absolverat est professus.

But because the nuns of St. Agnes of the same village, who were supplying the younger monks with material for sin, he consigned to a stricter custody, thereafter, an occasion having been found, the young monks stirred up others against him, as though the resignation of the aforesaid H. had been less canonical. Hearing this, the aforesaid bishop came to the place, seeking the cause of the dissension, and paternally reproving the aforesaid H., as though he had sown the tinder of hatred in the church, he received from him that such things were not being done by him. And when certain of the monks, the bishop himself being present, said that they were by no means absolved from the obedience of the aforesaid H., the same H. declared that he had absolved them.

Et ut omnem a se suspicionis materiam amoveret, cum iureiurando vehementer asseruit coram episcopo antedicto, quod neque illam nec aliam habere vellet ulterius abbatiam. Monachi vero post recessum episcopi ad artes solitas nihilominus recurrentes, coram dicto episcopo et capitulo Constantiensi adversus eundem R. controversiam agitarunt, tanquam minus canonice dictus H. dimiserit abbatiam. Quum dictus R. paratus esset de iustitia sua in continenti probare, monachi defectum causae suae videntes, in nullo gravati sedem apostolicam appellarunt, et per literas infra terminum appellationis per subreptionem obtentas, contra ipsum R. per nuncios appellantem iniqua sententia promulgata, eius fuit adversarius restitutus.

And that he might remove from himself every matter of suspicion, he most strongly asserted on oath before the aforesaid bishop that he wished to hold neither that abbacy nor any other thereafter. The monks, however, after the bishop’s departure, nevertheless reverting to their accustomed arts, prosecuted a controversy before the said bishop and the Chapter of Constance against the same R., as though the said H. had resigned the abbacy less canonically. When the said R. was prepared to prove his right forthwith, the monks, seeing the defect of their cause, being in no way aggrieved, appealed to the Apostolic See; and by letters obtained by subreption within the term of the appeal, an unjust sentence having been promulgated against that R., appealing by messengers, his adversary was restored.

Ipse vero R. appellationem interpositam per nuncium prosequens, et termino constituto commissionis literas ad certos iudices impetravit, ut quod occasione prioris commissionis contra eum iudicatum fuerat ad statum debitum revocato, et ei restituerent abbatiam, et a monachis sibi facerent debitam reverentiam exhiberi. Sed monachis obstinatis et sibi obedire nolentibus], ambae partes ad sedem apostolicam accesserunt, quibus a bonae memoriae Coelestino Papa praedecessore nostro nos ipsi, dum in minori eramus officio constituti, et dilectus filius noster Ioannes tt. S. Stephani presbyter cardinalis, dati fuimus auditores. Et quum utrimque coram nobis esset diutius allegatum, et eidem praedecessori nostro per nos esset processus negotii declaratus, ipse bonae memoriae Coelestinus praedecessor noster praedictum R. seniorem, sententiam cum instantia postulantem, ad componendum coegit invitum; et sic abbatiae renuncians, de manu eius custodiam et etiam prioratum recepit, ab eo, dum viveret, sine quaestione qualibet possidendos.

But R. himself, prosecuting the interposed appeal through a messenger, and, a term having been set, obtained letters of commission to certain judges, that what had been judged against him on the occasion of the prior commission, being recalled to its due state, they should restore to him the abbacy, and should cause due reverence to be exhibited to him by the monks. But the monks being obstinate and unwilling to obey him], both parties came to the Apostolic See, for whom, by Celestine of good memory, our predecessor, we ourselves—while we were established in a lesser office—and our beloved son John, cardinal presbyter of the title of St. Stephen, were appointed auditors. And when on either side it had been argued at length before us, and the progress of the case had been made clear by us to that same predecessor of ours, he, Celestine of good memory, our predecessor, constrained the aforesaid senior R., who was demanding sentence with urgency, unwilling, to come to a composition; and thus, renouncing the abbacy, he received from his hand the custody and also the priorate, to be possessed by him, while he lived, without any question whatsoever.

Cui ordinationi licet consentiret invitus, domum tamen reversus, adversariis compositionem ipsam nolentibus observare, non potuit quae [sibi] concessa sunt obtinere, quin potius in eum, quod deterius est, manus iniecerunt postea violentas. Sed adiutus ab illius loci hominibus et monachorum manus evadens, ad appellationis subsidium convolavit. Interim vero dilectus filius noster P. S. Mariae in Via lata diaconus cardinalis apostolicae sedis legatus, ad partes illas accedens, pro iam dictis et aliis multis excessibus et suspendit monachos, et monasterium interdixit.

Although he consented unwillingly to that arrangement, yet, having returned home, since the adversaries were unwilling to observe the composition itself, he could not obtain the things that had been granted [to him],
nay rather, what is worse, afterwards they laid violent hands upon him. But, aided by the men of that place and escaping the hands of the monks, he fled to the succor of an appeal. Meanwhile our beloved son P., deacon cardinal of St. Mary in Via lata, legate of the apostolic see, coming to those parts, on account of the aforesaid and many other excesses both suspended the monks and interdicted the monastery.

Ipsi vero contempta sententia cardinalis divina promptius quam antea celebrarunt, et in hac suspensione praedictus adversarius eius de medio est sublatus. Quo comperto ad ecclesiam venit, et, quum vellet praedictae compositioni parere, parte altera hoc nolente, ne ad electionem abbatis procederetur, quousque quaestio inter eos finiretur, obicem provocationis obiecit; sed monachi per omnia contumaces, et dictum R. iuniorem pariter eligentes, ipsum benedicendum dioecesano episcopo praesentarunt, qui post appellationem interpositam benedixit eum, et in ecclesia interdicta. [Unde idem R. iterato ad sedem apostolicam accedens, a nobis literas impetravit, ut quod post appellationem legitime interpositam perperam fuerat a monachis attentatum ad statum debitum revocato, si constaret a suspensis et interdictis electionem factam fuisse, denunciarent eam penitus non tenere, super restitutione vero ipsius R. senioris et aliis, quae utrinque ducerent proponenda, statuerent, appellatione remota, quod ordo posceret rationis.

Ipsi, however, the sentence of the cardinal having been despised, celebrated the divine services more promptly than before; and during this suspension the aforesaid adversary of his was removed from the midst. Learning this, he came to the church, and, when he wished to obey the aforesaid composition, the other party being unwilling, he interposed the obstacle of a provocation (appeal), lest they proceed to the election of an abbot until the question between them should be ended; but the monks, in all things contumacious, and likewise choosing the said R. the younger, presented him to the diocesan bishop to be blessed, who, after an appeal had been interposed, blessed him—and in a church under interdict. [Whence the same R., approaching the apostolic see again, obtained letters from us, that, what had been wrongly attempted by the monks after an appeal had been lawfully interposed, being recalled to its due state, if it should be established that the election had been made by those suspended and interdicted, they should declare it to hold not at all; but concerning the restitution of R. the elder himself, and other matters which on either side they might deem ought to be proposed, they should determine, the appeal being removed, what the order of reason required.]

Ceterum iudices delegati literis his receptis, partes ad suam praesentiam citaverunt, et quum monachi per suggestionem falsi probare vellent literas impetratas, iudicibus nolentibus ipsarum probationem recipere, sedem apostolicam appellarunt. Delegati vero, quia remota erat in literis appellatio, in causa nihilominus procedentes, quum per depositiones testium eis de veritate negotii constitisset, pro saepedicto R. seniore sententiam protulerunt, adiudicantes ei ecclesiam memoratam. Petebat itaque quod factum erat ex delegatione apostolicae sedis per nos obtinere debitam firmitatem, ut repressa contumacia monachorum pacifica ipsius abbatiae possessione gauderet.

Moreover the delegated judges, these letters having been received, cited the parties to their presence; and when the monks wished to prove, by a suggestion of falsity (suggestio falsi), that the letters had been obtained, the judges being unwilling to receive proof thereof, they appealed to the apostolic see. The delegates, however, because appeal had been removed in the letters, nevertheless proceeding in the cause, when by the depositions of witnesses the truth of the business had been established to them, delivered sentence for the oft-mentioned R. the elder, adjudging to him the aforesaid church. He therefore sought that what had been done by delegation of the apostolic see might obtain due firmness through us, so that, the contumacy of the monks being repressed, he might rejoice in the peaceful possession of that abbacy.

Ceterum contra eundem R. seniorem fuit ex parte altera taliter allegatum, quod, quum dictus H. quondam abbas minus legitime resignasset, et monachi de electione tractarent, senior R. fraude adhibita procuravit, quod, quum vesperae cantarentur, et die sequenti esset electio celebranda, homines burgi ad ecclesiam accedentes ipsum R. fere omnibus monachis reclamantibus ibidem per violentiam intruserunt, Monachi vero postea cognoscentes renunciationem praefati H. minime tenuisse, pariterque pensantes, quod sub eius conversatione laudabili monasterium proficere posset, ipsum tanquam abbatem proprium requirebant. Unde factum est, quod post multas altercationes et commissiones factas tandem de utriusque partis assensu commissio est obtenta, quod, si de informi resignatione H. et inutili substitutione R. senioris constaret iudicibus delegatis, R. remoto, saepe dicto H. restituerent abbatiam, et ita fuit effectui mancipatum. Post haec ipso R. nihilominus murmurante, ambo pariter ad praedecessoris nostri praesentiam accesserunt, qui, sicut iam praemisimus, nos et praefatum presbyterum cardinalem eis tribuit auditores, et tandem causa diutius actitata per eundem praedecessorem nostrum de utriusque partis assensu fuit compositio taliter celebrata, quod H. abbatiam, R. vero prioratum et custodiam obtineret, propter quod ipsi H. obedientiam promisit.

Moreover, against that same R. the elder it was thus alleged by the other side, that, when the said H., once abbot, had resigned less legitimately, and the monks were treating of the election, the elder R., fraud being employed, contrived that, when vespers were being sung, and on the following day the election was to be celebrated, men of the borough, approaching the church, with almost all the monks protesting, there by violence intruded that R. But the monks afterwards, coming to know that the renunciation of the aforesaid H. had by no means held, and likewise considering that under his laudable conversation the monastery could profit, were requiring him as their proper abbot. Whence it happened that, after many altercations and commissions made, at length by the assent of both parties a commission was obtained, that, if it should be established before the delegated judges concerning the ill‑formed resignation of H. and the unprofitable substitution of R. the elder, with R. removed, they should restore the abbey to the oft‑said H., and thus it was consigned to effect. After these things, with R. himself nevertheless murmuring, both together approached the presence of our predecessor, who, as we have already premised, appointed us and the aforesaid presbyter cardinal to them as auditors; and at length, the case having been acted for a longer time, through that same our predecessor, by the assent of either party, a composition was thus celebrated, that H. should obtain the abbey, but R. indeed the priory and custody, for which reason he promised obedience to H. himself.

Sic ergo eis reversis ad propria, praefatam compositionem idem R. coram dioecesano episcopo approbavit. Sed ab ipso abbate postea requisitus tertio, si custodiam et prioratum vellet habere, post trinam citationem veniens dixit, quod non per eum, sed per Romanum Pontificem volebat habere praemissa, unde nullam obedientiam ei voluit exhibere. Recedens igitur absque abbatis licentia, quum extra monasterium moram faceret longiorem, ab ipso H. de fratrum consilio fuit excommunicationis vinculo innodatus; et quum per longum tempus non rediret ad monasterium, abbas dicta officia, consulentibus fratribus, aliis assignavit, qui, quamdiu abbas vixit, ea pacifice tenuerunt.

Thus, therefore, when they had returned to their own places, the aforesaid composition the same R. approved before the diocesan bishop. But, being thereafter asked for the third time by the abbot himself whether he wished to have the custody and the priorate, coming after a triple citation he said that he wished to have the aforesaid not through him, but through the Roman Pontiff; hence he was willing to exhibit no obedience to him. Departing, therefore, without the abbot’s license, when he made a longer stay outside the monastery, by that same H., on the counsel of the brothers, he was bound with the bond of excommunication; and when for a long time he did not return to the monastery, the abbot, with the brothers advising, assigned the said offices to others, who, so long as the abbot lived, held them peacefully.

Abbate vero defuncto, fratres convenerunt in unum, nonnullis abbatibus et aliis viris religiosis praesentibus, qui ad defuncti convenerant sepulturam, et R. iuniorem, seniore absente, in abbatem unanimiter elegerunt, quem praesentatum sibi dioecesanus episcopus confirmavit et benedixit. Consequenter vero senior R. ad praesentiam nostram accedens, literas ad remotos per diaetas quatuor iudices et suspectos monachis per mendacium impetravit, ad quos pars monachorum ante aliquam citationem accedens, copia commissionis obtenta, literas per falsi suggestionem proposuit impetratas pro eo, quod dicebatur in eis, compositionem sibi non fuisse servatam, monasterium interdictum, et se appellasse prius, quam R. iunior electus fuerit in abbatem, quae falsa penitus asserebat. Tacuit etiam, se excommunicatum ab hoc abbate defuncto, et alia quaedam, quibus expressis literas ipsas nullatenus impetrasset.

With the abbot indeed deceased, the brothers convened into one, with some abbots and other religious men present, who had come together for the burial of the deceased; and they unanimously elected R. the younger, the elder being absent, as abbot, whom, when presented to him, the diocesan bishop confirmed and blessed. Consequently the elder R., coming into our presence, procured by a lie letters to judges remote by four day-stages (diaetae) and suspect to the monks; to whom a party of the monks, approaching before any citation and having obtained a copy of the commission, set forth that the letters had been procured by false suggestion, on the ground that it was said in them that the composition had not been observed toward him, that the monastery was interdicted, and that he had appealed before R. the younger had been elected abbot—claims which they asserted were utterly false. He also kept silent that he had been excommunicated by this now-deceased abbot, and certain other things, which, if expressed, he would by no means have obtained those letters.

Quumque omnia, quae praemisimus, sufficienter probare vellent, et iudices eorum probationes recipere, tanquam demandatum eis non fuerit, recusarent, ipsi monachi ante ingressum iudicii appellarunt, sicut ex depositionibus testium est probatum. Delegati vero nihilominus procedentes, et recipientes testes partis adversae, seniorem R. instituendum sententialiter decreverunt, quorum factum, tanquam iniquum, irritari a nobis monachi suppliciter postulabant.] Quum autem quae praemissa sunt et alia quaedam praefati cardinales nobis et fratribus nostris prudenter et fideliter retulissent, Nos attendentes, quod ex consensu compositionis receptae, quam praedecessor noster etiam confirmaverat, ius, si quod sibi competierat, R. senior amisisset, ac per hoc, ne monachi ad electionem procederent, de iure minime appellare potuisset, quum, nisi quorum interest, audiri non soleant appellantes, de consilio fratrum nostrorum appellationem illam dicimus legitimam non fuisse. Unde per eam electio non potuit impediri.

And when they wished sufficiently to prove all the things which we have set forth above, and the judges refused to receive their proofs, as though it had not been committed to them, the monks themselves, before the ingress of judgment, appealed, as has been proved from the depositions of the witnesses. Nevertheless the delegates, proceeding notwithstanding and receiving the witnesses of the adverse party, decreed by sentence that the elder R. be instituted; whose deed, as iniquitous, the monks were humbly asking to be annulled by us.] But when the aforesaid cardinals prudently and faithfully reported to us and to our brothers the things set forth and certain others, We, considering that from the consent to the composition received, which our predecessor had also confirmed, the right, if any had pertained to him, the elder R. had lost, and thereby that he could by right in no way have appealed in order that the monks might not proceed to election, since appellants are not wont to be heard unless they are those whose interest it is, by the counsel of our brothers say that that appeal was not legitimate. Whence by it the election could not be impeded.

[Quia vero constitit nobis, monachos ante litis exordium rationabiliter appellasse pro eo, quod super falsi suggestione probationem nolebant admittere delegati, et per consequentiam eo ipso, quod bene appellatum fuerat, iurisdictionem iudicum exspirasse, quicquid ab eis est perperam attentatum, vel de recipiendis ante litem contestatam testibus, vel de sententia proferenda denunciamus sententialiter non tenere.] Sane quamvis dilecti filii P. praepositus et capitulum Constantiense de interdicto, quod cardinalis posuerat, in suis literis inseruerint, quia tamen per id, quod R. iuniori dioecesanus episcopus munus benedictionis impendit, ei videtur quod praemisimus obviare, unde vel scriptura facto, vel factum scripturae praeiudicat, nec probatum fuit, licet obiectum, quod ab interdictis electio fuerit celebrata, ipsam non potuimus irritare, praesertim quum contra personam electi nihil fuerit intentatum. Ideoque causam ipsam sub ea forma vobis duximus de consensu partium committendam, ut, si constiterit, quod electio fuerit facta a suspensis, ea omnino cassata ipsi monasterio, post satisfactionem condignam, suspensionis et interdicti sententia relaxata, de persona idonea consulatur. Alioquin ne utilitas monasterii retardetur, praemissam electionem per vos appellatione remota volumus confirmari, et R. iuniorem abbatiae pacifica possessione gaudere, [aliam vero etc.

[Because indeed it has been established to us that the monks, before the outset of the suit, reasonably appealed, for the reason that the delegates were unwilling to admit proof upon the suggestion of falsity, and consequently, by that very fact, because it had been well appealed, the jurisdiction of the judges expired, whatever was wrongly attempted by them, either concerning the receiving of witnesses before the suit was contested, or concerning the pronouncing of sentence, we by sentence denounce not to hold.] Truly, although our beloved sons P., the provost, and the Constance chapter inserted in their letters concerning the interdict which the cardinal had imposed, yet because by the fact that the diocesan bishop bestowed the munus of benediction upon R. the younger, that seems to run counter to what we have set forth above—whence either the writing prejudices the fact, or the fact prejudices the writing—and it was not proved, although alleged, that the election had been celebrated by those under interdict, we were not able to annul it, especially since nothing had been directed against the person of the elect. Therefore we have deemed that the case itself should be committed to you, with the consent of the parties, under this form: that, if it be established that the election was made by those suspended, with it altogether quashed, after condign satisfaction, and the sentence of suspension and interdict relaxed, counsel be taken for the monastery itself concerning a suitable person. Otherwise, lest the utility of the monastery be delayed, we will that the aforesaid election be confirmed by you, the appeal being removed, and that R. the younger enjoy the peaceful possession of the abbacy, [as to another etc.

Dat. Later. VII.

Given at the Lateran, 7.

Id. Apr. 1199.]

The Ides of April, 1199.]

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Si electus non habet sufficientem scientiam, vel ante confirmationem administrat, eius electio cassari debet.

If the elected does not have sufficient knowledge, or administers before confirmation, his election ought to be quashed.

Idem Capitulo Pennensi.

The same to the Chapter of Penne.

Qualiter post obitum bonae memoriae Pennensis episcopi ecclesia vestra vacante, receptis prius super electione facienda literis nostris, primicerium vestrum vobis elegeritis in pastorem, vos tanquam auctores electionis ipsius plenius cognovistis. Verum quoniam electus a vobis ante confirmationem obtentam administrationi episcopatus se irreverenter immiscuit, recipiendo tam a clericis quam a laicis iuramenta, non attendens, quod secundum Apostolum nemo debet sibi honorem assumere, sed qui vocatur a Deo tanquam Aaron, praecipue quia nec donum scientiae pontifici conveniens fuerat assecutus, quum iuxta verbum dominicum: "Qui fecerit et docuerit magnus vocetur in regno coelorum," postquam nobis praesentastis eundem electum, sufficienti examinatione praemissa, communicato fratrum consilio, electionem de ipso factam exigente iustitia duximus irritandam, quicquid ex ea et ob eam factum est denunciantes penitus non tenere. [Ne autem gregi etc.

Whereas, after the death of the bishop of Penne of good memory, your church being vacant, and our letters having first been received concerning the election to be made, you chose your primicerius for yourselves as pastor, as the authors of that election you became more fully aware. But since the one elected by you, before confirmation had been obtained, irreverently intruded himself into the administration of the episcopate, by receiving oaths both from clerics and from laity, not attending to the fact that, according to the Apostle, no one ought to assume honor to himself, but he who is called by God like Aaron, especially because he had not even attained the gift of knowledge befitting a pontiff, since, according to the Lord’s word: "He who shall do and shall teach shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens," after you presented to us the same elect, with sufficient examination premised, the counsel of the brethren having been taken, justice requiring it, we have deemed the election made of him to be annulled, declaring that whatever has been done from it and on account of it does not hold at all. [Lest, however, the flock etc.

Dat. Lat. XI. Kal.

Given at the Lateran, 11 days before the Kalends.

Oct. 1199.]

CAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER 18.

Si vocantur ad electionem non vocandi, valet electio facta eis non exspectatis. H. dic. secundum lecturam communem.

If, for the election, those not-to-be-called are called, the election made without waiting for them is valid. H. says this according to the common reading.

Idem Capitulo Capuano.

The same to the Capuan Chapter.

Quum inter universas metropoles Capuana sit apostolicae sedi vicinior, ad provisionem ipsius specialius adspiramus, talem ipsi personam praefigi cupientes, quae sicut alios metropolitanos loci vicinitate, sic et devotionis affectu praecellat, per quam et ipsa metropolis tam in spiritualibus quam in temporalibus optatum suscipiat incrementum. Intelleximus autem per dilectos filios I. et F. canonicos vestros, et per literas, quas ad sedem apostolicam detulerunt, quod ad decanum et alios canonicos vestros Panormi manentes, quum ex eorum parte fuisset vobis per literas intimatum, ut ecclesiae Capuanae damna pensantes sic tractaretis super electione substituendi pastorem, quod nullum deberetis in eorum absentia nominare, quendam socium vestrum cum literis destinastis, duodecim dierum terminum assignantes, infra quem post receptionem literarum vestrarum iter arriperent redeundi, quamvis ecclesiastica consuetudo non exigat, ut ad electionem pastoris canonici tam remoti vocentur, et illi praecipue, qui longe antequam vos metropolitani vestri obitum praesentialiter cognoverunt, quorum aliqui post eius decessum ad Capuanam ecclesiam sunt reversi. Quia vero mora longior est in electionibus valde suspecta, immo saepe damnosa, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus atque praecipimus, quatenus invocata Spiritus sancti gratia personam idoneam per electionem canonicam concorditer assumatis ad regimen Capuanae ecclesiae, consequenter ad audientiam nostram nuncios idoneos transmissuri, per quos a nobis vice regia postuletis assensum, et apostolicae confirmationis gratiam requiratis, attentius provisuri ut eo discretionis et caritatis studio procedatis, quod nec in electione vitium, nec in electo defectus valeat inveniri.

Since among all the metropolises Capua is nearer to the Apostolic See, we aspire with more special provision for it, desiring that such a person be set at its head as shall, just as he excels other metropolitans by nearness of place, so also by affection of devotion, through whom the metropolis itself may receive the desired increase both in spirituals and in temporals. We have learned, moreover, through our beloved sons I. and F., your canons, and through the letters which they brought to the Apostolic See, that to the dean and your other canons staying at Palermo—when on their part it had been intimated to you by letters that, weighing the losses of the church of Capua, you should so deal regarding the election of a pastor to be substituted that you ought to name no one in their absence—you sent a certain associate of yours with letters, assigning a term of twelve days, within which, after the reception of your letters, they should take up the journey of returning, although ecclesiastical custom does not require that canons so remote be called to the election of a pastor, and especially those who long before you learned in person of your metropolitan’s decease, some of whom, after his death, have returned to the church of Capua. But since a longer delay in elections is very suspect, indeed often harmful, we command and strictly enjoin upon your discretion by apostolic writings that, the grace of the Holy Spirit invoked, you unanimously assume by canonical election a suitable person for the governance of the church of Capua, and thereafter send suitable envoys to our audience, through whom you may request from us, in the royal stead, assent, and seek the grace of apostolic confirmation, taking more attentive care to proceed with such zeal of discretion and charity that neither in the election may a fault, nor in the elect a defect, be found.

Alioquin et factum electionis revocaremus in irritum, et personas eligentium puniremus.

Otherwise we would revoke the act of the election into nullity, and we would punish the persons of the electors.

CAP. XIX.

CHAPTER 19.

Non debet inspici, an post appellationem, sed an contra fuerit electio celebrata. Et penes vocantes, quibus competit vocandi potestas, remanet ius eligendi, si vocati venire contemnunt. Et ad officium confirmatoris spectat examinare electum, etiam nemine opponente.

It ought not to be inspected whether after an appeal, but whether the election was celebrated contrary to it. And with the summoners, to whom the power of calling belongs, the right of electing remains, if those called disdain to come. And it pertains to the office of the confirmer to examine the elected person, even with no one opposing.

Et nisi electus doceatur, legitimae aetatis et literaturae, habetur pro non legitime electo.

And unless the elect is shown to be of legitimate age and of letters, he is held as not legitimately elected.

Idem Archi. et Capitulo Capuano.

The same to the Archbishop and the Chapter of Capua.

Quum nobis olim de obitu [bonae memoriae archiepiscopi Capuani tam per vestras literas quam nuncios constitisset, volentes, prout officii nostri sollicitudo deposcit, in pastorem provideri celerius ecclesiae viduatae, vobis dedimus in mandatis, ut electionem canonicam de persona idonea faceretis, per quam in spiritualibus et temporalibus Capuana ecclesia posset congrue gubernari. Vos autem mandatum nostrum suscipientes humiliter et devote, statuto die in metropolitana ecclesia convenistis, et, quum ad tractandum de facienda electione in capitulo sederetis, et tu, fili archidiacone, hymnum ad invocandam Spiritus sancti gratiam incepisses, dilectus filius M. archidiaconus Theatinus, canonicus Capuanus, silentium indicens, sic ait: "Dominus Papa ut faceremus canonicam electionem praecepit, et ego ne fiat, nisi canonica, interdico, et ad ipsum vocem appellationis emitto." Quumque a quibusdam vestrum quaesitum fuisset ab archidiacono memorato, quid intelligeret per canonicam electionem, respondit, ut secundum decreta canonica nullus in episcopum de aliena eligeretur ecclesia, dum in propria posset idoneus inveniri. Et sic aliquantulo facto tumultu, quum tu, fili archidiacone, hymnum iterum incepisses, ipse archidiaconus Theatinus cum quibusdam complicibus suis chorum exivit, et coepit in quodam angulo ecclesiae commorari, et vos hymnum in choro solenniter complevistis.

When it had formerly been established for us concerning the death [of the archbishop of Capua of good memory, as much through your letters as through messengers], wishing, as the solicitude of our office demands, that provision be made more swiftly with a pastor for the widowed church, we gave you instructions to make a canonical election of a suitable person, through which in spirituals and temporals the Capuan church might be suitably governed. But you, humbly and devoutly receiving our mandate, on the appointed day assembled in the metropolitan church, and, when you were sitting in chapter to discuss making the election, and you, son archdeacon, had begun the hymn to invoke the grace of the Holy Spirit, the beloved son M., the archdeacon of Teate, a Capuan canon, enjoining silence, thus said: "The Lord Pope has ordered that we make a canonical election, and I forbid that it be done unless canonical, and I lodge an appeal to him." And when by some of you it had been asked of the aforesaid archdeacon what he understood by canonical election, he replied, that according to the canonical decrees no one should be elected as bishop from another church, while in his own a suitable person could be found. And thus, a little commotion having arisen, when you, son archdeacon, had begun the hymn again, that archdeacon of Teate, with certain of his accomplices, left the choir and began to remain in a certain corner of the church, and you completed the hymn solemnly in the choir.

Sed quum post invocatam Spiritus sancti gratiam foret de electione tractandum, unum presbyterum, et unum diaconum, et alium acolythum vicem gerentem subdiaconi, qui etiam est cancellarius ecclesiae Capuanae, ut vota singulorum seriatim perquirerent, elegistis. Qui universorum perquirentes diligentius voluntates, vos omnes, qui ad eligendum in capitulo remansistis, invenerunt in electione concordes, dilectum filium R. subdiaconum et capellanum nostrum, filium dilecti filii nobilis viri P. comitis Celanensis, unanimiter nominantes. Demum vero praedictum archidiaconum, et qui cum eo exierant, per quosdam de vestris admonere curastis, ut ad electionem accederent faciendam.

But when, after the grace of the Holy Spirit had been invoked, there was to be deliberation about the election, you chose one presbyter, and one deacon, and another acolyte acting in the stead of a subdeacon, who is also chancellor of the Church of Capua, that they might inquire serially into the votes of each. They, more diligently investigating the wishes of all, found you all, who had remained in the chapter to elect, to be concordant in the election, unanimously naming the beloved son R., our subdeacon and chaplain, son of the beloved son, the noble man P., count of Celano. At length indeed you took care to admonish, through certain of your own, the aforesaid archdeacon and those who had gone out with him, that they should come to proceed with the making of the election.

Sed quum ipsi venire penitus recusassent, et diceret idem archidiaconus, quod non ei feceratis tantum honoris et gratiae quod vobiscum vellet in electione facienda persistere, vos publicata electione vestra cantastis "Te Deum laudamus," et pulsari fecistis cum solennitate companas, ut quod per vos factum fuerat innotesceret civitati. Ad quarum sonitum quum universus populus ad ecclesiam advenissent, et audissent, qualiter a vobis electio fuerat celebrata, factum vestrum communiter approbarunt; et quidam eorum, ut archidiaconum et alios, qui ab electione discordabant, ad concordiam revocarent, multipliciter institerunt. Verum ipse archidiaconus, ut proponitur, se tunc ipsi electioni minime consentire, sed in nostra praesentia suum assensum ipsi velle praestare respondit, quod etiam, sicut dicitur, saepe ac saepius in multorum praesentia replicavit.

But when they themselves had altogether refused to come, and that same archdeacon said that you had not shown him so much honor and favor that he would wish to persist with you in making the election, you, your election having been made public, sang "Te Deum laudamus," and caused the bells to be rung with solemnity, so that what had been done by you might be made known to the city. At the sound of which, when all the people had come to the church and had heard how by you the election had been celebrated, they collectively approved your deed; and certain of them pressed in many ways that they might recall the archdeacon and others who were at variance with the election to concord. But the archdeacon himself, as is set forth, replied that he did not at that time in the least consent to that election, but that he wished to render his assent to it in our presence, which also, as it is said, he repeated again and again in the presence of many.

Tu vero, fili archidiacone, cum multis de canonicis Capuanis decretum electionis afferens, eligentium subscriptionibus roboratum, ad nostram praesentiam accessisti, et, quum apud nos fuissetis aliquamdiu commorati, tres canonici Capuara pro parte adversa post aliquot dies nostro se conspectui praesentarunt. Vobis igitur et ipsis in nostra et fratrum nostrorum praesentia constitutis, utrique partium praecepimus dicere veritatem, et quantum quidem erat in narratione facti usque ad exitum archidiaconi praedicti de choro, neutra partium discordabat. Dicebant tamen clerici antedicti, quod multi, qui exierant cum archidiacono, minis et terroribus fuerant inducti electioni a vobis postmodum factae consentire.

You indeed, son Archdeacon, bringing with many of the Capuan canons the decree of the election, strengthened by the subscriptions of the electors, came into our presence; and, when you had sojourned with us for some time, three canons of Capua, for the adverse party, after several days presented themselves to our sight. Therefore, with you and them set in our presence and in that of our brothers, we commanded both parties to speak the truth; and, so far as it was in the narration of the fact up to the exit of the aforesaid archdeacon from the choir, neither party was at discord. The aforesaid clerics, however, said that many who had gone out with the archdeacon had been induced by menaces and terrors to consent to the election afterwards made by you.

Quumque tam a vobis quam clericis illis quaesiverimus diligenter, quot erant clerici Capuani, qui electioni debuerant interresse, inventi non fuistis in responsione discordes, sed tam vos quam ipsi certum super hoc numerum designastis. Et quum quaereremus sollicite, quot exierant cum archidiacono Theatino, quum appellationem opposuit, interpositae appellationi faventes, licet in hoc a vobis praefati tres clerici discordarent, quod scilicet XII. vel XIII.

And when we had inquired diligently both of you and those clerics, how many Capuan clerics there were who ought to have been present at the election, you were found not to be discordant in your answer, but both you and they designated a fixed number on this point. And when we asked carefully how many had gone out with the Theatine archdeacon when he lodged the appeal, favoring the appeal that had been interposed, although in this the aforesaid three clerics disagreed with you—namely, that 12 or 13.

ad plus de canonicis ab electione facta proponerent dissentire, et vos eos esse V. aut VI. solummodo diceretis, secundum tamen expressum a vobis et ipsis canonicorum numerum tres partes et amplius erant in electione concordes, si etiam praedictorum clericorum assertio vera esset, quod scilicet XIII. canonici dissentirent. Quamquam autem, ut praediximus, diligenter inquisivimus publice veritatem, ne tamen aliqua videremur omittere, de quibus fides nobis erat plenior exhibenda, per quosdam de fratribus nostris singulatim vos et ipsos clericos examinari praecepimus, ut quisque vestrum coram ipsis plenius et securius exponeret veritatem; qui non aliud, quam ante propositum fuerat, invenerunt.

that they were proposing that more of the canons dissented from the election that had been made, and you asserted that they were only 5 or 6; nevertheless, according to the number of canons specified by you and by them, three parts and more were in concord in the election, even if the assertion of the aforesaid clerics were true, namely that 13 canons dissented. And although, as we have said before, we diligently inquired publicly into the truth, nevertheless, lest we should seem to omit any matters in which fuller credence ought to be exhibited to us, through certain of our brothers we ordered that you and those clerics be examined individually, so that each of you might set forth the truth before them more fully and more securely; and they found nothing other than what had been proposed before.

Interrogati vero clerici antedicti, qui quosdam canonicorum dixerant minis et terroribus ad consentiendum inductos, si viderunt aliquibus quamlibet coactionem inferri, taliter responderunt, quod post factam electionem audiverunt quosdam de canonicis aliis comminantes et dicentes: "De civitate trecenti vocentur armati, et tunc apparebit, quis electioni nostrae noluerit consentire." Sed licet hoc dictum fuerit, non viderunt tamen propter hoc cum armis aliquem venientem, vel ipsis coactionem aliquam intulisse.] Quum autem ex utriusque partis assertione constaret, interpositam fuisse appellationem canonicam, quando ne fieret electio, nisi canonica, secundum mandati nostri tenorem, ad nostram fuit audientiam appellatum, videri poterat, quod post eam medio tempore nihil debuit innovari, unde talis electio iudicanda erat irrita et inanis, utpote post appellationem canonice interpositam attentata. Sed contra, quum appellatum fuisset, non ut nulla electio fieret, sed ut fieret canonica, si factum electionis canonice fuerit subsecutum, non utique contra formam appellationis huiusmodi, sed magis secundum eam videbatur esse processum, et ideo, licet post appellationem, non tamen contra eandem fuit electio celebrata, propter quod non erat aliquatenus irritanda. Nam quum duae partes et amplius electioni consenserint et consentiant, licet cautum reperiatur in canone, ut tunc alter de altera eligatur ecclesia, quum nullus in propria fuerit repertus idoneus, quia tamen hoc in favorem introductum est clericorum, et cuique licet renunciare iuri, quod pro se noscitur introductum, vos, qui duae partes eratis et amplius, quum quod duae partes capituli faciunt totum facere videatur, in hac parte iuri, quod pro vobis facere videbatur, renunciare potuistis, et electionem de persona alterius ecclesiae celebrare, praesertim quum illud decretum locum videatur habere, quando clericis renitentibus et invitis per alicuius violentiam potestatis extraneus ingeritur ex adverso, propter quod sequitur in decreto, ut sit facultas clericis renitendi, si se viderint praegravari, et quos ingeri sibi viderint ex adverso, non timeant refutare.

But when the aforesaid clerics were asked—who had said that certain of the canons were induced to consent by threats and terrors—whether they saw any compulsion whatsoever inflicted on any persons, they answered thus: that after the election had been made they heard certain of the canons threatening others and saying: "Let three hundred armed men be called from the city, and then it will appear who has been unwilling to consent to our election." But although this was said, they did not on account of this see anyone coming with arms, nor that any compulsion had been brought to bear upon them.] However, since from the assertion of both parties it was evident that a canonical appellation had been interposed—when, lest an election be made unless canonical, according to the tenor of our mandate, appeal was made to our audience—it could seem that after it, in the meantime, nothing ought to have been innovated, whence such an election was to be judged null and void, as having been attempted after a canonically interposed appeal. But on the contrary, since appeal had been made not that no election be made, but that it be made canonical, if a canonical making of the election followed, it seemed not to have proceeded at all against the form of such an appellation, but rather according to it; and therefore, although after the appeal, yet not against the same was the election celebrated, on account of which it was in no way to be annulled. For since two parts and more have consented and do consent to the election, although it is found provided in the canon that then one be elected from another church when no one in his own has been found suitable, yet because this has been introduced in favor of clerics, and it is permitted to each to renounce the right which is known to have been introduced for oneself, you, who were two parts and more—since what two parts of the chapter do seems to make the whole do—were able in this matter to renounce the right which seemed to work for you, and to celebrate an election of a person from another church, especially since that decree seems to have place when, the clerics resisting and unwilling, an outsider is thrust in from the opposite side by the violence of someone’s power; wherefore it follows in the decree that there be a faculty for the clerics to resist, if they shall see themselves overburdened, and that those whom they shall see thrust upon them from the opposite side they need not fear to refuse.

Praeterea quum sedes apostolica caput omnium ecclesiarum exsistat, et Romanus Pontifex iudex sit ordinarius singulorum, quando de ipsa quis assumitur in praelatum alterius, ei posse obiici non videtur, propter capitis privilegium, quod obtinet plenitudinem potestatis, quod de alia ecclesia eligatur, quum a capite membra reputari non debeant aliena. Item quum post appellationem emissam, non ut non fieret electio, quia talis appellatio nulla foret, sed ut fieret canonica, archidiaconus Theatinus cum suis fautoribus chorum exiisset, et vos illos, ut interessent electioni faciendae vobiscum, curassetis sollicite revocare, quoniam ad electionem faciendam accedere noluerunt, alienos se fecisse videntur, propter quod electioni a vobis iuxta formam mandati apostolici concorditer celebratae de iure non posse contradicere videbantur, praesertim quum idem archidiaconus postea requisitus responderit, quod in praesentia nostra vellet suum ei praebere consensum. Et ideo quum secundum statuta concilii Lateranensis appellatione remota semper id debeat praevalere, quod a pluribus et sanioribus fuerit ordinatum, nisi forte a paucioribus et inferioribus aliquid rationabile obiectum fuerit et ostensum, a vobis celebrata electio, tanquam a maiori et saniori parte, non obstante contradictione vel appellatione paucorum, debebat et poterat rationabiliter confirmari, quum id, quod obiectum exstitit et ostensum, rationibus praemissis appareat rationabile non fuisse.

Moreover, since the Apostolic See exists as the head of all churches, and the Roman Pontiff is the ordinary judge of individuals, when someone is taken from that See to be prelate of another, it does not seem that it can be objected to him, on account of the privilege of the head—which holds the plenitude of power—that he is elected from another church, since from the head the members ought not to be reckoned as alien. Likewise, since after an appeal had been issued—not that no election should be made, for such an appeal would be null, but that it should be canonical—the Archdeacon of Chieti, with his favorers, had gone out of the choir, and you took care solicitously to recall them, that they might be present at the election to be made together with you, because they refused to come to make the election, they seem to have made themselves outsiders, on account of which they did not seem able in law to contradict the election, celebrated by you in concord according to the form of the apostolic mandate, especially since the same archdeacon, when afterwards required, answered that in our presence he would afford his consent to him. And therefore, since according to the statutes of the Lateran Council, the appeal being set aside, that must always prevail which has been ordained by the more numerous and the sounder, unless perhaps by the fewer and the inferior something reasonable has been objected and shown, the election celebrated by you, as by the greater and sounder part, notwithstanding the contradiction or appeal of a few, ought and could reasonably be confirmed, since that which was objected and shown appears by the aforesaid reasons not to have been reasonable.

His igitur et aliis allegatis, quanquam contra personam illius, quem elegistis, nihil unquam dictum fuerit vel obiectum, quia tamen iuxta verbum Apostoli, dicentis: "Nemini cito manum imponas," debemus attendere diligenter ad ea, quae circa personam inquirenda fuerant, duximus ex officio nostro, sicut decuit, procedendum. Et quidem, quum tria sint in persona electi praecipue inquirenda, videlicet aetas legitima, morum honestas, et literatura sufficiens, licet de honestate morum, tanquam ei, qui nobiscum est aliquamdiu laudabiliter conversatus, possimus ipsi laudabile testimonium perhibere, Illius quoque literaturae, licet non eminentis, tamen convenientis electus exsistit, ut pro defectu scientiae, sicut plenius intelleximus ab his, qui eum melius cognoverunt, ab electione non deberet excludi. De legitima tamen aetate scire plene non potuimus veritatem, de qua nec vos, ut accepimus, aliquid cogitastis, quia, quum a multis, cuius aetatis exsisteret, curaverimus indagare, a nemine unquam audivimus, quod annum aetatis tricesimum attigisset.

Therefore, with these and other things alleged, although nothing was ever said or objected against the person of him whom you elected, yet because, according to the word of the Apostle saying, “Lay hands on no one hastily,” we ought to attend diligently to those things which had to be inquired concerning the person, we judged from our office, as was fitting, that we should proceed. And indeed, since three things are to be inquired especially in the person of the elect, namely lawful age, honesty of morals, and sufficient literature (learning), although concerning the honesty of morals, as of one who has for some time conducted himself laudably with us, we can bear to him praiseworthy testimony, his literature also—though not eminent, yet suitable—the elect possesses, so that for a defect of knowledge, as we have more fully understood from those who knew him better, he ought not to be excluded from the election. Of lawful age, however, we were not able fully to know the truth—about which neither you, as we have learned, gave any thought—because, when we took care to inquire of many of what age he was, we never heard from anyone that he had reached the thirtieth year of age.

Quum autem secundum praedicti statuta concilii nullus debeat in episcopum eligi, qui tricesimum aetatis non egerit annum, licet senectus venerabilis sit non diuturna, nec annorum numero computata, sed cani hominis sint sensus eius, et aetas senectutis vita immaculata, quia tamen post illa tria, quae Salomon asserit difficilia, quartum quasi reputet impossibile, viam videlicet viri in adolescentia sua, tanquam investigari non possit: Nos ecclesiae pariter et personae providere volentes, et tam rationes quam canones observare, habito super hoc cum fratribus nostris diligenti tractatu, quia propositum vestrum providum intelleximus, et ideo propter urgentem necessitatem et evidentem utilitatem ecclesiae Capuanae, quam in hac parte potius approbamus, volumus ipsum firmiter perdurare, praefatum subdiaconum nostrum de communi fratrum nostrorum consensu vobis in procuratorem concedimus, liberam administrationem ei tam in temporalibus quam in spiritualibus committentes. [Quapropter etc. Dat.

However, since according to the statutes of the aforesaid council no one ought to be elected into the episcopate who has not completed the thirtieth year of age, although old age is venerable not for its long duration, nor reckoned by the number of years, but the grey hairs of a man are his senses, and the age of old age is an immaculate life; because nevertheless, after those three which Solomon asserts are difficult, he accounts a fourth as it were impossible—namely the way of a man in his adolescence—as though it cannot be investigated: we, wishing alike to provide for the church and for the person, and to observe both reasons and canons, after a diligent tractation on this with our brothers, because we have understood your plan to be provident, and therefore, on account of the urgent necessity and evident utility of the Church of Capua, which in this part we rather approve, we will that it endure firmly; we grant the aforesaid our subdeacon to you, by the common consent of our brothers, as procurator, committing to him free administration both in temporals and in spirituals. [Wherefore etc. Dated.

Laterani. 1220.]

At the Lateran. 1220.]

CAP. XX.

CHAPTER 20.

Illegitimus potest postulari, non autem eligi, et electores, nisi probaverint, illum ignoranter elegisse, incidunt in poenas Lateranensis concilii.

An illegitimate man can be postulated, but not elected; and the electors, unless they have proved that they chose him in ignorance, incur the penalties of the Lateran Council.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Innotuit nobis olim tam per tuas literas, quam quorundam suffraganeorum tuorum et dilectorum filiorum prioris et conventus Wigorniensis ecclesiae, quod, Vigoriensi ecclesia destituta pastore, dicti prior et conventus eiusdem dilectum filium magistrum M. archidiaconum Eboracensem in episcopum unanimiter elegerunt, cuius, quum eius tibi fuisset electio praesentata, confirmationem usque in adventum ipsius, qui absens eligebatur et inscius, distulisti; qui tandem, quod factum fuerat audito, ad praesentiam tuam devotus accessit, et praeter opinionem omnium, qui nihil obstare credebant, quin statim concors et canonica deberet electio confirmari, spontanea tibi et secreta confessione monstravit, quod conscientia eius aliquantisper ex natalibus esset laesa, et, quod ad tantae dignitatis apicem praeter indulgentiam sedis apostolicae nollet aliquatenus promoveri, proposuit, etiamsi promoventem benignum et facilem inveniret. Tu autem, sicut vir providus et discretus, intellecta conscientia eius, noluisti protinus ad confirmationem procedere, sed nobis rei seriem per tuas insinuans literas, et per eas ipsius magistri merita et conscientiam commendasti; capitulum autem eiusdem ecclesiae, quare per te fuisset electionis confirmatio protelata, se ignorare, per literas suas nobis transmissas exposuit, cuius electionem capitulum petiit per sedem apostolicam confirmari, praesentato nobis electionis decreto subscriptionibus eligentium roborato. Quidam autem suffraganeorum tuorum, quod per tuas literas videbaris obscure aliquantulum innuisse, per suas literas in aliquibus asseruerunt, eum fuisse filium cuiusdam militis, et ab eo ex quadam ingenua et non coniugata susceptum.

It became known to us formerly, both through your letters and through those of certain of your suffragans and of the beloved sons, the prior and convent of the church of Worcester, that, the church of Worcester being without a pastor, the said prior and convent unanimously elected as bishop the beloved son Master M., archdeacon of York; and when his election had been presented to you, you deferred the confirmation until the arrival of the man himself, who was being elected absent and unaware; who at length, when he heard what had been done, devoutly came into your presence, and, contrary to the expectation of all who believed that nothing stood in the way of the election’s being confirmed at once in concord and canonically, by a spontaneous and secret confession showed to you that his conscience was somewhat injured by his birth, and he set forth that, as to being advanced to the summit of so great a dignity, he would not in any way wish to be promoted without the indulgence of the Apostolic See, even if he should find the promoter kindly and compliant. You, however, as a provident and discreet man, having understood his conscience, did not wish forthwith to proceed to confirmation, but, intimating to us the course of the matter through your letters, by them commended the merits and conscience of the same master; the chapter of the same church, for its part, explained by letters sent to us that it did not know why by you the confirmation of the election had been prolonged, and the chapter asked that his election be confirmed by the Apostolic See, the decree of election having been presented to us, strengthened by the subscriptions of the electors. But certain of your suffragans, what you seemed to have hinted somewhat obscurely in your letters, asserted in their own letters in some respects: that he was the son of a certain knight, and had been begotten by him of a certain freeborn woman, not wedded.

Interim vero idem quoque magister ex insperato ad praesentiam nostram accessit, et quod nobis de nativitate ipsius per literas aliquorum suffraganeorum tuorum fuerat intimatum exposuit, et adiecit, quod nunquam pater eius habuerat uxorem, sed matris eius virginitatis florem praeripuit quasi furtim, et ipsa infra quadriennium a nativitate ipsius matrimonium non contraxit. Nos ergo cum fratribus nostris habito super hoc diligenti tractatu, relectis canonibus, quosdam invenimus, qui non legitime genitos promoveri vetant ad officium pastorale, causam forte trahentes ex lege divina, per quam spurii et manzeres usque in decimam generationem in ecclesiam Dei prohibentur intrare. Invenimus etiam alios, qui undecunque genitos non prohibent ad sacros ordines promoveri, dummodo sibi merita suffragentur, asserentes, quod culpa parentum non est filiis imputanda.

Meanwhile, the same master likewise, quite unexpectedly, came into our presence, and set forth what had been intimated to us about his birth by the letters of some of your suffragans, and he added that his father had never had a wife, but had snatched away the flower of his mother’s virginity as if by stealth,
and she herself did not contract marriage within four years from his birth. Therefore we, together with our brothers, having held a diligent tractate on this, the canons having been reread, found some who forbid those not legitimately begotten to be promoted to the pastoral office, perhaps drawing their case from the divine law, by which bastards and manzeres, up to the tenth generation, are prohibited to enter into the Church of God. We also found others who do not prohibit those born from wherever to be promoted to sacred orders, provided that merits support them, asserting that the fault of the parents is not to be imputed to the children.

Et ad hoc probandum inducunt, quod Dominus noster Iesus Christus non tantum ex alienigenis, sed etiam ex adulterinis voluit commixtionibus nasci, qui est sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech. Hi etiam scripturae divinae videntur inniti, qua dicitur; "Filius non portabit iniquitatem patris, et pater non portabit iniquitatem filii," per quam antiquum videtur proverbium removeri, quod inter filios Israel dici solebat: "Patres comederunt uvam acerbam, et dentes filiorum obstupescunt." Quidam vero ad concordiam discordantia revocantes, repugnantiam canonum praedictorum sopire quodammodo videbantur, dicentes, quod illegitime geniti si religiose fuerint aut in coenobiis, aut in canonicis conversati, a sacris ministeriis minime revocentur, et inter illegitime genitos quidam asserunt eos solos a sacris officiis prohibendos, qui paternam incontinentiam imitantur. Et hi quoque videntur auctoritate divinae legis inniti, qua dicitur: "Ego sum Deus zelotes visitans peccata patrum in filios usque in tertiam et quartam progeniem in iis, qui oderunt me [gratis]," quasi dicat, in his, qui circa me paternum odium imitantur.

And to prove this they adduce that Our Lord Jesus Christ willed to be born not only from alien-born, but even from adulterous commixtures, he who is a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. These also seem to lean upon divine Scripture, wherein it is said: "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, and the father shall not bear the iniquity of the son," by which the ancient proverb seems to be removed, which used to be said among the sons of Israel: "The fathers have eaten the sour grape, and the teeth of the sons are set on edge." Certain men, however, calling back discordant things to concord, seemed in some manner to lull the repugnance of the aforesaid canons, saying that if the illegitimately begotten have lived religiously either in coenobia or among canons, they are by no means to be called back from sacred ministries; and among the illegitimately begotten some assert that only those are to be prohibited from sacred offices who imitate paternal incontinence. And these too seem to rely on the authority of the divine law, where it is said: "I am a jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the sons unto the third and fourth generation in those who hate me [gratis]," as if to say: in those who imitate toward me the paternal hatred.

Verum canon concilii Lateranensis a bonae memoriae Alexandro Papa praedecessore nostro editus in synodo generali, primis concordans canonibus non solum tales vetat in episcopos promoveri, verum etiam eligentibus talem personam poenam infligit, immo ipso facto eandem poenam asserit incurrisse, ut secundum hoc canon latae sententiae esse videatur, cuius tenor talis est: "Ne videlicet, quod de quibusdam pro necessitatibus temporis factum est, in exemplum trahatur a posteris, nullus in episcopum eligatur, nisi qui de legitimo matrimonio sit natus," circa finem subiungens: "Clerici sane si contra formam istam quemquam elegerint, et eligendi tunc potestate privatos, et ab ecclesiasticis beneficiis triennio se noverint esse suspensos." Sane praedictus canon, qui non per eum, qui canones non nosset antiquos, sed [per] illum, qui plene noverat canonicas sanctiones, in concilio multorum iurisperitorum est editus et ipsius approbatione concilii roboratus, natis de non legitimo matrimonio omnem videtur in episcopos promovendi aditum praeclusisse, quum id etiam ad consequentiam trahi prohibeat, quod pro necessitate innuit prioribus temporibus esse factum, licet nihil amplius quam necessitas dispensantem ad dispensationem inducat. Praeterea electionem talium innuit nullam esse, dum in poenam statuit electorum, ut tunc eligendi potestate se noverint privatos, quod nihil esset, si tunc non occurreret electio facienda; quod fieri non posset, priori electione seu etiam nominatione durante. Ex quo patet, electionem huiusmodi per ipsum canonem irritatam.

But the canon of the Lateran council, issued by Pope Alexander of good memory, our predecessor, in a general synod, agreeing with the earlier canons, not only forbids such men to be promoted to bishops, but even inflicts a penalty on those electing such a person—indeed it asserts that by the very fact (ipso facto) they have incurred the same penalty—so that according to this the canon seems to be of latae sententiae; the tenor of which is as follows: "Namely, lest what was done concerning certain persons for the necessities of the time be drawn into example by posterity, let no one be elected to the episcopate unless he be born of legitimate marriage," adding near the end: "Clerics indeed, if against this form they shall have elected anyone, let them know that then they have been deprived of the power of electing, and that they are suspended from ecclesiastical benefices for three years." Truly, the aforesaid canon, which was not issued by one who did not know the ancient canons, but [by] him who fully knew the canonical sanctions, in a council of many jurists, and strengthened by the approbation of that council, seems to have shut off every access for those born of non-legitimate marriage to be promoted to bishops, since it also forbids to be drawn by consequence that which it intimates to have been done in earlier times for necessity—although nothing more than necessity induces the dispenser to a dispensation. Moreover, it intimates that the election of such is null, while it sets as a penalty for the electors that they then know themselves deprived of the power of electing, which would be nothing if at that time there did not occur an election to be made; which could not happen while a prior election or even nomination was still in force. Whence it is clear that an election of this kind is rendered void by the canon itself.

Quamvis autem canon Lateranensis concilii, ab Alexandro praedecessore nostro editus, non legitime genitos adeo persequatur, quod electionem talium innuit nullam esse, nobis tamen per eum adempta non fuit dispensandi facultas, quum ea non fuerit prohibentis intentio, qui successoribus suis nullum potuit in hac parte praeiudicium generare, pari post eum, immo eadem potestate functuris, quum non habeat imperium par in parem, sed ea tantum fuerit mens ipsius, ut, quia ex eo, quod aliquando ex dispensatione pro necessitate temporis factum fuerat, quidam gratiam in licentiam extendentes, et inde sumentes exemplum, se licite credebant eligere tales, et indifferenter huiusmodi eligebant, [quum] talia fieri prohiberet. Unde gravem electoribus poenam inflixit. Deliberavimus tamen cum fratribus nostris, utrum in tali casu et cum tali persona deberemus misericorditer dispensare, vel iuris potius servare rigorem.

Although the canon of the Lateran council, issued by Alexander our predecessor, so persecutes those not legitimately begotten that it intimates the election of such to be null, nevertheless the faculty of dispensing was not taken from us by it, since that was not the intention of the one prohibiting, who could generate no prejudice for his successors in this matter, who after him were to be exercising equal—indeed the same—power, since an equal has no command over an equal; but his mind was only this: that, because from that which at some time had been done by dispensation for the necessity of the time, certain persons, extending grace into license and taking thence an example, believed that they were licitly choosing such men, and without distinction were choosing persons of this sort, [since] he forbade such things to be done. Whence he inflicted a grave penalty upon the electors. We have nevertheless deliberated with our brothers whether in such a case and with such a person we ought mercifully to dispense, or rather to preserve the rigor of the law.

Invenimus enim, a bonae memoriae Urbano Papa praedecessore nostro in casu multo difficiliori cum Cenomanensi dispensatum electo, qui fuerat filius sacerdotis, et Legionensi episcopo, qui post consecrationem suam humiliter fuerat et sponte confessus, quod fuisset ex matre non legitima procreatus, quam pater, vivente uxore propria, cognovisset. Sed idem Urbanus prohibuit, ne id quasi pro regula in poslterum ad consequentiam traheretur. Videbatur enim, quod, quum cum illegitime natis fuisset aliquamdiu dispensatum, et ex certa causa forsitan in posterum dispensandum, in hac causa celerius deberet dispensatio indulgeri, illi personae videlicet, quae minus imperfectionis, plus perfectionis habebat.

For we find that by Pope Urban of good memory, our predecessor, in a much more difficult case there was dispensation with the elect of Le Mans, who had been the son of a priest, and with the bishop of León, who after his consecration had humbly and of his own accord confessed that he had been procreated from a not-legitimate mother, whom his father had known while his own wife was living. But the same Urban forbade that this be drawn into consequence for the future as if for a rule. For it seemed that, since with those illegitimately born there had for some time been dispensation, and perhaps for a certain cause there would be dispensing in the future, in this case the dispensation ought to be more swiftly indulged, namely to that person who had less of imperfection, more of perfection.

Multa enim in hoc casu dispensationem inducere videbantur, literarum scientia, morum honestas, vitae virtus, et fama personae, multipliciter a quibusdam etiam ex fratribus nostris, qui eum in scholis cognoverant, approbatae. Faciebant etiam ad id non modicum concors capituli Vigoriensis electio, petitio populi, assensus principis, votum tuum, suffraganeorum suffragia, et humilis devotio confitentis, qui sponte ac humiliter suum maluit confiteri reatum, quam laesa conscientia thronum conscendere pastoralem. Habito ergo super hoc cum fratribus nostris diligenti tractatu, intelligentes, Vigoriense capitulum eundem magistrum non humiliter postulasse, sed improvide potius elegisse, quum ad obtinendum dispensationis beneficium procedendum fuisset, non per electionem inhibitam, sed per postulationem permissam, electionem ipsam praedicti canonis auctoritate cassatam denunciamus irritam et inanem, parcentes non modicum Vigoriensi capitulo, quod eis nec poenam infligimus expressam in canone supradicto, nec probare cogimus ignorantiam, quam allegant.

For many things indeed in this case seemed to induce a dispensation: knowledge of letters, honesty of morals, virtue of life, and the fame of the person, approved in many ways by certain even of our brothers who had known him in the schools. Not a little, too, made toward this the concordant election of the Chapter of Vigorium, the petition of the people, the assent of the prince, your vote, the suffrages of the suffragans, and the humble devotion of the confessor, who of his own accord and humbly preferred to confess his guilt rather than, with conscience wounded, to ascend the pastoral throne. Therefore, a diligent tractate having been held upon this with our brothers, understanding that the Vigorian Chapter had not humbly postulated the same master, but rather had imprudently elected him, whereas for obtaining the benefit of dispensation the procedure ought to have been, not through a forbidden election, but through a permitted postulation, we denounce the election itself, annulled by the authority of the aforesaid canon, as void and empty, sparing not a little the Vigorian Chapter, in that we inflict upon them neither the penalty expressed in the above-said canon, nor do we compel them to prove the ignorance which they allege.

Et quamvis post cassationem huiusmodi a nobis a multis fuerit humiliter supplicatum, ut propter causas praedictas dignaremur cum eo misericorditer dispensare, quum ad dispensandum in talibus nullus se casus habilior posset afferre, quia tamen praedicto capitulo liberam facultatem eligendi vel postulandi volumus reservare, supplicationem huiusmodi, quae nomine capituli non fiebat, quum non ad postulandam dispensationem, sed ad petendam confirmationem ipsius capituli fuerint nuncii destinati, ad praesens non duximus admittendam, decernentes irritum et inane quicquid super ordinatione ipsius episcopatus ante susceptionem literarum nostrarum fuerit attentatum. Volumus igitur et mandamus, quatenus per Cantuariensem provinciam ex parte nostra facias districtius inhiberi, ne, quod de multis in eadem provincia, quod sine pudore non dicimus, inordinate noscitur esse factum, de cetero contra formam praescriptam nullatenus attentetur. Quod si Vigoriense capitulum eundem magistrum propter praerogativam meritorum ipsius duxerit postulandum, postulationem ipsius apud sedem apostolicam praesentare procuret.

And although after such a cassation many have humbly supplicated us that, for the aforesaid causes, we would deign mercifully to dispense with him, since for dispensing in such matters no case more suitable could be brought forward, nevertheless, because we wish to reserve to the aforesaid chapter the free faculty of electing or of postulating, we have not judged this kind of supplication to be admitted for the present—since it was not being made in the name of the chapter, inasmuch as the envoys had been sent not to postulate a dispensation, but to seek the confirmation of that chapter—decreeing null and void whatever concerning the ordination of that bishopric shall have been attempted before the reception of our letters. We therefore will and command that you cause it to be more strictly inhibited, on our part, throughout the province of Canterbury, lest that which, in many instances in the same province— which we do not say without shame— is known to have been done inordinately, be hereafter in no wise attempted against the prescribed form. But if the Vigorense chapter shall have judged that the same master ought to be postulated on account of the prerogative of his merits, let it take care to present his postulation at the Apostolic See.

CAP. XXI.

CHAPTER 21.

Non possunt electores in praeiudicium electi compromittere; sed, si consenserit electioni suae vel consentire velit, non obstante laudo in contrarium lato, est confirmandus, si aliud canonicum sibi non obsistat, licet non sit de gremio illius ecclesiae, quamcunque ob causam a maiori parte fuerit appellatum. Et in hoc ultimo est iste textus multum notabilis.

Electors cannot compromise to the prejudice of the elected; but, if he has consented to his election or is willing to consent, notwithstanding an award (laudum) given to the contrary, he is to be confirmed, if no other canonical matter stands in his way, although he is not of the gremio (body) of that church, to which for whatever cause he has been called by the greater part. And in this last point this text is very notable.

Idem Genuensi Archiepiscopo, et Placentino et Bobiensi Episcopis.

The same to the Archbishop of Genoa, and to the Bishops of Piacenza and Bobbio.

Quum inter dilectos filios canonicos Saonenses super electione pontificis quaestio verteretur, eligentium votis in diversa divisis, ad sedem apostolicam dilecti filii S. subdiaconus Saonensis et I. procurator capituli accesserunt, quibus venerabilem fratrem nostrum I. Albanensem episcopum et dilectum filium nostrum A. tit. S. Martini presbyterum cardinalem dedimus auditores. Proposuit autem procurator praedictus, quod singuli requisiti communi assensu in Hastensem praepositum, excepto praedicto subdiacono, convenerunt, quo in sua duritia permanente, aliorum consensus redactus fuit in scriptum publicum consequenter.

When, among our beloved sons the canons of Savona, a question was in dispute over the election of a pontiff, the votes of the electors being divided in different directions, our beloved son S., subdeacon of Savona, and I., procurator of the chapter, came to the Apostolic See, to whom we gave as auditors our venerable brother I., bishop of Albano, and our beloved son A., presbyter cardinal of the title of St. Martin. The aforesaid procurator, moreover, proposed that each person, when asked, by common assent concurred on the provost of Asti, except for the aforesaid subdeacon; as he remained in his own hardness, the consensus of the others was accordingly reduced into a public instrument.

Ceterum pro parte altera fuit propositum ex adverso, quod, quum septem essent canonici Saonenses, in capitulum se receperunt, de futura electione pontificis tractaturi, ubi diversi a diversis nominati fuere. Sed archidiacono, archipresbytero et praeposito dictum Hastensem praepositum nominantibus, fuit a praefato S. fortiter obviatum, asserente, ipsum morbo epileptico laborare, pro quo alia vice tanquam inhabilis fuerat recusatus; nec ad aliam ecclesiam debere fieri transitum, donec reperiretur idoneus in ecclesia Saonensi. (Et infra:) Sed praepositus Saonensis spretis appellationibus interpositis praepositum Hastensem elegit, obiiciente parte adversa, quod huiusmodi electio propter appellationes interpositas et alia etiam obstacula non teneret.

But on the other side it was proposed in opposition that, since there were seven canons of Savona, they withdrew into chapter to discuss the future election of a pontiff, where different men were named by different men. But when the archdeacon, the archpresbyter, and the provost named the aforesaid provost of Asti, it was strongly withstood by the aforesaid S., asserting that he labors under the epileptic disease, on account of which on another occasion he had been refused as unfit; nor ought a transfer be made to another church until a suitable person were found in the church of Savona. (And below:) But the provost of Savona, the appeals that had been interposed being scorned, elected the provost of Asti, the opposing party objecting that an election of this sort would not hold because of the interposed appeals and also other obstacles.

(Et infra:) Sed et civitatem idem praepositus et alii omnes egressi, exceptis presbytero et subdiacono saepedictis, secum sigillum ignorantibus eis detulerunt, et ad Mediolanensem archiepiscopum accedentes petierunt electionem, quam fecerant, confirmari, licet a solo praeposito, et post appellationem facta fuisset. Sed quoniam indebitus electionis processus archiepiscopo antea innotuerat, petitioni eorum non annuens, quendam de fratribus suis ad investigandum electionis processum Saonam direxit. Sed quum testes producerentur coram eo, et postularetur, ut nuncium pariter ipsum procurarent, pars adversa iam dictum archiepiscopum, altera vero sedem apostolicam invocavit.

(And below:) But the same provost and all the others, having likewise left the city, except for the oft‑mentioned presbyter and subdeacon, carried off with them the seal, unbeknownst to them, and, approaching the Archbishop of Milan, asked that the election which they had made be confirmed, although it had been made by the provost alone and after an appeal had been lodged. But since the undue process of the election had previously become known to the archbishop, not assenting to their petition, he dispatched one of his brethren to Savona to investigate the process of the election. But when witnesses were being produced before him, and it was requested that they likewise have the messenger himself summoned, the opposing party invoked the already‑mentioned archbishop, while the other invoked the apostolic see.

Sed quum ad mandatum nuncii partes Mediolanum ivissent apostolus petiturae, ab archiepiscopo, ut ad pacem redirent, fuerunt monitae diligenter, cuius arbitrio praepositus se velle stare constanter asseruit, si hoc et ipsum pars faceret adversa, quod deliberato consilio praefatus subdiaconus repromisit. Post haec reversi ad propria, et demum ab archiepiscopo evocati, archipresbyter pro parte altera de rato, ut dicebat, literis praemunitus, ipse vero S. pro parte sua in Mediolanensem archiepiscopum compromittere curaverunt, qui magistrum G. Modicensem canonicum eis dedit in episcopum, et etiam confirmavit, quem in Saonensi ecclesia, praesente clero et populo civitatis, adhibitis solennitatibus consuetis, electum publice nunciarunt, cui archiepiscopus, praeposito sedem apostolicam provocante, consecrationis manus distulit impertiri. (Et infra:) Postquam igitur coram praefatis auditoribus fuit super his et similibus diutius disputatum, qui nobis ea sufficienter ac fideliter retulerunt, quoniam de ipsis nobis non potuit fieri plena fides, causam ipsam vestro duximus examini committendam, Discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, quum constet, electionem de praeposito memorato a maiori et saniori parte capituli celebratam etiam et subscriptam, si dictus praepositus eidem electioni consenserit, ut per mutuum consensum eligentium et electi quasi coniugale vinculum spiritualiter sit contractum, nisi sufficienter sit ostensum, eundem praepositum morbo epileptico laborare, super quo contra ipsum dicitur appellatum, vos, non obstante appellationis obiectu, si qua forsan ex aliis causis superius memoratis proponitur interposita, quum ex iis, quae coram nobis allegata fuerunt, eas appellationes certa ratione frivolas reputemus, electionem nostra freti auctoritate, sublato cuiuslibet contradictionis et appellationis obstaculo, confirmetis ipsius, non obstante, quod post talem electionem a praefato archiepiscopo proponitur esse factum, etiamsi a partibus in eum fuerit compromissum, quum electores a tali electione sic resilire nequiverint.

But when, at the mandate of the messenger, the parties had gone to Milan to petition the Apostolic See, they were diligently admonished by the archbishop to return to peace, to whose arbitration the provost steadfastly asserted that he wished to stand, if the opposing party would do this as well—which the aforesaid subdeacon, with deliberate counsel, promised. After these things, having returned to their own places, and at length summoned by the archbishop, the archpresbyter on the other side, fortified, as he said, with letters of ratification, and S. himself for his own part, took care to compromise to the Milanese archbishop, who gave them Master G., a Modenese canon, as bishop, and even confirmed him, whom, in the Savonese church, with the clergy and the people of the city present, the customary solemnities being employed, they publicly announced as elected, to whom the archbishop, the provost appealing to the Apostolic See, deferred to impart the hands of consecration. (Et infra:) After, therefore, there had been a longer disputation before the aforesaid auditors concerning these matters and the like, who reported them back to us sufficiently and faithfully, since full faith could not be made to us concerning them, we judged the case itself to be committed to your examination. We command to your Discretion by apostolic writings, that, since it is evident that the election of the aforesaid provost was celebrated and even subscribed by the greater and sounder part of the chapter, if the said provost consented to the same election, so that by the mutual consent of the electors and of the elected, as it were, a conjugal bond might spiritually be contracted, unless it be sufficiently shown that the same provost labors under the epileptic disease, on which it is said appeal was taken against him, you—non obstante the objection of appeal, if perchance from the other causes above-mentioned an interposed appeal is proposed, since from those things alleged before us we deem those appeals for a sure reason frivolous—fortified by our authority, with the obstacle of any contradiction and appeal removed, confirm his election, notwithstanding what is alleged to have been done after such an election by the aforesaid archbishop, even if there was a compromise into him by the parties, since the electors could not thus recoil from such an election.

Quod si electores illius non compromiserint in archiepiscopum memoratum, etiamsi dictus praepositus nondum electioni de se factae consenserit, eo tamen consentire volente, dummodo a morbo sit immunis obiecto, vos electionem ipsius nihilominus confirmetis.

If, however, his electors shall not have compromised in the aforesaid archbishop, even if the said provost has not yet consented to the election made concerning himself, yet he being willing to consent, provided he is immune from the disease objected, you nonetheless should confirm his election.

CAP. XXII.

CHAPTER 22.

Electus a maiori et saniori parte capituli, si est et erat idoneus tempore electionis, confirmabitur; si autem erat indignus in ordinibus, scientia vel aetate, et fuit scienter electus, electus a minori parte, si est dignus, confirmabitur.

Elected by the greater and sounder part of the chapter, if he is, and was at the time of the election, suitable, he will be confirmed; but if he was unworthy in orders, knowledge, or age, and was knowingly elected, the one elected by the lesser part, if he is worthy, will be confirmed.

Idem Praenestino Episcopo, apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same to the Bishop of Praeneste, Legate of the apostolic see.

Dudum ad audientiam nostram quaestione perlata, quod, vacante praepositura Colocensis ecclesiae, in duo se vota eligentium divisissent, causam iudicibus duximus committendam, quod auditis, quae proponerentur hinc inde, si de partium procederet voluntate, definitivam sententiam promulgarent; alioquin causam sufficienter instructam ad nostram remitterent audientiam; statuentes partibus terminum competentem, quo per se, vel idoneos responsales ad sedem apostolicam accederent sententiam recepturae. Ipsi vero, mandatum apostolicum fideliter exsequi cupientes, partes ad suam praesentiam convocarunt, receperunt testes hinc inde productos, examinaverunt eligentium conscientias, audiverunt allegationes utrinque. Et quoniam praepositus sancti Georgii eorum sententiae se tandem asseruit nolle stare, processum ad sedem apostolicam destinarunt, partibus festum beati Michaelis tunc proximo venturum veniendi ad sedem apostolicam terminum praefigentes, [quem praepositus SS. Apostolorum, allegans, quod terminus tam prolixus dispendium ecclesiae generaverat, ad festum S. Servatii breviavit.] Quumque nuncii praepositi sanctorum Apostolorum statuto termino ad praesentiam nostram accessissent, praepositus sancti Georgii nec venit, nec pro se misit idoneum responsalem.

Some time ago, a question having been brought to our hearing—that, the provostship of the Colocensis church being vacant, the votes of the electors had divided themselves into two—we judged the cause to be committed to judges, who, having heard what should be proposed on this side and that, if it proceeded by the will of the parties, should promulgate a definitive sentence; otherwise, they should remit the sufficiently instructed cause to our hearing; appointing for the parties a competent term, at which they themselves, or suitable responsals, should come to the apostolic see to receive the sentence. They indeed, wishing faithfully to execute the apostolic mandate, convoked the parties to their presence, received witnesses produced on this side and that, examined the consciences of the electors, heard the allegations on both sides. And since the provost of Saint George at length asserted that he was unwilling to stand by their sentence, they sent the process to the apostolic see, prefixing for the parties the feast of Blessed Michael then next to come as the term for coming to the apostolic see, [which the provost of the Holy Apostles, alleging that so lengthy a term had generated detriment to the church, shortened to the feast of Saint Servatius.] And when the envoys of the provost of the Holy Apostles had come at the set term to our presence, the provost of Saint George neither came, nor did he send in his stead a suitable responsal.

[Sed venerabilis frater noster Coloniensis archiepiscopus eius absentiam excusavit, asserens eum captum, arrepto itinere ad sedem apostolicam veniendi, a nobili viro W. Iuliacensi comite detineri. Nos autem ne aliquid disponere in eius praeiudicium videremur, per dilectum filium praepositum S. Gereonis et B. concanonicum suum mandavimus ad festum Resurrectionis dominicae sub peremptorio partem utramque citari. Qui, sicut ex literis ipsorum accepimus, SS. Apostolorum praepositum viva voce, praepositum vero S. Georgii per literas et nuncios pariter citaverunt; qui citatione recepta se scripsit ad sedem apostolicam accessurum.

[Sed our venerable brother, the archbishop of Cologne, excused his absence, asserting that, having set out on the journey to come to the apostolic see, he had been seized and was being detained by the noble man W., count of Jülich. But we, lest we seem to dispose anything to his prejudice, through our beloved son, the provost of St. Gereon, and B., his fellow-canon, ordered that each party be cited, under a peremptory deadline, to the feast of the Lord’s Resurrection. They, as we have learned from their letters, cited the provost of the Holy Apostles by viva voce, but the provost of St. George equally by letters and messengers; who, upon receiving the citation, wrote that he would come to the apostolic see.]

Verum, quum nec ad terminum, nec ultra terminum, etiam per VIII. hebdomades exspectatus venerit, vel miserit idoneum responsalem, eum reputavimus contumacem, eundem in expensas legitimas parti condemnantes adversae.] Visis attestationibus et Gestis igitur iudicum diligenter inspectis, invenimus, quod pro praeposito sanctorum Apostolorum auctoritas, pro praeposito vero sancti Georgii numerus eligentium faciebat, quum primus a quatuordecim, tum personis, tum canonicis, qui alios dignitate, aetate et tempore praecedebant, secundus vero a viginti quatuor fuisset electus. Obiiciebatur autem praeposito S. Georgii minor scientia, defectus aetatis, et quod in minoribus erat ordinibus constitutus.

But, since neither by the term nor beyond the term, even for 8 weeks, though awaited, did he come, nor did he send a suitable representative, we reckoned him contumacious, condemning the same to the lawful expenses to the adverse party.] The attestations having been seen and the Acts of the judges diligently inspected, we found that for the provost of the Holy Apostles authority availed, but for the provost of Saint George the number of electors did so, inasmuch as the former had been elected by fourteen, both dignitaries and canons, who preceded the others in dignity, age, and seniority, while the latter had been elected by twenty-four. Moreover, a lesser knowledge was objected to the provost of St. George, a defect of age, and that he was constituted in the minor orders.

Unde quum praepositurae illi esset archidiaconatus annexus, nondum erat ei dignitas conferenda, ratione cuius cogebatur infra praefixum a canonibus spatium in diaconum promoveri. Proponebatur autem pro altero, quod vir erat aetate, scientia et moribus commendandus. Unde meliori ducti zelo propter hoc electores ipsius in eum se confessi fuerant convenisse; non solum sui, sed quidam alterius etiam electores eum prudentiorem esse praesertim in spiritualibus asserebant, quamvis alium magis utilem maxime circa temporalia propter potentiam fuerint protestati.

Whence, since an archdeaconate was annexed to that provostship, the dignity was not yet to be conferred upon him, by reason of which he was compelled to be promoted to the diaconate within the space prefixed by the canons. But it was proposed on behalf of the other that he was a man to be commended for age, knowledge, and morals. Wherefore, led by a better zeal on this account, his electors had confessed that they had agreed upon him; not only his own, but certain electors of the other also asserted that he was more prudent, especially in spiritual things, although they had protested that the other was more useful, especially as regards temporalities, on account of his power.

Quum autem allegationes pro eodem praeposito sancti Georgii coram iudicibus ipsis praepositae nobis non fuerint praesentatae, propter quod non potuimus scire per nos, quid obiecerit, vel quid responderit ad obiecta, sicque causa remissa non fuit sufficienter instructa, [tunc] ad diffinitivam sententiam non duximus procedendum, sed decisionem causae ipsius iudicibus commisimus sub hac forma, ut, vel si notorium esset, vel per ea, quae iam dicta erant, constaret, quod praepositus S. Georgii electionis tempore pateretur vel in ordinibus, vel in scientia, vel in aetate defectum, qui eum iuxta canonum sanctiones impediret ad huiusmodi officium promoveri, ei, sublato appellationis obstaculo, non obstante ipsius absentia corporali, silentium imponentes, praeposito sanctorum Apostolorum praeposituram adiudicarent eandem, et eum in possessionem corporalem mittentes pacifica facerent possessione gaudere. Alioquin, quum in eum non solum plures, sed duae paene partes convenerint, et impedimentis cessantibus appareat, quod eum bono zelo elegerint, praepositi sanctorum Apostolorum electione appellatione remota cassata, electionem confirmarent ipsius, et ei facerent praeposituram assignari praedictam, et de cetero tanquam praeposito responderi, [contradictores etc. Dat.

However, since the allegations for that same provost of St. George, set forth before the judges themselves, had not been presented to us, on account of which we could not know for ourselves what he had objected, or what he had replied to the objections, and so the case, having been remitted, was not sufficiently instructed, [then] we did not deem it to be proceeded to a definitive sentence, but we committed the decision of the case to the same judges under this form: that, either if it were notorious, or it were established through the things already said, that the provost of St. George at the time of the election was suffering a defect either in orders, or in knowledge, or in age, which would impede him, according to the sanctions of the canons, from being promoted to an office of this kind, imposing silence upon him, the obstacle of appeal having been removed, notwithstanding his bodily absence, they should adjudge the same provostship to the provost of the Holy Apostles, and, sending him into corporal possession, should cause him to enjoy peaceful possession. Otherwise, since not only more, but nearly two parts, had agreed upon him, and, the impediments ceasing, it appears that they elected him with good zeal, the election of the provost of the Holy Apostles, the appeal removed, having been quashed, they should confirm his election, and should cause the aforesaid provostship to be assigned to him, and thereafter he should be answered as provost, [the contradictors etc. Dated.]

Lat. V. Id. Apr. 1203.]

Lateran, April 9, 1203.]

CAP. XXIII.

CHAPTER 23.

Recipientes postulatum ad ecclesiam tanquam institutum vel administratorem ante admissionem postulationis a superiore factam, privati sunt potestate eligendi, et ad alios, licet pauciores, devolvitur potestas eligendi; et si omnes privati sunt, devolvitur ad Papam in ecclesiis cathedralibus. Hoc dic. secundum principaliorem intellectum, qui magis congruit literae.

Those receiving a postulation to a church as one instituted or as administrator before the admission of the postulation made by the superior are deprived of the power of electing, and to others, albeit fewer, the power of electing devolves; and if all are deprived, it devolves to the Pope in cathedral churches. This is said according to the more principal understanding, which more agrees with the letter.

Idem Canonicis Maguntinensibus.

The same to the Canons of Mainz.

Bonae memoriae C. Maguntinensi archiepiscopo, episcopo Sabinensi, viam universae carnis ingresso, quum vota vestra se in varia divisissent, et quibusdam petentibus Wormaciensem episcopum quibusdam vero venerabilem fratrem nostrum nunc archiepiscopum vestrum, tunc praepositum sancti Petri Maguntinensis, sibi eligentibus in pastorem, dilectus filius magister P. scholasticus Maguntinus cum quibusdam aliis pro illis, qui Warmatiensem episcopum postularunt, procurator ad apostolicam sedem accessit; pro aliis vero dilecti filii E. et R. clerici [Maguntini] venerunt, quorum alter institutus fuit procuratur. Partibus igitur in nostra praesentia constitutis, et eis in consistorio nostro diligenter et sufficienter auditis, de fratrum nostrorum consilio venerabili fratri nostro Praenestino episcopo, a sede apostolica legato, dedimus in mandatis, ut, si eundem episcopum quoad temporalia vel spiritualia recepisse constaret ecclesiam Maguntinensem, vel ministrasse in temporalibus aut spiritualibus in eadem, prout obiectum fuerat ex adverso, postulationem factam de ipso, sublato cuiuslibet appellationis obstaculo, nunciaret irritam, de gratia nostra concedens eidem, ut Warmatiensem sibi ecclesiam retineret. Nam de iure communi, quia praeter auctoritatem nostram transire praesumpsit, utraque erat spoliandus, ut [et] ea careret, quam concupivit avare, et ea, quam superbe despexit.

C., of good memory, archbishop of Mainz, bishop of Sabina, having entered the way of all flesh, when your votes had divided themselves into various parts, and some were requesting the bishop of Worms, but others were choosing for themselves as pastor our venerable brother, now your archbishop, then provost of Saint Peter of Mainz, the beloved son Master P., scholasticus of Mainz, with certain others, on behalf of those who petitioned for the bishop of Worms, approached the apostolic see as procurator; but on behalf of the others the beloved sons E. and R., clerics [of Mainz], came, of whom the one was appointed procurator. Therefore, the parties having been set in our presence, and they having been diligently and sufficiently heard in our consistory, by the counsel of our brothers we gave in mandate to our venerable brother the bishop of Praeneste, legate from the apostolic see, that, if it were established that the church of Mainz had received that same bishop with respect to temporals or spirituals, or that he had ministered in temporals or spirituals in the same, as had been objected from the opposing side, he should announce the postulation made concerning him null, the obstacle of any appeal having been removed, granting to him from our grace that he should retain for himself the church of Worms. For by the common law, because he presumed to pass beyond our authority, he was to be despoiled of both, so that he would lack both that which he coveted avariciously, and that which he haughtily despised [and].

Quod si parere contemneret, utraque ipsum ecclesia denunciaret auctoritate nostra privatum. Deinde inquireret de ipsius electione archiepiscopi diligentius veritatem, et, si ei de vi, quam ipse et sui metuebant, constaret, eo non obstante, quod post appellationem ad nos interpositam fuerat in ipsius electione processum, quum alii, qui appellationi ad nos interpositae, ne sine ipso ac sociis eius haberent in electione processum, non duxerint deferendum, uti contra ipsum hac exceptione non possent, quia frustra legis auxilium invocat qui committit in legem, unde nec ab eis posse obiici videbatur, quod idem esset a paucioribus secundum eorum assertionem electus, quum ipsi, appellationem ad nos legitime interpositam contemnentes, et praeter licentiam nostram recipientes episcopum memoratum, reddiderint se indignos, electionem archiepiscopi, dummodo nihil obstaret de canonicis institutis, sublato appellationis obstaculo confirmaret. Quod si nec recepisse praefatam ecclesiam quoad spiritualia vel temporalia, nec in spiritualibus vel temporalibus ministrasse constaret episcopum memoratum, idem legatus audiret quae super postulatione ipsius et electione archiepiscopi proponerentur hinc inde, testes utrinque reciperet, et eorum depositionibus publicatis usque ad calculum sententiae definitivae procedens, gesta omnia sub sigillo suo ad nostram praesentiam destinaret, statuens partibus terminum competentem, quo apostolico se conspectui praesentarent sententiam recepturi.

But if he should contemn to obey, each church would denounce him, by our authority, as deprived. Then he should inquire more diligently into the truth concerning his election as archbishop, and, if it were clear to him about the force which he and his own feared, notwithstanding this, that after an appellation had been interposed to us there had been proceeding in his election, since the others did not deem it to be deferred to the appellation interposed to us, lest there be proceeding in the election without him and his associates, they might not be able to use this exception against him, because he invokes the aid of the law in vain who commits against the law; whence it seemed it could not be objected by them either that the same had been elected by fewer, according to their assertion, since they themselves, contemning the appellation lawfully interposed to us, and receiving the aforesaid bishop beyond our license, rendered themselves unworthy; he should confirm the election of the archbishop, provided that nothing stood in the way from the canonical institutes, the obstacle of the appellation having been removed. But if it were not established that the aforesaid bishop had either received the aforesaid church as to spirituals or temporals, nor had ministered in spirituals or temporals, the same legate should hear what on this side and that would be proposed concerning his postulation and the election of the archbishop, should receive witnesses on each side, and, their depositions having been published, proceeding up to the calculus of the definitive sentence, should dispatch all the acts under his seal to our presence, setting for the parties a competent term on which they should present themselves to the apostolic sight to receive the sentence.

Licet autem essent notoria, quae contra dictum Wormaciensem episcopum et eius fautores fuerant obiecta, praedictus tamen legatus ad maiorem cautelam multos et magnos testes recepit, ex ipsius archiepiscopi parte productos, qui super praedictis deposuere iurati. Unde ipse iuxta mandati nostri tenorem procedens, postulationem factam de Wormaciensi cassavit, et electionem archiepiscopi memorati, quamvis a paucissimis celebratam, curavit auctoritate apostolica confirmare, ipsumque ordinavit in presbyterum, et tandem in archiepiscopum consecravit. Ipse autem humiliter ad nostram praesentiam accedens, suppliciter postulavit, ut pallium sibi, videlicet insigne pontificalis officii, de consueta sedis apostolicae benevolentia conferremus.

Although the things which had been objected against the said bishop of Worms and his favorers were notorious, nevertheless the aforesaid legate, for greater caution, received many and great witnesses, produced on the part of the archbishop himself, who deposed under oath concerning the aforesaid matters. Wherefore he, proceeding according to the tenor of our mandate, annulled the postulation made of the Worms bishop, and took care by apostolic authority to confirm the election of the aforesaid archbishop, although celebrated by very few; and he ordained him into the presbyterate, and at length consecrated him as archbishop. He himself, however, humbly approaching our presence, suppliantly requested that we would confer upon him the pallium, namely the insignia of the pontifical office, from the accustomed benevolence of the Apostolic See.

Verum quidam simplex nuncius ab adversariis eius ad sedem apostolicam destinatus ex eorum parte apertas nobis cum sigillo pendente literas praesentavit, per quas iidem significabant canonici, quod praedictus legatus corruptus pecunia iniquam sententiam protulisset. Addebant etiam, quod Maguntini cives pariter iuraverunt, quod eum nunquam haberent episcopum, et quod universi clerici, paucis exceptis, suo favebant electo. Quum autem super his coepissemus deliberare cum fratribus nostris, electioni eiusdem archiepiscopi duo videbantur obstare, videlicet quod a paucissimis, et post interpositam a se ipso appellationem videbatur electus.

However, a certain simple messenger, dispatched by his adversaries to the apostolic see, presented to us open letters from their side with the seal hanging, through which the canons signified that the aforesaid legate, corrupted by money, had pronounced an iniquitous sentence. They added also that the citizens of Mainz likewise swore that they would never have him as bishop, and that all the clerics, a few excepted, favored their own elect. But when we began to deliberate about these matters with our brothers, two things seemed to obstruct the election of the same archbishop, namely, that he appeared to have been elected by very few, and after an appeal interposed by himself.

Nam quum postulatio Warmaciensis episcopi fuerit praecedentis appellationis ratione cassata, archiepiscopi electio debebat etiam ex eadem causa cassari. Sed econtra, sicut superius est expressum, qui in appellationem deliquerant, appellationem contra eundem archiepiscopum non poterant allegare. Poterat quoque dici, quod, etsi post appellationem, non tamen contra formam appellationis fuisset electus archiepiscopus saepe dictus, quum appellaverit in hac forma, ne canonici Maguntiae residentes sine ipso ac sociis suis haberent in electione processum.

For since the postulation of the bishop of Worms had been quashed by reason of the preceding appeal, the election of the archbishop ought likewise to be quashed for the same cause. But on the contrary, as has been expressed above, those who had transgressed in regard to the appeal could not allege the appeal against that same archbishop. It could also be said that, although after the appeal, nevertheless the oft‑mentioned archbishop had not been elected contrary to the form of the appeal, since he appealed in this form: that the canons residing at Mainz should not have progress in the election without him and his associates.

Nec nocet, quod posset ex altera parte replicari; quia nec ipse et socii sui debuerant procedere sine ipsis, quia ipsi appellationem apud nos interpositam contemnendo reddiderant se indignos, et abusi fuerant iure suo. Unde, quum in Lateranensi concilio de his, qui quasdam personas inhibitas eligunt, sit statutum, ut eligendi tunc potestate privatos, et ab ecclesiasticis beneficiis triennio noverint se suspensos, illis pro longe maiori delicto tanquam indignis ab electionis potestate cadentibus, penes eundem ac socios suos tantum ius remanserat eligendi. Quare, si multo pauciores in ipsum quam convenerint convenissent, intelligendum est tamen, quod omnes, qui tunc eligere poterant, elegerunt eundem.

Nor does it harm that a rejoinder could be made from the other side; because neither he nor his associates ought to have proceeded without them, since they, by scorning the appeal interposed before us, had rendered themselves unworthy and had abused their right. Whence, since in the Lateran council it is statuted concerning those who elect certain inhibited persons, that they then know themselves deprived of the power of electing and suspended from ecclesiastical benefices for three years, with them, for a far greater delinquency, as unworthy falling from the power of election, the right of electing remained with that same man and his associates alone. Wherefore, even if far fewer had convened for him than had assembled, it is nevertheless to be understood that all who then were able to elect, elected the same.

Contra legati vero processum hoc facere videbatur, quod non citatis Wormaciensi episcopo et eius fautoribus processisset. Porro iuxta canonicas sanctiones excessus notorius examinatione non indiget, et pro his, quae a iudice sunt acta, praesumitur, quod omnia rite fuerint celebrata; quamvis et, quod citati non fuerint, non posset de facili comprobari, quia negantis factum per rerum naturam nulla est directa probatio, quum, etsi quilibet de se posset asserere, quod ad eum citatio minime pervenisset, singuli tamen vestrum essent in suo testimonio singulares. Ad ipsum quoque legatum, si voluissent, secure potuissent procuratorem idoneum destinare, sicut [et] nuncium destinarant, quemadmodum ex ipsorum ad nos directis literis comprobatur, qui secure ad eundem legatum accessit, et ad propria remeavit, quum et ipse legatus paratus fuerit securitatem omnimodam providere.

On the contrary, the proceeding of the legate seemed to incur this fault, that he proceeded without the bishop of Worms and his supporters having been cited. Moreover, according to canonical sanctions, a notorious excess has no need of examination, and, as to the things which have been done by a judge, it is presumed that all was duly celebrated; although also that they had not been cited could not easily be proved, because by the nature of things there is no direct proof of a negated fact, since, even if anyone could assert of himself that the citation had by no means reached him, yet each of you would be solitary in his own testimony. To the legate himself also, if they had wished, they could safely have dispatched a suitable procurator, just as they had sent a nuncio, as is verified by their letters directed to us, who safely approached the same legate and returned to his own home, since the legate himself too was prepared to provide every manner of security.

Nec obest, quod idem nuncius dicitur appellasse, quum appellationi renunciaverit, et in commissione nostra, quam pars reportavit utraque, obstaculum fuisset appellationis amotum. Sed nec apparebat etiam, qui contra factum legati quicquam posset obiicere ac probare, quum non procurator sufficiens, sed simplex ad nos contra praedictum archiepiscopum fuisset nuncius destinatus. [Praeterea si appareret etiam, non esset aliquatenus audiendus, quum adversarii eius per praesumptionem, contemptum et blasphemiam audientia nostra se reddiderint indignos.

Nor does it hinder, that the same nuncio is said to have made an appellation, since he renounced the appellation, and in our commission, which each party carried back, the obstacle of the appellation had been removed. But neither did it appear, moreover, who could object and prove anything against the act of the legate, since not a sufficient procurator, but a mere nuncio had been sent to us against the aforesaid archbishop. [Moreover, even if it were to appear, he would not in any way be to be heard, since his adversaries, through presumption, contempt, and blasphemy, have rendered themselves unworthy of our audience.

Praesumptio enim fuit, quod virum, pastorali praeditum dignitate, alteri ecclesiae spirituali coniugio copulatum, praeter auctoritatem nostram contra formam canonicam non solum eligere, sed recipere praesumpserunt. Contemptus accessit ex eo, quod postquam procurator eorum nostras literas reportavit, in quibus mandabatur expresse, quod si Warmaciensis episcopus Maguntinam ecclesiam quoad spiritualia vel temporalia recepisset, vel in spiritualibus vel temporalibus ministrasset in ea, ipsius postulatio cassaretur, et eisdem non veniret in dubium, sed potius manifeste constaret, quod Warmaciensis temporalia saltem receperat, et ministrarat in iis, ipsi postmodum tanquam electo suo, sicut ex literis ipsorum apparet, in quibus eum electum suum nominant et ei se asserunt unanimi consensu favere, temere paruerunt, et consenserunt in ipsum, spirituale cum eo adulterium perpetrantes, quum et per nuncium ad nos ultimo destinatum electionem ipsius in publico consistorio postulaverunt confirmari. Blasphemia vero in eo fuerat subsecuta, quod, ponentes in coelo os suum, legatum nostrum, qui fungebatur in illis partibus vice nostra, et qui prius etiam, quam assumeretur ad officium pastorale, multae religionis exstiterat, utpote qui in Cisterciensi ordine fuerat primo abbas, quantum in eis exstitit infamantes, eum corruptum fuisse pecunia sunt mentiti.] Nos igitur, etsi propter auctoritatem iudiciariam praesumamus pro his, quae acta sunt a legato, illi tamen plus innitimur rationi, quod adversarii archiepiscopi ex tribus causis praedictis se usque adeo reddiderunt indignos, quod contra eum non debebant audiri.

For there was presumption, that they presumed, beyond our authority and against the canonical form, not only to elect but to receive a man endowed with pastoral dignity, joined to another church by a spiritual marriage. Contempt was added from this: that after their procurator brought back our letters, in which it was expressly commanded that, if the bishop of Worms had received the church of Mainz as to spirituals or temporals, or had ministered in it in spirituals or temporals, his postulation would be quashed, and for them it would not come into doubt, but rather it would be manifestly established that the Worms bishop had at least received the temporals and had ministered in them, they afterwards, as to their elect—just as appears from their letters, in which they name him their elect and assert that they favor him with unanimous consent—rashly obeyed and consented to him, perpetrating spiritual adultery with him, since by a messenger last sent to us they even requested in a public consistory that his election be confirmed. And blasphemy indeed had followed in this, that, setting their mouth in heaven, our legate—who was performing in those parts in our stead, and who even before he was assumed to the pastoral office had been of much religion, inasmuch as he had formerly been an abbot in the Cistercian order—defaming him as far as was in them, they lied that he had been corrupted by money.] We therefore, although on account of judicial authority we presume for those things which were done by the legate, nevertheless rely more upon that reasoning, that the adversaries of the archbishop by the three aforesaid causes rendered themselves so unworthy that they ought not to be heard against him.

Unde quod de ipso factum fuerat non poterat impediri per eos, quin etiam si electores eiusdem partis pariter deliquissent, ut se reddidissent indignos, ad nos devoluta fuisset hac vice ordinatio ecclesiae Maguntinensis, quare dictum archiepiscopum sine iuris iniuria potuissemus eidem ecclesiae praeficere in pastorem, praesertim quum per legatum apostolicae sedis fuisset in Maguntinum episcopum consecratus. Super his ergo cum fratribus nostris habito diligenti tractatu, de ipsorum consilio cassationem postulationis factae de Wormaciensi episcopo ratam habemus, electionem memorati archiepiscopi confirmantes. [Dat.

Whence that which had been done concerning him could not be impeded by them; indeed, even if the electors of the same party had likewise offended, so that they rendered themselves unworthy, the ordering of the Maguntine church would on this occasion have devolved upon us; wherefore we could, without injury to right, appoint the said archbishop as pastor to the same church, especially since through the legate of the Apostolic See he had been consecrated as Maguntine bishop. Therefore, upon these matters, having held diligent deliberation with our brothers, by their counsel we hold as valid the cassation of the postulation made concerning the Wormacian bishop, confirming the election of the aforesaid archbishop. [Given.

Lateran. X. Kal. April.

Lateran. 10 Kalends of April.

1202.]

CAP. XXIV.

CHAPTER 24.

Sufficit electo ad obtinendum docere, eligentem fuisse in quasi possessione tempore electionis, licet non probet, quod proprietas iuris eligendi ad illum pertineret.

It suffices for the elected, for obtaining, to show that the elector was in quasi-possession at the time of the election, although he does not prove that the proprietorship of the right of electing pertained to that man.

Idem Clericis sanctae Agathes.

The same to the Clerics of Saint Agatha.

Querelam, quam dilectus filius G. tituli sancti Vitalis nunc presbyter, tunc sanctae M. in Aquiro diaconus cardinalis per oeconomum ecclesiae vestrae, cuius idem cardinalis est gubernator, contra P. nunc presbyterum, tunc vero diaconum ecclesiae sancti Salvatoris, quae dicitur de Cornutis, coram bonae memoriae C. Papa praedecessore nostro super ecclesia ipsa proposuit, C. papa praedecessor noster nobis, in minori officio constitutis, audiendam et examinandam commisit. Petebat igitur idem oeconomus praefatum P. ab ecclesia sancti Salvatoris, quam in praeiudicium vestrae ecclesiae ad iniuriam cardinalis praedicti occupare praesumpserat, removeri, quum ipsa ecclesia sancti Salvatoris pertineat ad ecclesiam sanctae Agathes pleno iure, petens etiam pensionem sexdecim denariorum Papiensium, debitam ecclesiae sanctae Agathes, pro eadem ecclesia Salvatoris de Thermis sibi restitui de novo subtractam. Praedictus vero P. clericus respondebat, quod ipse nullam iniuriam irrogaverat cardinali, nec in praeiudicium ecclesiae vestrae receperat dictam ecclesiam, quum haec ad illam nullo iure pertineat, nec aliquam sibi debeat reddere pensionem; sed ipse per electionem populi, ad quem de antiqua consuetudine pertinet electio, a cardinali sanctae Susannae, cui eadem ecclesia Salvatoris, tanquam capella suo titulo, in spiritualibus est subiecta, canonice fuerat institutus.

The complaint which the beloved son G., now presbyter of the title of Saint Vitalis, then cardinal deacon of Saint M. in Aquiro, through the oeconomus (steward) of your church, of which the same cardinal is governor, brought against P., now a presbyter, but then a deacon of the church of Saint Savior, which is called “de Cornutis,” before Pope C. of good memory, our predecessor, concerning the church itself, Pope C., our predecessor, committed to us, being constituted in a lesser office, to be heard and examined. The same oeconomus accordingly sought that the aforesaid P. be removed from the church of Saint Savior, which he had presumed to occupy to the prejudice of your church and to the injury of the aforesaid cardinal, since that same church of Saint Savior pertains to the church of Saint Agatha by full right; he also sought that the pension of 16 Pavia denarii, owed to the church of Saint Agatha for the same church of the Savior “de Thermis,” be restored to him, having been newly subtracted. But the aforesaid cleric P. answered that he had inflicted no injury upon the cardinal, nor had he received the said church to the prejudice of your church, since it pertains to it by no right, nor does he owe any pension to him; but that he, by the election of the people, to whom by ancient custom the election pertains, had been canonically instituted by the cardinal of Saint Susanna, to which same church of the Savior, as a chapel under his title, it is subject in spirituals.

Quumque ad suam assertionem probandam utraque pars multoties testes produxisset, nos illos recepimus et examinavimus diligenter, quorum depositionibus publicatis disputationem audivimus super illis. Sed antequam huiusmodi controversia finem accipere potuisset, praefatus praedecessor noster debitum carnis exsolvit. Demum autem utraque pars a nubis cum instantia postulavit, ut causam ipsam decidere dignaremur.

And when each party, to prove its own assertion, had many times produced witnesses, we received them and examined them diligently; and, their depositions having been published, we heard the disputation upon them. But before a controversy of this sort could receive an end, our aforesaid predecessor paid the debt of the flesh. At length, however, each party petitioned us with urgency, that we would deign to decide the cause itself.

Nos igitur, rationibus utriusque partis diligenter auditis, et plenius intellectis, habito fratrum nostrorum consilio, dictum P. ab impetitione oeconomi vestri, super electione ac institutione de se facta in ecclesia sancti Salvatoris absolvimus, et super his praefato oeconomo silentium duximus imponendum, quum per testes idoneos nobis constiterit evidenter, quod populus in quasi possessione praesentandi clericum ad illam ecclesiam exsistebat, quando ipsum presbyterum ad illam elegit, et ecclesia eadem spectat ad titulum sanctae Susannae in spiritualibus pleno iure, salva quaestione super iure patronatus inter ecclesiam vestram, et populum saepe dictae ecclesiae sancti Salvatoris. Quia vero per testes omni exceptione maiores fuit liquide comprobatum, quod pensio sexdecim denariorum Papiensis monetae fuerit clericis ecclesiae vestrae pro ecclesia sancti Salvatoris de Thermis annuatim per multa tempora persoluta, sed de novo subtracta, nos in eundem statum percipiendi pensionem huiusmodi de ecclesia sancti Salvatoris de Thermis ecclesiam vestram decernimus reducendam, et ad solutionem pensionis subtractae condemnamus presbyterum antedictum, salva quaestione proprietatis inter ecclesias memoratas. [Dat.

We therefore, the reasons of each party diligently heard and more fully understood, having taken the counsel of our brothers, absolve the said P. from the impetition of your oeconomus concerning the election and institution made of him in the church of Saint Savior, and on these points we deemed that silence should be imposed upon the aforesaid oeconomus, since by suitable witnesses it has stood evident to us that the people were in quasi-possession of presenting a cleric to that church when they elected that priest to it, and that the same church pertains to the title of Saint Susanna in spirituals by full right, the question being reserved concerning the right of patronage between your church and the people of the oft-said church of Saint Savior. Because indeed through witnesses above every exception it was clearly proven that a pension of sixteen denarii of Pavia coinage had been paid annually for many periods to the clerics of your church for the church of Saint Savior of the Baths, but was of late subtracted, we decree that your church be restored to the same status of receiving such a pension from the church of Saint Savior of the Baths, and we condemn the aforesaid presbyter to the payment of the subtracted pension, the question of proprietas between the aforesaid churches being reserved. [Given.

II. Non. Iun. 1205.]

2. the Nones of June, 1205.]

CAP. XXV.

CHAPTER 25.

Eligentes scienter indignum privati sunt potestate eligendi in electione, quae primo occurrit facienda.

Those electing one knowingly unworthy are deprived of the power of electing in the first election to be held.

Idem.

The same.

Quum Wintoniensis ecclesia pastore vacaret, archidiaconus cum suis fautoribus Salubriensem decanum, prior vero et complices eius praecentorem Linconensem in episcopum elegerunt. [Quumque propter hoc partes ad nostram praesentiam accessissent, quoniam super serie rei gestae non modicum discordabant, testes utrinque recipi fecimus, et attestationes iussimus publicari, quibus perspicaciter intellectis, postquam ab utraque parte sufficienter exstitit allegatum, super ferenda sententia cum fratribus nostris deliberavimus diligenter. Invenimus autem, electionem utramque fuisse contra formam canonicam attentatam, et ut de coniurationibus, appellationibus et excommunicationibus taceamus, primam per inordinatam praesumptionem, secundam vero per violentam impressionem comperimus esse factam; ideoque, via regia procedentes, utramque duximus exigente iustitia sententialiter irritandam.

When the church of Winchester was vacant of a pastor, the archdeacon with his favorers elected the dean of Salisbury as bishop, but the prior and his accomplices elected the precentor of Lincoln as bishop. [And when on account of this the parties had come into our presence, since they were not a little at variance concerning the series of the deed, we caused witnesses on both sides to be received, and ordered the attestations to be published; which, having been understood perspicaciously, after on each side it had been sufficiently alleged, we deliberated diligently with our brothers concerning the sentence to be given. We found, moreover, that each election had been attempted contrary to canonical form; and, to say nothing of conspiracies, appeals, and excommunications, we discovered the first to have been done through inordinate presumption, but the second through violent intrusion; and therefore, proceeding by the royal road, justice requiring it, we judged that each should be annulled by sentence.

Post aliquot vero dies pars illa, quae praecentorem Lincolniensem elegerat, ad praesentiam nostram accedens, quoddam sub sigillo capituli protulit instrumentum, in quo continebatur expressum, quod Wintoniensis conventus vices suas priori et quibusdam fratribus super electione pontificis in nostra praesentia celebranda commiserat, eisque plenam et liberam eligendi sibi pontificem contulerat potestatem, unde suppliciter postulabat a nobis licentiam eligendi. Nos autem alteri parti exhiberi fecimus instrumentum, quod quum fuisset ab omnibus comprobatum, quaesivimus, utrum isti cum illis eligere vellent, an potius sine illis. Qui habito consilio responderunt, quod salvis exceptionibus, quas contra illos habebant, ipsi cum eis electionem volebant unanimem celebrare.] Licet igitur omnes in communi de facienda electione tractaverint, quia tamen nequiverunt esse concordes, infecto negotio ad nos habuere recursum.

After some days indeed that party which had elected the precentor of Lincoln, coming into our presence, produced a certain instrument under the seal of the chapter, in which it was expressly contained that the convent of Winchester had committed its powers to the prior and to certain brothers concerning the election of a pontiff to be celebrated in our presence, and had conferred upon them full and free power of choosing a pontiff for themselves; whence it humbly was requesting from us license to elect. But we caused the instrument to be shown to the other party, and when it had been approved by all, we asked whether these wished to elect with those, or rather without them. They, counsel having been taken, answered that, saving the exceptions which they had against them, they themselves wished to celebrate a unanimous election with them.] Although therefore all in common deliberated about making the election, yet because they were not able to be concordant, with the business unfinished they had recourse to us.

Et hi quidem, qui praecentorem elegerant, [firmiter] asserebant, quod illi, qui decanum elegerant, eligendi erant potestate privati pro illa maxime causa, quod hominem non legitime natum scienter eligere praesumpserunt, unde secundum Lateranense concilium et eligendi hac vice perdiderant potestatem, et per triennium ecclesiasticis beneficiis carere debebant, suppliciter postulantes, ut super hoc inlerloqui dignaremur. Illi vero taliter respondebant, quod, licet is, quem elegerant, fuisset minus legitime natus, per gratiam tamen apostolicae sedis legitimari promeruit, et hoc asserebant se legitime probaturos. Nos igitur attendentes, quod isti post primam electionem admiserant illos ad celebrandam secundam, et quod decretum memorati concilii decrevit, huiusmodi praesumptores una vice duntaxat eligendi potestate privatos, quoniam electio, quam coram nobis celebrare volebant, non iam secunda, sed tertia concurrebat, ad eligendum illos censuimus admittendos, ita ut procurator archidiaconorum sine monachorum praeiudicio interesset.

And those, indeed, who had elected the precentor [firmly] asserted that those who had elected the dean were deprived of the power of electing, especially for this reason: that they had presumptuously and knowingly chosen a man not legitimately born; whence, according to the Lateran council, they had on this turn lost the power of electing, and for three years ought to be without ecclesiastical benefices—humbly beseeching that we deign to interlocute upon this. But they in turn responded thus: that, although he whom they had elected had been less legitimately born, yet by the grace of the Apostolic See he had merited to be legitimized, and they asserted that they would legitimately prove this. We therefore, considering that these, after the first election, had admitted those to celebrate the second, and that the decree of the aforesaid council decreed that presumers of this sort are deprived of the power of electing for one turn only, since the election which they wished to celebrate before us was now not the second but the third, judged that they should be admitted to elect, such that the procurator of the archdeacons should be present without prejudice to the monks.

Cumque rursus in unum locum ad tractandum super electione facienda communiter convenissent, nequiverunt tamen in unum votum concorditer convenire, quamvis in hoc utrique communiter concordarent, quod, nisi celebraretur electio coram nobis, irreparabile detrimentum Wintoniensi ecclesiae imminebat. Verum, eo faciente qui fecit utramque unum ad unanimem tandem concordiam redierunt, praefatum praecentorem sibi pari consensu in episcopum eligentes. Nos autem, et honestati nostrae providere volentes, et ecclesiasticae libertati, non prius electionem illam decrevimus confirmandam, quam in consisitorio nostro publice iuravissent, quod nec per aliquam obligationem erant astricti nec per aliquam coactionem inducti, ut electionem huiusmodi celebrarent.

And when they had again come together into one place to deliberate in common about the election to be made, nevertheless they were not able to come together concordantly into one vote, although in this both parties commonly agreed: that unless the election were celebrated before us, irreparable detriment was impending for the Winchester church. However, by Him who made both one bringing it about, they at length returned to unanimous concord, choosing for themselves with equal consent the aforesaid precentor as bishop. We, however, wishing to provide both for our honor and for ecclesiastical liberty, did not decree that election to be confirmed before they had publicly sworn in our consistory that they were bound by no obligation and induced by no coercion to celebrate an election of this kind.

Iuramentis igitur sic receptis, et electionem examinavimus et electum. Quumque per literas venerabilis fratris nostri Ö Turonensis archiepiscopi, nec non aliorum multorum, de ipsius ordinatione canonica et procreatione legitima nobis et fratribus nostris plenissime constitisset, et carissimus in Christo filius noster I. rex Anglorum illustris, cui libente animo, quantum possumus, cum honestate deferimus, sicut ex patentibus eius literis nobis innotuit, suum praestitisset assensum, ceteris regulariter concurrentibus, quia rectis dispositionibus nihil morae vel difficultatis debet afferri, ne gregi dominico diu desit cura pastoralis, electionem ipsam, de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio, duximus confirmandam. [Quocirca universitati etc.

Therefore, with the oaths thus received, we examined both the election and the elected. And when, through the letters of our venerable brother, the Archbishop of Tours, as well as of many others, it had been made most fully clear to us and to our brothers concerning his canonical ordination and legitimate procreation, and our dearest son in Christ, I., the illustrious king of the English, to whom we defer with willing mind, as far as we can, with honor, as it became known to us from his open letters, had given his assent, the other things regularly concurring—since to right dispositions no delay or difficulty ought to be brought, lest the pastoral care be lacking to the Lord’s flock for a long time—we, with the common counsel of our brothers, deemed that the election itself should be confirmed. [Wherefore to the whole etc.

Dat. XI. Kal. Iul.

Dated June 21.

Ao. VIII. 1205.]

Year 8. 1205.]

CAP. XXVI.

CHAPTER 26.

Eligens scienter indignum in episcopum, est ob hoc suspensus a beneficiis ecclesiae per triennium, nec potest interim ad dignitatem illius eligi vel assumi.

One who knowingly chooses an unworthy man as bishop is on this account suspended from the benefices of the Church for three years, nor can he in the interim be elected or assumed to that dignity.

Idem Abbati Cisterciensi, R. et P. Monachis Fontis frigidi.

The same to the Cistercian Abbot, R. and P., monks of Cold Fountain.

Per inquisitionem, quam de mandato nostro fecistis super statu episcopatus et episcopi Tholosani, perspicaciter intelleximus, quod Mascaron cancellarius iuratus asseruit, se scivisse pro certo, R. olim Tholosanum episcopum et amicos ipsius ante suam electionem habuisse colloquium cum quibusdam canonicis nominatim expressis, eosque sollicitasse precibus, ut ipsum eligerent in episcopum, seque vidisse pariter et audivisse, quando praedictus episcopus, exsistens in domo S. Petri de Coquinis recognovit in quorundam canonicorum praesentia, se canonicis illis, qui adversati fuerant suae primae electioni, iurasse in domo Actonis de Montibus, credens pro certo, quod iuramentum illud illicitum fuit, et praestitum, ut idem R. eligeretur ex pacto, et quod ipsemet post primam electionem ipsius cassatam domum episcopalem eius nomine detinebat, recipiens quosdam reditus et proventus, quos de ipsius conscientia et consensu in eiusdem negotiis expendebat. Quum igitur talem scienter in episcopum eligendo, sicut ipse suo iuramento firmavit, ecclesiasticis beneficiis reddiderit se indignum, grave gerimus et molestum, quod dilecto filio Tholosano praeposito in episcopum Convennarum electo idem Mascaron in praepositum dicitur substitutus. Quocirca discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, eundem Mascaronem ab officio praepositurae penitus amoventes, faciatis virum idoneum ad officium illud assumi.

Through the inquisition which, by our mandate, you made concerning the state of the episcopate and the bishop of Toulouse, we have understood with perspicacity that Mascaron the chancellor, sworn, asserted that he knew for certain that R., once bishop of Toulouse, and his friends, before his election, had held a colloquy with certain canons expressly named, and had solicited them with prayers to elect him as bishop; and that he had likewise seen and heard when the aforesaid bishop, being in the house of St. Peter de Coquinis, acknowledged, in the presence of certain canons, that he had sworn to those canons who had opposed his first election, in the house of Acto of the Mountains, believing for certain that that oath was illicit, and given so that the same R. might be elected by a pact; and that he himself, after the first election of him had been quashed, was holding the episcopal house in his name, receiving certain revenues and proceeds, which, with his knowledge and consent, he was expending in the same business. Since, therefore, by knowingly electing such a man as bishop, as he himself confirmed by his oath, he has rendered himself unworthy of ecclesiastical benefices, it is grievous and vexatious to us that, for our beloved son, the provost of Toulouse, elected bishop of the Convenae, that same Mascaron is said to have been substituted as provost. Wherefore, by apostolic writings, we command your discretion that, entirely removing the same Mascaron from the office of the provostship, you cause a suitable man to be assumed to that office.

[Contradictores etc. Dat. II. Non.

[Contradictors etc. Given on the 2nd of the Nones.

Iul. An. VIII. 1205.]

Jul. Year 8. 1205.]

CAP. XXVII.

CHAPTER 27.

Si non professus eligitur ad regimen ecclesiae regularis, cassatur electio, consuetudine in contrarium non obstante.

If one not professed is chosen to the regimen (governance) of a regular church, the election is quashed, the custom to the contrary notwithstanding.

Idem Priori sancti Frigidiani, G. et G. Canonicis Lucanensibus.

The same to the Prior of Saint Frigidian, G. and G., Canons of Lucca.

Quum causam, quae inter Bonum presbyterum et Brunum canonicum ecclesiae sancti Petri Lucanensis vertitur super eo, quod dictus presbyter Bonus a maiori parte canonicorum eiusdem ecclesiae, praedicto B. et quodam alio contradicentibus, in priorem, sicut dicitur, est electus, olim vobis duximus committendam, vos, sicut ex literis vestris accepimus, partes citare curastis, ut iuxta mandatum nostrum causam ipsam fine possetis canonico terminare. Quumque in vestra essent praesentia constitutae, dictus presbyter Bonus cum instantia postulabat, ut electionem de se factam auctoritate curaretis apostolica confirmare. Sed praefatus Brunus e contrario respondebat, illum non esse dignum regimine prioratus, crimen ei obiiciens simoniae, quodque ipsius electio non erat canonice celebrata.

When the case, which is being contested between Bonus the priest and Bruno, a canon of the church of Saint Peter of Lucca, concerning the fact that the said priest Bonus, by the greater part of the canons of the same church, the aforesaid B. and a certain other opposing, was, as it is said, elected into prior, we long ago decided to commit to you, you, as we gathered from your letters, took care to summon the parties, so that, according to our mandate, you might be able to bring that very case to a canonical end. And when they had been set in your presence, the said priest Bonus urgently requested that you take care to confirm by apostolic authority the election made of him. But the aforesaid Bruno responded to the contrary, that he was not worthy of the regimen of the priory, bringing against him the charge of simony, and that his election had not been celebrated canonically.

Et, quia professus non erat, ipsum asserebat merito repellendum. Verum quum de simonia nihil fuisset probatum, nec aliquid contra modum electionis ostensum, movit vos vehementer ipsius ecclesiae privilegium, in quo continebatur expressum, ut nullus ibi qualibet subreptionis astutia praeponatur, nisi quem fratres communi consensu, vel fratrum pars consilii sanioris secundum Dei timorem et B. Augustini regulam, providerint eligendum. Quamvis autem multi priores continue unus post alium in ipsa ecclesia per multa et longa tempora fuerint non professi, quia tamen praefatus presbyter B. non est professus observantiam regularem, dubitatis, et merito, nobis procedere inconsultis contra privilegium sedis apostolicae concessum ecclesiae memoratae.

And, because he was not professed, he asserted that he ought deservedly to be repelled. But when nothing had been proved concerning simony, nor anything shown against the mode of the election, the privilege of that church moved you vehemently, in which it was contained expressly that no one there, by any cunning of subreption, be set over, except him whom the brothers by common consent, or the part of the brothers of sounder counsel, according to the fear of God and the Rule of Blessed Augustine, shall have provided to be chosen. Although, moreover, many priors continually, one after another, in that same church for many and long times were not professed, nevertheless, because the aforesaid presbyter B. has not professed the regular observance, you hesitate, and with reason, to proceed, without consulting us, against the privilege of the Apostolic See granted to the aforesaid church.

Quia igitur non debemus attendere solummodo, quid factum sit, sed potius, quid sit faciendum, consultationi vestrae taliter respondemus, quod, quum secundum legem divinam non sit in bove arandum et asino, nec quisquam debeat vestem induere de lana linoque contextam, sublato cuiuslibet appellationis obstaculo irritetis electionem praedictam, et compellatis praefatum presbyterum, aliosque clericos non professos, ut vel beati Augustini regulam in eadem ecclesia constitutam profiteantur et servent, aut ipsam ecclesiam omnino dimittant. [Contradictores etc. Dat.

Since therefore we ought not to attend only to what has been done, but rather to what is to be done, we thus respond to your consultation: that, since according to the divine law it is not to be ploughed with an ox and an ass, nor ought anyone to put on a garment woven of wool and linen, with the obstacle of any appeal removed you are to annul the aforesaid election, and compel the aforesaid presbyter, and the other non-professed clerics, either to profess and observe the rule of blessed Augustine established in the same church, or wholly to leave the church itself. [The contradictors, etc. Given.]

Ferentini VIII. Id. Iul. 1203.]

Ferentino, 8 July 1203.]

CAP. XXVIII.

CHAPTER 28.

Nominatio vel appellatio eius, cuius non interest, electionem non impedit. Sed si vocandus contemnitur, eo prosequente contemptum, cassatur electio etiam confirmata; et potest prosequi, nisi consenserit electioni; quod potest etiam ex post facto. H. d. usque ad § Super eo. ñ § 1. Episcopus, dum celebratur missa consecrationis suae, vel archiepiscopus ante receptum pallium, ordines conferre non debet.

The nomination or appellation of one whom it does not concern does not impede the election. But if one who ought to be summoned is contemned, with him prosecuting the contempt, the election is cassated (annulled) even if confirmed; and he can prosecute, unless he has consented to the election; which he can also do ex post facto. H. d. usque ad § Super eo. ñ § 1. A bishop, while the Mass of his own consecration is being celebrated, or an archbishop before the pallium has been received, ought not to confer orders.

H. d. usque ad ver. Quod autem. ñ § 2. Iste vers.

In this place up to the word “Quod autem.” ñ § 2. This verse.

non summatur, tum propter diversitatem lecturarum, tum quia non facit ad titulum. Abb.

it is not included, both because of the diversity of readings, and because it does not fit the title. Abb.

Idem I. tit. sancti Stephani in Celio monte Presbytero cardinali apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same, of the 1st title of Saint Stephen on the Caelian Mount, to the presbyter cardinal, legate of the apostolic see.

Quod, sicut ex literis tuis [nostro nuper apostolatui praesentatis accepimus, post multos labores maris et terrae, ac diversitatem gentium ad iniunctum tibi legationis officium exsequendum prospere per Dei gratiam pervenisti, et Hibernicanam ecclesiam studuisti pro posse in melius reformare, sicut ipsa operis exhibitio manifestat, gratum gerimus admodum et acceptum, et tuae sollicitudinis studium plurimum in Domino commendamus. Verum ecclesiae Armachanae negotium, quod tibi videbatur arduum et difficile, sine nostro noluisti consilio terminare, sed nobis eiusdem duxisti negotii seriem tuis literis intimandam, ut ex nostro postmodum rescripto cognosceres, qualiter tibi foret in ipso negotio procedendum. Sicut enim in tuis perspeximus literis contineri, bonae memoriae Armachano archiepiscopo viam universae carnis ingresso, a iustitiario regio vocatus fuit archidiaconus Armachanus, ut pro substituendo pontifice, ne regni pax posset aliquatenus impediri, suffraganeos Armachanae ecclesiae convocaret, et omnes illos, qui ad faciendam conventionem debuerant convenire; ac sic per eum, ut dicebatur, omnes vocati fuerunt; sed pauci apud villam de Ponte, ad quos pertinebat electio, convenerunt, duo videlicet suffraganei Armachanae ecclesiae, abbas de Mellifonte, qui privilegium demonstrabat, se primam in electione vocem habere, ac praedictus archidiaconus Armachanus.

Wherefore, as from your letters [presented recently to our apostolate we have received, after many labors of sea and land, and the diversity of peoples, you arrived prosperously by God’s grace to execute the office of legation enjoined upon you, and you have endeavored, as far as you were able, to reform the Hibernian church for the better, as the very exhibition of the work manifests; we hold it very pleasing and acceptable, and we highly commend in the Lord the zeal of your solicitude. But the business of the Church of Armagh, which seemed to you arduous and difficult, you were unwilling to settle without our counsel, but you judged that the sequence of the same business should be intimated to us by your letters, that from our rescript thereafter you might learn how you should proceed in the business itself. For as we have clearly perceived to be contained in your letters, the archbishop of Armagh of good memory having entered the way of all flesh, the archdeacon of Armagh was summoned by the royal justiciar, that, for the purpose of substituting a pontiff, lest the peace of the realm might in any way be hindered, he should convoke the suffragans of the Church of Armagh, and all those who ought to have come together to make the convention; and thus through him, as it was said, all were called; but few assembled at the villa of Ponte, those to whom the election pertained, namely, two suffragans of the Church of Armagh, the abbot of Mellifont, who displayed a privilege that he had the first voice in the election, and the aforesaid archdeacon of Armagh.

Qui deliberato consilio in tres personas, ut dicitur, convenerunt; in Midensem videlicet episcopum, qui unus erat ex suffraganeis, in archidiaconum Midiae, et magistrum Manfredum, regium capellanum. Unus vero de duobus episcopis, qui ad talem nominationem convenerat requisitus, firmiter asserebat, quod interfuit illi electioni, sed tacuit, nec praebuit in ipsa electione consensum; aliis e contrario asserentibus, quod ipsum consensisse crediderant, quia interfuit et nullatenus contradixit. Postmodum autem, plurimis diebus elapsis, praefatus archidiaconus Armachanus apud Armachanum episcopos suffraganeos convocavit, et omnes convenientes in ipsam metropolim, exceptis Midensi episcopo et abbate Mellifontis, qui nulla ratione per Hibernienses illuc poterant convenire, abbatem canonicurum regularium de Benger in archiepiscopum elegerunt, et ipsum, sicut consuetudinis esse dicebant, sequenti die dominica in episcopum consecraverunt; qui post inunctionem suam, antequam missarum solennia finirentur, quendam in acolythum ordinavit, et administrare praesumpsit.

Who, with deliberated counsel, as it is said, agreed upon three persons; namely upon the Bishop of Meath, who was one of the suffragans, upon the Archdeacon of Meath, and Master Manfred, the royal chaplain. But one of the two bishops who had assembled for such a nomination, when asked, firmly asserted that he was present at that election, but kept silent and did not in that election give consent; others, on the contrary, asserting that they had believed he had consented, because he was present and by no means contradicted. Afterwards, however, many days having elapsed, the aforesaid Archdeacon of Armagh convoked at Armagh the suffragan bishops, and all gathering in that metropolis, except the Bishop of Meath and the Abbot of Mellifont, who by no means could make their way thither through the Irish, they elected the abbot of the canons regular of Benger as archbishop, and him, as they said was the custom, they consecrated as bishop on the following Sunday; who, after his anointing, before the solemnities of the masses were finished, ordained a certain man as acolyte, and presumed to administer.

Quumque ipsum super hoc graviter redargueres, dicebat ipse, ac confitebantur alii de partibus ipsius, quod talis consuetudo erat hactenus in Hibernia observata. Contentio vero maxima ex electione huiusmodi erat inter Hibernienses et Anglicos, quoniam Anglici firmiter asserebant, se nolle penitus Hiberniensem aliquem eorum esse archiepiscopum, nullatenus paterentur, ac sic multa plurima in tua praesentia proponentes quidam Anglici et Hibernici asserebant, quod, si Anglicus praeficeretur Armachanae ecclesiae, non provideretur utiliter ipsi ecclesiae ac totius terrae quieti. Postmodum autem, quum dicto electo administratio per te interdicta fuisset, et concessa archidiacono memorato, ei unus suffraganeorum obiecit, quod quandam tabulam argenteam distraxerat ab ecclesia Armachana, qui tibi tandem confessus exstitit tabulam ipsam ab Armachanis clericis et laicis recepisse, ac vendidisse pro XXV.

And when you severely reproved him on this, he said—and others of his party confessed—that such a consuetude had hitherto been observed in Ireland. But there was a very great contention from this kind of election between the Hibernians and the English, since the English firmly asserted that they did not at all wish any Hibernian to be their archbishop, and would in no way allow it; and thus, setting forth very many points in your presence, certain English and Hibernians asserted that, if an Englishman were set over the Church of Armagh, due provision would not be made profitably for that church and for the quiet of the whole land. Afterwards, however, when the administration to the said elect had been interdicted by you and granted to the aforesaid archdeacon, one of the suffragans objected to him that he had alienated a certain silver tablet from the Church of Armagh; who at length confessed to you that he had received that tablet from the clerics and layfolk of Armagh, and had sold it for 25.

marchis eandem, sed firmiter promittebat, quod quicquid de ipso contingeret, ipsius ecclesiae super hoc indemnitatibus praecaveret. Significasti praetera nobis, quod facta prima electione apud villam de Ponte, ne quid fieret in praeiudicium illius electionis et dignitatis regis, qui assensum suum in electionibus asserit requirendum, ad nostram fuit audientiam appellatum.] Nos igitur, literarum tuarum tenore diligenter inspecto, sex in eis perspicimus contineri, quorum tria contra praedictum electum; et alia tria contra eius electionem facere videbantur. Primum, nominatio facta de tribus, quam in literis tuis aliquoties electionem appellas, contra quam, si electio vera fuit, antequam cassaretur, non debuerat aliquid aliquatenus attentari.

for the same, for 25 marks, but he firmly promised that whatever should befall him, he would provide the church itself with indemnities in this matter. You also signified to us that, the first election having been made at the vill of Ponte, lest anything be done to the prejudice of that election and of the dignity of the king, who asserts that his assent is to be required in elections, appeal was made to our audience.] Therefore, the tenor of your letters having been diligently inspected, we perceive six things to be contained in them, three of which are against the aforesaid elect; and the other three seemed to tell against his election. First, the nomination made from three, which in your letters you several times call an election, against which, if the election was true, before it was annulled, nothing ought in any way to have been attempted.

Secundum, appellatio interposita, quae si legitima fuit, sequentem electionem penitus impedivit. Tertium, quia Midensis episcopus et abbas Mellifontis, qui interesse debuerant, ad electionem minime convenerunt. Unde si contempti fuerunt vel alter vel ambo, plus eorum contemptus, quam multorum contradictio praedictam electionem debuit impedire.

Secondly, an appeal having been interposed, which, if it was legitimate, wholly impeded the subsequent election. Thirdly, because the bishop of Meath and the abbot of Mellifont, who ought to have been present, did not at all convene for the election. Whence, if either or both were contemned, their contempt ought more to have impeded the aforesaid election than the contradiction of many.

Quartum, quia praefatus abbas sic electus ante confirmationem obtentam administrare praesumpsit. Quintum, quia in die consecrationis suae ordines celebravit, quum nondum pallium obtineret. Sextum, dilapidatio, quia tabulam argenteam alienare minime formidavit.

Fourth, because the aforesaid abbot, thus elected, presumed to administer before confirmation had been obtained. Fifth, because on the day of his consecration he celebrated orders, when he had not yet obtained the pallium. Sixth, dilapidation, because he did not at all fear to alienate a silver tablet.

Verum quum ex prima electione, quae facta est de tribus, dicenda videtur potius nominatio, non nisi quatuor de omnibus, ad quos electio pertinebat, videlicet duo suffraganei ecclesiae Armachanae, et praedictus abbas Mellifontis, et archidiaconus Armachanus convenerint, et ex illa tali nominatione nihil iuris acquisitum fuerit nominatis, licite procedi potuit ad electionem regulariter celebrandam, praesertim in ecclesia Armachana, quum iuxta constitutiones canonicas, si fieri potest, in cathedrali ecclesia debeat electio celebrari. Nec talis appellatio interposita electionem illam potuit impedire, quum in ea nihil attentatum fuerit in praeiudicium regiae dignitatis, quia non simplex nominatio, sed solennis electio debet principi praesentari, ut postulationi praestet assensum, etsi secus aliquando per usurpationem aliqui faciant abusive. Si autem praefati Miridiensis episcopus et abbas Mellifontis, qui interesse debuerant, non contempti fuerunt, sed ad electionem vocati, si tamen sine periculo potuerint convocari, sive nequiverint sive noluerint ad electionem celebrandam accedere ipsorum absentia non potuit electionem impedire, quoniam, si ad locum illum inter Hibernienses secure non poterant proficisci, nec ceteri ad alium locum inter Anglicos tute poterant convenire, propter quod tibi super hoc credimus veritatem diligentius inquirendam, et, si eos vocatos fuisse constiterit, si vocati absque periculo poluerunt, et illos noluisse, vel non potuisse ad electionem celebrandam venire, propter eorum absentiam, si canonicum aliud non obstitit, electio ipsa non debet aliquatenus irritari.

But since from the first election, which was made by three, what ought rather to be called a nomination, only four of all those to whom the election pertained—namely two suffragans of the church of Armagh, and the aforesaid abbot of Mellifont, and the archdeacon of Armagh—came together, and from such a nomination nothing of right was acquired by the nominees, it was lawful to proceed to an election to be regularly celebrated, especially in the church of Armagh, since, according to the canonical constitutions, if it can be done, the election ought to be celebrated in the cathedral church. Nor could such an appeal interposed impede that election, since in it nothing was attempted to the prejudice of the royal dignity, because not a simple nomination, but a solemn election ought to be presented to the prince, that he may grant assent to the postulation, although otherwise at times some by usurpation act abusively. If, however, the aforesaid bishop of Meath and the abbot of Mellifont, who ought to have been present, were not despised but were called to the election—if indeed they could have been summoned without danger—whether they were unable or unwilling to come to the election to be celebrated, their absence could not impede the election, since, if they could not safely travel to that place among the Irish, neither could the others safely assemble to another place among the English; wherefore we entrust to you to inquire the truth more diligently concerning this; and, if it shall be established that they were called, if, being called, they could without danger, and that they were unwilling, or were not able, to come to the election to be celebrated, then on account of their absence, if nothing else canonical stood in the way, the election itself ought not in any way to be annulled.

Quodsi eos vocatos non fuisse constiterit, sed contemptos, infirmanda erit penitus electio taliter celebrata, nisi postea propter bonum pacis diligenter admoniti curaverint consentire. Ceterum, quum, antequam tu ad partes Hibernicas pervenisses, illa fuerit electio celebrata, et electus ipse statim coeperit ministrare, tu satis id potes sub dissimulatione transire, quum id, sicut nosti, de metropolitanis Angliae, Franciae, Alemaniae et aliarum partium remotarum, qui concorditer sunt electi, Romana ecclesia patiatur, ecclesiarum utilitate pensata, quia, si tanto tempore, quousque posset electus confirmationem cum pallio a sede apostolica obtinere, regalia non reciperet, ecclesia, quae interim administratore careret, non modicum incurreret detrimentum. § 1. Super eo autem, quod in die consecrationis suae, antequam missarum solemnia finirentur, acolythum ordinavit, pro tali excessu eum corripias et castiges, nisi forte hoc esse de antiqua consuetudine cognoveris ecclesiae Armachanae.

But if it shall have been established that they were not summoned, but were treated with contempt, the election celebrated in such a manner must be entirely invalidated, unless afterwards, for the good of peace, having been diligently admonished, they should take care to consent. Moreover, since, before you had reached the Irish parts, that election was celebrated, and the elect at once began to minister, you can quite pass over this with dissimulation, since, as you know, the Roman Church tolerates this in the case of the metropolitans of England, France, Germany, and other remote regions, who have been elected concordantly, the utility of the churches being weighed, because if, for so long a time as until the elect could obtain confirmation with the pallium from the Apostolic See, he did not receive the regalia, the church, which in the meantime would lack an administrator, would incur no small detriment. § 1. Moreover, concerning this, that on the day of his consecration, before the solemnities of the masses were finished, he ordained an acolyte, for such an excess you should rebuke and chastise him, unless perhaps you should recognize this to be of the ancient custom of the Church of Armagh.

De qua si tibi constiterit, quod nunc factum est propter simplicitatem et ruditatem gentis illius poteris misericorditer sustinere. Districte tamen ex parte nostra prohibeas, ne de cetero aliquid simile attentetur, quum solus Romanus Pontifex, qui, sicut nosti, ante hymnum angelicum consecratur, et postmodum ipse missarum sollennia incipit et perficit consecratus, in die consecrationis suae valeat ordines celebrare. Ceteri vero, qui inter epistolam et evangelium consecrantur, quia consecrati concelebrant principaliter celebranti, ne dividatur mysterium unitatis, non debent tunc ordines celebrare.

Concerning this, if it has been established for you that what has now been done was on account of the simplicity and rudeness of that people, you can mercifully tolerate it. Strictly, however, on our part you should prohibit that anything similar be attempted hereafter, since the Roman Pontiff alone—who, as you know, is consecrated before the angelic hymn, and afterward, himself consecrated, begins and completes the solemnities of the Mass—may on the day of his consecration celebrate orders. But the others, who are consecrated between the epistle and the gospel, because, once consecrated, they concelebrate with the principal celebrant, lest the mystery of unity be divided, ought not then to celebrate orders.

Praeterea quum non liceat archiepiscopo sine pallio convocare concilium, conficere chrisma, dedicare basilicas, ordinare clericos, et episcopos consecrare, multum profecto praesumit, qui, antequam impetret pallium, clericos ordinare festinat, quum id non tanquam simplex episcopus, sed tanquam archiepiscopus facere videatur. § 2. Quod autem tabulam argenteam dicitur vendidisse, dummodo ecclesiam Armachanam, sicut promisit, reddat indemnem, aequanimiter poteris praeterire, quum id de cleri et populi processerit voluntate. Sane secundum ea, quae nobis tuis literis intimasti, tibi praescripto modo duximus rescribendum; sed quum tu de circumstantiis eiusdem negotii habere valeas notitiam pleniorem, et nos de discretione tua plurimum confidamus, in isto et aliis negotiis, te sic credimus auctore Domino processurum, quod tuae sollicitudinis prudentia merito poterit commendari, et tua legatio ad honorem et commodum sedis apostolicae multipliciter redundabit.

Moreover, since it is not permitted to an archbishop without the pallium to convoke a council, to prepare chrism, to dedicate basilicas, to ordain clerics, and to consecrate bishops, he indeed presumes much who, before he obtains the pallium, hastens to ordain clerics, since he seems to do this not as a mere bishop, but as an archbishop. § 2. As to his being said to have sold a silver tablet, provided that he renders the Church of Armagh unharmed, as he promised, you can pass it over with equanimity, since this proceeded from the will of the clergy and the people. Indeed, according to the things which you intimated to us in your letters, we have judged that we should write back to you in the prescribed manner; but since you are able to have fuller knowledge of the circumstances of that same business, and we place very great confidence in your discretion, in this and other affairs we believe, with the Lord as author, that you will proceed in such a way that the prudence of your solicitude can deservedly be commended, and your legation will redound in many ways to the honor and advantage of the Apostolic See.

[Postquam autem literae etc. Datum. Ö 1202.]

[After, however, the letters, etc. Given. Ö 1202.]

CAP. XXIX.

CHAPTER 29.

Electio per minorem partem capituli facta non tenet, nec per subsequentem consensum ratificari potest. Hoc dicit secundum communem intellectum.

An election made by the lesser part of the chapter does not hold, nor can it be ratified by subsequent consent. He says this according to the common understanding.

Idem Toletano Episcopo, et Sagonensi et de Ardenna abbatibus.

The same. To the Bishop of Toledo, and to the Abbots of Sagona and of Ardenna.

Auditis et intellectis meritis causae de duabus electionibus celebratis in ecclesia Baiocensi, unam de G. archidiacono, et alteram de R. subdiacono invenimus utramque contra formam canonicam attentatam. Quum enim, inquisitis voluntatibus singulorum, decanus cum paucioribus in ipsum R., et cantor cum pluribus in dictum G. archidiaconum convenissent, solo cantore postmodum quendam alium, videlicet magistrum R. de Algediis nominante, ad nostram fuit audientiam appellatum, ne decanus, qui primam in electione vocem habebat, ad electionem procederet sine consensu totius capituli, vel maioris et sanioris partis ipsius, ut discordiae ianua, quae iam videbatur aperta, per appellationis obstaculum clauderetur. Ipse vero decanus, non habito consensu maioris partis capituli, sed longe minoris, subito in electionem prorupit, appellans, ne quis contra ipsam electionem aliquid attentaret, quamvis asseveret, quod electioni factae statim plures alii consenserunt; quum tamen ex postfacto nequiuerit convalescere quod ab initio non valebat, quoniam electio, quae fuerat irrita ipso iure, per subsequentem consensum, maxime appellatione pendente, non poterat esse rata.

Having heard and understood the merits of the cause concerning the two elections celebrated in the church of Bayeux, one of G. the archdeacon, and the other of R. the subdeacon, we found each undertaken contrary to the canonical form. For when, the wishes of each having been inquired, the dean with the fewer had agreed upon that same R., and the cantor with the more upon the said G. the archdeacon, the cantor alone thereafter naming some other, namely Master R. de Algediis, an appeal was made to our hearing, lest the dean, who had the first voice in the election, should proceed to the election without the consent of the whole chapter, or of its greater and sounder part, so that the door of discord, which already seemed to be open, might be shut by the obstacle of the appeal. But the dean himself, not having the consent of the greater part of the chapter, but of a far smaller, suddenly burst forth into the election, appealing that no one should attempt anything against that election, although he avers that several others immediately consented to the election that was made; although nevertheless that which from the beginning had no validity could not be strengthened ex post facto, since an election which was null ipso iure could not be ratified by subsequent consent, especially while an appeal was pending.

Eis ergo ad propria recedentibus, cantor et alii, qui remanserant in capitulo, post illam electionem nondum cassatam, et appellationem ad nos interpositam, a nominatione dicti archidiaconi recedentes, de novo praefatum subdiaconum absque Romani Pontificis vel etiam metropolitani proprii conscientia, quum subdiaconus esset, non solum eligere praesumpserunt, verum etiam pulsatis campanis cum processione solenni, cantando hymnum, in ecclesiam deportare. Nos igitur his et aliis, quae coram nobis fuere proposita, diligenter auditis, de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio electionem utramque duximus irritandam. [Per apostolica etc.

With them therefore returning to their own places, the cantor and the others who had remained in chapter, after that election not yet quashed and an appeal interposed to us, withdrawing from the nomination of the said archdeacon, anew presumed not only to elect the aforesaid subdeacon without the knowledge of the Roman Pontiff or even of his own metropolitan, since he was a subdeacon, but also, the bells having been rung, with a solemn procession, singing a hymn, to carry him into the church. We therefore, these and other things which were set forth before us having been diligently heard, by the common counsel of our brethren judged that both elections were to be annulled. [By apostolic etc.

Dat. Rom. ap. S. Petr.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter's.

X. Kal. Maii Ao. VIII. 1205.]

10th day before the Kalends of May, Year 8, 1205.]

CAP. XXX.

CHAPTER 30.

Potestas data compromissariis ad eligendum praelatum, re non integra revocari non potest, et desinit res esse integra, postquam compromissarii coeperunt habere tractatum.

The power given to the compromissaries to elect a prelate cannot be revoked, the matter not being entire; and the matter ceases to be entire after the compromissaries have begun to conduct deliberation.

Idem Grandissylvae et Bellaeperticae Abbatibus.

The same. To the Abbots of Grandissylva and Bellaepertica.

In causis, quae [apostolicae sedis deferuntur examini iura debent subtiliter observari quia quod in una causa per Romanum Pontificem iudicatur in aliis causis formam tribuit iudicandi.] Nimirum quum in ecclesia Tholosana vacante duo per dissensionem capituli sui, videlicet venerabilis frater noster episcopus Convenarum, et dilectus filius R. archidiaconus Agennensis nominati fuissent, et R. canonicus S. Licerii, B. archidiaconus, et R. canonicus S. Stephani Tholosani pro parte dicti episcopi, pro parte vero altera dilectus filius magister P. de Rama et G. socius eius ad nostram praesentiam accesserunt, quibus venerabilem fratrem nostrum Albanensem episcopum et dilectum filium H. tit. S. Martini presbyterum cardinalem deputavimus auditores. Coram quibus proposuerunt nuncii praedicti, quod, Quum capitulum Tholosanensis ecclesiae ad tractandum de electione episcopi convenissent, duos, scilicet R. de Ponte, et M. cellerarium, elegerunt, ut quinque de eodem capitulo eligerent electores, qui praestito iuramento de substituendi pontificis electione tractarent, et a singulis de capitulo statutum est et concessum, ut ille, quem illi quinque concorditer, vel tres ex illis eligerent, ab eis, si persona esset idonea, pro episcopo sine contradictione aliqua haberetur.

In cases,
which are [brought to the examination of the Apostolic See, the laws ought to be carefully observed with subtlety, because what in one case is judged by the Roman Pontiff grants in other cases the form of judging.] Namely, when in the church of Toulouse being vacant two had been nominated through the dissension of its chapter, to wit our venerable brother the bishop of the Convenae, and our beloved son R., archdeacon of Agen, and R., canon of St. Licerius, B., archdeacon, and R., canon of St. Stephen of Toulouse for the part of the said bishop, but on the other part our beloved son Master P. de Rama and G., his associate, came into our presence, to whom we deputed as auditors our venerable brother the bishop of Albano and our beloved son H., presbyter-cardinal of the title of St. Martin. In whose presence the aforesaid envoys proposed that, when the chapter of the church of Toulouse had convened to treat of the election of a bishop, they chose two, namely R. de Ponte and M. the cellarer, that they might choose five electors from the same chapter, who, an oath having been taken, should treat of the election of putting in the pontiff, and it was by each of the chapter established and granted that he whom those five should unanimously, or three of them, choose, if the person were suitable, should be held by them as bishop without any contradiction.

Et etiam statutum fuit expresse, quod, si quinque electores in unam personam convenire non possent, tribus ex eis concordantibus reliqui duo illorum sequi tenerentur assensum, et electionem eorum ratam habere. Postmodum vero, quum a praedictis duobus quinque electores electi fuissent, et ad tractandum de electione secessissent in partem, et non possent omnes in unam pariter concordare personam, tres ex eis convenerunt in praedictum episcopum Convennarum, qui erat archidiaconus ecclesiae Tholosanae et antequam praenunciarent nominationem ipsius, eam sub protectione apostolica posuerunt, et deinde electionem, quam de postulando eodem episcopo fecerant, capitulo publicarunt; ac reliqui duo subsequenter tertia die cum paucis de capitulo, reliquis absentibus, elegerunt praedictum archidiaconum Agennensem. Adiecerunt insuper praedicti R. et alii nuncii memorati quod a dilecto filio I. tit.

And it was also expressly decreed that, if the five electors could not agree upon one person, with three of them agreeing the remaining two would be bound to follow their assent and to hold their election as ratified. Afterwards, indeed, when the five electors had been chosen by the aforesaid two, and had withdrawn apart to deliberate about the election, and all could not equally agree upon one person, three of them agreed upon the aforesaid bishop of Comminges, who was archdeacon of the church of Toulouse, and before they gave prior notice of his nomination, they placed it under apostolic protection, and then published to the chapter the election which they had made for petitioning the same bishop; and the remaining two subsequently on the third day, with a few from the chapter, the rest being absent, elected the aforesaid archdeacon of Agen. They added moreover, the aforesaid R. and the other envoys mentioned, that by the beloved son I., presbyter cardinal of the title...

S. Priscae presbytero cardinali apostolicae sedis legato fuit ex parte illa specialis nuncius destinatus. Et quoniam episcopus ipse postulandus erat a nobis, et legatus nullum concedendi vel transferendi eum potestatem habebat, quum huiusmodi dispensatio sedi duntaxat apostolicae reservetur, ne quid contra fieret, nostram audientiam appellavit. Nuncii vero praedicti archidiaconi coram praedictis auditoribus e contrario responderunt, quod, quum praedicti quinque electores, in quos totum capitulum eligendi transtulerat potestatem, seorsum de electione tractantes, inter se dissiderent ita, quod contentiosae voces eorum a fratribus, qui remanserant in capitulo, auditae fuissent, capitulum, ipsos propter huiusmodi contentiones suspectos habentes, ad eos duos de canonicis destinarunt, per quos inhibuerunt eis ex parte nostra et praedicti legati, ne ulterius in facto procederent.

To the Cardinal Priest of S. Prisca, legate of the apostolic See, a special nuncio was dispatched from that side. And since that bishop was to be postulated from us, and the legate had no power of granting or transferring him, since a dispensation of this kind is reserved only to the apostolic See, lest anything be done to the contrary, he appealed to our audience. But the nuncios of the aforesaid archdeacon, before the aforesaid auditors, replied to the contrary that, since the aforesaid five electors—upon whom the whole chapter had transferred the power of electing—while dealing separately about the election, were disagreeing among themselves to such a degree that their contentious voices had been heard by the brethren who had remained in chapter, the chapter, holding them suspect on account of contentions of this sort, sent to them two of the canons, through whom they inhibited them, on our part and that of the aforesaid legate, from proceeding further in the matter.

Et ita potestatem eligendi, quam eis commiserant, revocarunt, mandantes eis, ut redirent ad capitulum, et pariter cum aliis fratribus de electione tractarent, et huiusmodi revocationi duo ex ipsis electoribus adhibentes consensum, reliquis tribus non contradicentibus, cum nunciis capituli ad ipsum capitulum sunt reversi. Sed alii tres, usque ad fores capituli subsecuti, ab eis postmodum discesserunt. Capitulum vero, illorum absentiam admirantes, quum tota die illa ipsorum praesentiam exspectassent, subsequenti die campanam pulsari fecerunt, sicut moris est, ad capitulum congregandum, et praedictis tribus cum paucis complicibus suis sese contumaciter absentantibus, prior, sacrista et maior cellarius ecclesiae sancti Stephani quia speciale super hoc praepositi absentis mandatum habebant, cum maiori et saniori parte capituli, convocatis abbatibus, prioribus ac monachis et aliis viris religiosis, elegit in episcopum archidiaconum supradictum.

And so they revoked the power of electing which they had committed to them, commanding them to return to the chapter and to treat together with the other brothers about the election; and to this kind of revocation, two of those electors adding their consent, the remaining three not contradicting, they returned with the envoys of the chapter to the chapter itself. But the other three, having followed as far as the doors of the chapter, afterwards withdrew from them. The chapter, however, wondering at their absence, when on that whole day they had awaited their presence, on the following day had the bell rung, as is the custom, for assembling the chapter; and the aforesaid three, with a few of their accomplices, contumaciously absenting themselves, the prior, the sacrist, and the greater cellarer of the church of Saint Stephen—because they had the special mandate of the absent provost in this matter—together with the greater and sounder part of the chapter, the abbots, priors, and monks and other religious men having been convoked, elected the aforesaid archdeacon as bishop.

Exhibuerunt etiam eiusdem archidiaconi nuncii literas praedicti legati, quas nobis super hoc destinavit. [Quarum erat continentia, quod quum capitulum Tholosanum de electione pontificis tractatum haberet, quibusdam episcopum Convenarum, reliquis archidiaconum Agenensem eligentibus in duos sua vota divisit, et utraque electio fuit illi a partibus diversis diversis temporibus praesentata] (et infra.) Quum autem praedicti auditores praemissa nobis et fratribus nostris fideliter retulissent, nos memoratum legatum piam intentionem in hoc facto habuisse pro certo credentes, ex ipso tamen tenore literarum suarum intelleximus, eum circumventum fuisse et per subreptionem, tacita veritate, perpendimus elicitum et extortum quicquid ab eo fuit obtentum, quum in ipsis literis non expresserit formam postulationis. Quia vero postulatio de episcopo Convennarum, quae praecesserat, et facta erat per eos, in quos totum capitulum eligendi transtulerat potestatem, propter quod unanimiter de consensu totius capituli intelligitur esse facta, quam potestatem, quum res non esset integra, quia in tractatu iam processerant electores, et tres, duobus discordantibus, convenerant in unam personam, capitulum minime potuit revocare, praesertim ex illa causa, quia illi quinque erant discordes, quum in translatione potestatis illius manifeste fuisset expressum, quod, si illos quinque contingeret dissidere electionem trium ratam haberent et firmam.

They also produced letters of the same archdeacon’s envoys from the aforesaid legate, which he sent to us on this matter. [The contents of which were that, since the Chapter of Toulouse had held deliberation concerning the election of a pontiff, some choosing the bishop of the Convenae, the others choosing the archdeacon of Agen, it divided its votes into two, and each election was presented to him by different parties at different times] (and below.) But when the aforesaid auditors had faithfully reported the premises to us and to our brothers, we, believing for certain that the aforesaid legate had had a pious intention in this affair, nevertheless from the very tenor of his letters understood that he had been circumvented, and we considered that, with the truth kept silent, by surreption whatever was obtained from him had been elicited and extorted, since in those letters he had not expressed the form of the postulation. Moreover, because the postulation concerning the bishop of the Convenae, which had come earlier, and had been made by those into whom the whole chapter had transferred the power of electing, on account of which it is understood to have been made unanimously by the consent of the whole chapter, which power, since the matter was not intact, because the electors had already proceeded in their discussion, and three, the two disagreeing, had agreed upon a single person, the chapter was by no means able to revoke, especially for this cause, that those five were at variance, since in the transfer of that power it had been plainly expressed that, if it should befall those five to disagree, they should hold the election of the three as ratified and firm.

Praeterea liquet, eundem legatum fuisse deceptum, quoniam in commissione sua, praetermisso de electione episcopi, qui erat a nobis solummodo postulandus, inquisitionem de sola electione archidiaconi sub forma superius expressa commisit, super quibus nequaquam taliter processissent, si omnia ex ordine, prout fuit in veritate processum, sibi enarrata fuissent. Unde, communicato fratrum nostrorum consilio electionem ipsius archidiaconi non ex vitio vel culpa personae ipsius, sed quia processum eius minus canonicum esse cognovimus, et ipsum legatum multipliciter circumventum, decernimus penitus irritandam. Quocirca discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus et districte praecipimus, quatenus, si personam ipsius episcopi utilem et necessariam inveneritis ad regimen ecclesiae Tholosanae, et idoneam tam scientia literarum, quam suae conversationis exemplo ad haereticorum perfidiam de Tholosana dioecesi exstirpandam, quae ibi per negligentiam praesulum miserabiliter et damnabiliter hactenus pullulavit, et si vobis ita constiterit, transeundi ad ecclesiam Tholosanam, propter urgentem necessitatem, et eorundem utilitatem auctoritate nostra, sublato cuiuslibet contradictionis et appellationis obstaculo, ei licentiam tribuatis; alioquin, ipsius postulatione repulsa, capitulo eiusdem ecclesiae auctoritate apostolica iniungatis, ut personam ad hoc idoneam eligant in pastorem.

Furthermore, it is clear that the same legate was deceived, since in his commission, with the matter of the election of the bishop—who was to be by us only postulated—omitted, he committed an inquisition concerning only the election of the archdeacon under the form expressed above; and they would by no means have proceeded thus in these matters, if everything in order, just as it had in truth proceeded, had been narrated to him. Wherefore, having taken counsel with our brothers, we decree the election of that archdeacon to be entirely annulled—not from defect or fault of his person, but because we have recognized his process to be less canonical, and that the legate himself was in many ways circumvented. Therefore we command and strictly enjoin upon your discretion by apostolic writings, that, if you shall have found the person of that bishop useful and necessary for the governance of the Church of Toulouse, and suitable both by the science of letters and by the example of his conduct for extirpating the perfidy of heretics from the Toulouse diocese, which there through the negligence of prelates has miserably and damnably hitherto sprouted, and if it shall thus be clear to you, that he pass over to the Church of Toulouse, on account of urgent necessity and their utility, by our authority, the obstacle of any contradiction and appeal being removed, you grant him license; otherwise, his postulation being repelled, you enjoin upon the chapter of the same church by apostolic authority that they elect as pastor a person suitable for this.

CAP. XXXI.

CHAPTER 31.

De consuetudine potest canonicorum electio ad solum capitulum pertinere. Hoc dicit, et solet quotidie allegari.

By custom, the election of the canons can pertain to the chapter alone. He says this, and it is wont to be cited daily.

Idem Episcopo Florentino.

The same to the Bishop of Florence.

Quum ecclesia Vulterana debito canonicorum obsequio longo fuisset tempore destituta, venerabilis frater noster Vulteranus episcopus, volens ministrorum defectum in eadem ecclesia restaurare, canonicos quosdam elegit, et instituit in eadem, quos residentes canonici recipere noluerunt, asserentes, quod talis electio fuerat in eorum praeiudicium attentata. Quumque super hoc suam ad nos ipse episcopus querimoniam destinasset, causam ipsam tibi commisimus fine canonico terminandam. [Partibus autem in tua praesentia constitutis, idem episcopus a te per suum petit responsalem ut dilectos filios, magistrum Mitidum, Ildebrandum, Placitum, Tholomaeum et Sofredum ab iniuria, quam ei super electione canonicorum Vulteranae ecclesiae inferunt, prohiberes, et ut ipsum iure electionis uti libere patiantur, nec ipsi eligenti, vel volenti eligere contradicant, asserens idem episcopus, quod ius eligendi canonicos ad ipsum multipliciter pertinebat.

Since the Vulteran church had for a long time been destitute of the due obsequy of the canons, our venerable brother the Vulteran bishop, wishing to restore the defect of ministers in the same church, chose certain canons and instituted them therein, whom the resident canons were unwilling to receive, asserting that such an election had been attempted to their prejudice. And when the bishop himself had sent his complaint to us on this matter, we committed the case to you to be terminated with a canonical end. [But with the parties set in your presence, the same bishop asks of you through his responsalis that you prohibit the beloved sons, Master Mitidus, Ildebrandus, Placitus, Tholomaeus, and Sofredus, from the injury which they inflict upon him concerning the election of canons of the Vulteran church, and that they allow him to use the right of election freely, nor do they contradict him when electing or wishing to elect, the same bishop asserting that the right of electing canons pertained to him in multiple ways.

Iure siquidem communi hoc sibi competere proponebat, quia, secundum quod sacrorum canonum statuta declarant, in sua ecclesia dispositionem, provisionem et iurisdictionem episcopus plenam habet; nam, etsi subditorum quisquam in suo officio et honore praecedat, episcopus tamen provisor est et ordinator in cunctis. Proposuit etiam, quod ex approbata consuetudine canonicorum electio ad ipsum in eadem ecclesia pertinet, sicut ad praelatos ceteros regionis, qui vel per se vel cum sociis consueverunt electionem facere clericorum. Sed, etsi dubium esset, cuiusmodi consuetudo in talibus servaretur ibidem, ad sedem esset apostolicam recurrendum, quum in aliis ecclesiis, quae sunt metropolitano subiectae, in huiusmodi dubiis ad consuetudinem metropoleos recurratur.

By common law indeed he asserted that this belonged to him, because, according to what the statutes of the sacred canons declare, in his own church the bishop has full disposition, provision, and jurisdiction; for, even if any one of the subjects should precede in his office and honor, nevertheless the bishop is the provider and ordainer in all things. He also proposed that by approved custom the election of canons pertains to him in the same church, just as to the other prelates of the region, who are accustomed either by themselves or with associates to make the election of clerics. But even if it were doubtful what sort of custom in such matters were observed there, recourse should be had to the Apostolic See, since in other churches which are subject to the metropolitan, in doubts of this kind recourse is had to the custom of the metropolis.

Unde, quum apud Romanam ecclesiam solus summus Pontifex eligat cardinales, canonicorum electionem in sua ecclesia idem episcopus ad se solum proposuit pertinere. Allegabat insuper, quod etsi nullo iure talis ad ipsum pertinuisset electio, propter canonicorum tamen negligentiam eligendi auctoritas ad ipsum fuerat devoluta. Sacris siquidem constitutionibus est permissum, ut episcopus quilibet pastorali diligentia suorum suppleat negligentiam clericorum.

Whence, since in the Roman Church the supreme Pontiff alone elects cardinals, the same bishop proposed that in his own church the election of canons should pertain to himself alone. He further alleged that even if by no law such an election had pertained to him, nevertheless, on account of the negligence of the canons in electing, the authority of choosing had devolved upon him. For by sacred constitutions it is permitted that any bishop, by pastoral diligence, may supply for the negligence of the clerics.

In Lateranensi quoque concilio noscitur esse statutum, ut, quum donatio dignitatis vel beneficii ad capitulum pertinet, si infra sex mensium spatium conferre distulerit, hoc episcopus exsequatur. Pro parte vero capituli fuit ex adverso responsum, quod de iure communi non ad episcopum, sed ad ipsum capitulum canonicorum electio pertinebat, ad quod probandum quosdam canones allegabant. Verum, quum circa hoc diversa canonum edita sint statuta, videbatur potius ad diversorum locorum consuetudines huiusmodi diversitas referenda, quum canonicorum electio alicubi ad solum spectet episcopum, alibi ad capitulum tantum, et alicubi pariter ad utrosque.

In the Lateran council as well it is known to have been statuted that, when the donation of a dignity or benefice pertains to the chapter, if within the space of six months it has delayed to confer it, the bishop shall execute this. But on behalf of the chapter there was, on the contrary, an answer that by the common law the election pertained not to the bishop, but to the chapter of the canons itself; to prove which they alleged certain canons. Yet, since different statutes of the canons have been issued on this matter, such diversity seemed rather to be referable to the customs of different places, since the canons’ election in some places pertains to the bishop alone, elsewhere to the chapter only, and in some places equally to both.

Sed, nec consuetudo sedis apostolicae, quam pro se praedictus episcopus introduxit, obesse posse canonicis videbatur, quia, licet summus Pontifex solus eligat cardinales, in sua tamen ecclesia cathedrali, Lateranensi videlicet, vel principis Apostolorum basilica, capitulum sibi concanonicos eligere consuevit, quamvis et in ipsis, sicut et in aliis ecclesiis, Romanus Pontifex interdum canonicos eligat ex plenitudine potestatis. Ad hoc autem, quod episcopus consequenter obiecit, quia videlicet propter capituli negligentiam eligendi ius ad ipsum fuerat devolutum, pars capituli respondebat, quod, propter neglectum huiusmodi episcopus eligendi ius sibi non potuit vendicare, nisi canonica monitione praemissa, quum in tali casu tempus minime sit determinatum a canone, quod vicem commonitionis suppleat, vel interpellare fingatur, praesertim, quum electos a canonicis et episcopo praesentatos ipse pro suae voluntatis arbitrio noluit confirmare. Quum itaque ordinarii iuris sit, ut admonitio debeat praeire vindictam, et praetextu negligentiae, monitione omissa episcopus poenam inflixerit, pars eadem proponebat merito improbandum quod ab ipso temere noscitur attentatum.

But neither did the custom of the Apostolic See, which the aforesaid bishop adduced on his own behalf, seem able to prejudice the canons, because, although the Supreme Pontiff alone chooses cardinals, nevertheless in his own cathedral church, namely the Lateran, or in the basilica of the Prince of the Apostles, the chapter is accustomed to choose fellow-canons for him, although even in those, as in other churches, the Roman Pontiff sometimes chooses canons from the plenitude of power. As to this, however, which the bishop thereupon objected—namely, that on account of the chapter’s negligence the right of choosing had devolved to him—the chapter’s party responded that, by reason of such neglect, the bishop could not vindicate to himself the right of choosing unless a canonical monition had first been given, since in such a case no time-limit is at all determined by canon to supply the place of a warning or to be deemed an interpellation, especially since he himself, at the arbitrium of his own will, refused to confirm those elected by the canons and presented by the bishop. Since therefore it is of ordinary law that admonition ought to precede punishment, and the bishop, under the pretext of negligence, with monition omitted, inflicted a penalty, that same party was proposing that what is known to have been rashly attempted by him should deservedly be disapproved.

Adiecit et pars capituli, quod Lateranensis statutum concilii sibi locum non vendicat in illis ecclesiis, in quibus nequaquam ecclesiastica beneficia sunt distincta, sed in quibus certus est canonicorum numerus et distinctae praebendae. Praeterea, si, iuxta tenorem concilii, deprehenderentur praedicti canonici negligentes, episcopus tamen, qui diuturniori tempore fuit negligens, ex hoc ius minime acquisivit, qui propter hoc esset merito puniendus, quum nemo ex eodem facto poenam debeat et praemium promereri; quin immo in hoc casu eligendi potestas ad superiorem exstitit merito devoluta, sicut ex concilii tenore coniicitur manifeste, unde in alienam messem non debuit mittere falcem suam. Quum autem haec et alia coram te fuissent proposita, et tu tamen deliberare velles super sententia proferenda, quia nimis diversa concilia reperisti, et fere quilibet, cuius in hac parte volebas uti consilio, suspectus alterutri parti ex causis aliquibus habebatur, causam instructam ad nostram praesentiam remisisti, sub tuo sigillo attestationes et allegationes partis utriusque transmittens.] Nos vero utriusque partis attestationibus et rationibus diligenter inspectis, de consilio fratrum nostrorum fraternitati tuae praesentium auctoritate mandamus, quatenus super primo articulo petitionis episcopi, in quo postulavit a te, ut praenominatos canonicos ab iniuria, quam ei super electione canonicorum Vulteranensis ecclesiae inferunt, prohiberes, ab impetitione ipsius episcopi saepe dictos canonicos appellatione postposita absolvere non postponas; quia, sicut iuris regula dicit, non videtur iniuriam facere qui utitur iure suo, quum per testes longe melius sit probatum, quod canonici supradicti hoc iure usi fuerint, ante quam episcopus memoratus.

Moreover, the party of the chapter added that the Lateran statute of the council does not claim place for itself in those churches in which ecclesiastical benefices are by no means distinct, but in those in which the number of canons is fixed and the prebends are distinct. Furthermore, if, according to the tenor of the council, the aforesaid canons were found negligent, nevertheless the bishop, who for a longer time was negligent, from this in no way acquired a right—he who on that account ought deservedly to be punished—since no one ought from the same deed to deserve both punishment and reward; nay rather, in this case the power of electing stood deservedly devolved to the superior, as is manifestly inferred from the tenor of the council, wherefore he ought not to have sent his sickle into another’s harvest. But when these and other things had been set forth before you, and yet you wished to deliberate upon the sentence to be pronounced, because you found councils too diverse, and almost everyone whose counsel you wished to use in this matter was held as suspected by one party or the other for certain causes, you sent the case, fully instructed, to our presence, transmitting under your seal the attestations and allegations of each party.] But we, with the attestations and reasons of each party diligently inspected, by the counsel of our brothers, by the authority of these presents command your fraternity, that, as to the first article of the bishop’s petition, in which he asked you to forbid the aforesaid canons from the injury which they inflict upon him concerning the election of the canons of the Vulterran church, you do not delay to absolve the oft-said canons from the attack of the said bishop, appeal set aside; because, as the rule of law says, he does not seem to do injury who uses his own right, since by witnesses it has been far better proved that the above-said canons have used this right before the aforesaid bishop.

In secundo quoque praescriptae petitionis articulo, quo idem petebat episcopus, ut dicti canonici ipsum iure electionis uti libere paterentur, absolvere studeas canonicos saepedictos, maxime si sit notorium, quod in Thuscia generalis consuetudo servetur, ut in cathedralibus ecclesiis solum capitulum, irrequisito episcopo, eligendi canonicos habeat facultatem. [Ne vero etc. Dat.

In the second article also of the aforesaid petition, wherein the same bishop requested that the said canons should allow him to use the right of election freely, you should strive to absolve the oft-said canons, especially if it be notorious that in Tuscany the general consuetude is observed, that in cathedral churches the chapter alone, without the bishop being asked, has the faculty of electing canons. [Lest indeed, etc. Dated.

Lat. XVI. Kal.

Lateran, 16 Kalends.

Nov. Ao. IX. 1206.]

Nov. Year 9. 1206.]

CAP. XXXII.

CHAPTER 32.

Compromittentes tenentur recipere electum a compromissariis, si sit dignus, nisi contra formam compromissi eum appareat electum.

Compromitters are bound to receive the person elected by the compromissaries, if he be worthy, unless he appears to have been elected contrary to the form of the compromise.

Idem Abbati sancti Victoris, et Decano Parisiensi, et Magistro R. Decortonensi, Canonico Morinensi.

The same to the Abbot of Saint Victor, and to the Dean of Paris, and to Master R. of Decorton, canon of the Morini.

Quum dilectus filius, archidiaconus Morinensis nobis intimasset (Et infra:) Ecclesia Morinensi episcopi solatio destituta, canonici eiusdem ecclesiae de pastoris substitutione tractantes, in tres canonicos Morinenses potestatem eligendi episcopum unanimiter contulerunt, iuramento interposito promittentes, ut illum reciperent in pastorem, quem de gremio ipsius ecclesiae ducerent in episcopum eligendum; qui, postmodum examinatis voluntatibus singulorum, Ioannem archidiaconum eiusdem ecclesiae, virum literatum, providum et discretum, in episcopum elegerunt. Metropolitanus quoque tam electionem et electi personam diligenter examinans, quam etiam super ipsius aetate, de cuius defectu fuerat ab aliquibus dubitatum, inquirens sollicite veritatem, per sententiam declarando electum ipsum minime sustinere in aetate defectum, electionem factam de ipso utpote canonice celebratam solenniter confirmavit. Qui postea, regalibus receptis a rege ad petitionem eiusdem capituli a venerabili fratre nostro Atrebatensi episcopo de mandato metropolitani praedicti fuit in presbyterum ordinatus, et aliquamdiu nullo contradicente liberam et pacificam tam in spiritualibus quam in temporalibus administrationem obtinuit in ecclesia Morinensi.

When the beloved son, the Morinensis archdeacon, had intimated to us (And below:) that the Morinensis Church, deprived of the solace of a bishop, the canons of the same church, treating of the substitution of a pastor, unanimously conferred upon three Morinensis canons the power of electing a bishop, interposing an oath and promising that they would receive as pastor him whom, from the bosom of that church, they would lead forth to be elected as bishop; who afterwards, the wishes of each individual having been examined, chose John, archdeacon of the same church, a learned, provident, and discreet man, as bishop. The Metropolitan also, diligently examining both the election and the person of the elect, and likewise, concerning his age—about the defect of which some had doubted—solicitously inquiring the truth, by a sentence declaring that the elect in no way sustained a defect of age, solemnly confirmed the election made of him as having been celebrated canonically. He afterwards, the regalia having been received from the king at the petition of the same chapter, was ordained as presbyter by our venerable brother, the Atrebatensian bishop, by mandate of the aforesaid Metropolitan, and for some time, with no one contradicting, he obtained free and peaceful administration both in spirituals and in temporals in the Morinensis Church.

Unde procuratores ipsi a nobis humiliter petierunt, ut his, qui post haec omnia invidiae stimulis agitati, contra factum proprium temere veniendo, adversus electum ipsum materiam discordiae suscitare praesumunt, silentium imponentes, et memoratam electionem tam concorditer celebratam et confirmatam solenniter approbantes, eidem faceremus electo munus consecrationis impendi, multorum super hoc non solum abbatum et capitulorum civitatis et dioecesis Morinensis, sed etiam aliorum presbyterorum nobis literis praesentatis, qui super praemissis omnibus testimonium perhibentes, electum ipsum de literatura, discretione ac honestate reddiderunt apud nos multipliciter commendatum, quinimmo et electorum ipsorum super hoc nobis literas obtulerunt, quibus erat illarum literarum de verbo ad verbum, sicut iidem asserunt electores, tenor insertus, quae de potestate ipsis tradita iuxta praemissam formam confectae in capitulo fuerant, et sigillo capituli sigillatae. Verum supradictus B., qui contra electum venerat memoratum, proposuit ex adverso, quod, quum supradictis tribus sub hac forma iuramento praestito fuerat eligendi concessa potestas, ut capitulum eum recipere teneretur, quem illi tres ab omnibus, vel maiori et saniori parte de gremio ipsius ecclesiae nominatum eligerent in pastorem, electores ipsi terminos potestatis sibi traditae non servantes, praedictum archidiaconum eligere praesumpserunt, quem pauci de capitulo nominarant. Unde canonici Morinenses postmodum admirantes, qualiter archidiaconus electus fuerat memoratus, quum plures essent in eadem ecclesia digniores, super electionis processu invicem colloquendo coeperunt fere omnes publice profiteri, quod nullatenus archidiaconum nominarant supra dictum, et reputantes, se in hac parte delusos, quod super hoc factum fuerat, per eundem B., cui suas testimoniales literas assignarunt, nostro curaverunt apostolatui reserare.

Whence the procurators themselves humbly asked of us that, imposing silence upon those who, after all these things, driven by the goads of envy, by rashly going against their own deed presume to stir up a matter of discord against the elect himself, and solemnly approving the aforesaid election so concordantly celebrated and confirmed, we would cause the gift of consecration to be conferred upon the same elect—many letters on this having been presented to us not only from abbots and from the chapters of the city and diocese of the Morini, but also from other presbyters, who, bearing testimony concerning all the aforesaid, rendered the same elect multiply commended with us for his literature (learning), discretion, and honesty; nay rather, even the electors themselves offered letters to us on this, in which, word for word, as the same electors assert, the tenor of those letters had been inserted which, concerning the power delivered to them, had been drawn up in chapter according to the aforesaid form and sealed with the seal of the chapter. However, the aforesaid B., who had come against the aforesaid elect, alleged on the contrary that, when to the aforesaid three, under this form with an oath taken, the power of electing had been granted—namely, that the chapter should be bound to receive him whom those three, from all, or from the greater and sounder part from the bosom of that same church, named, should elect as pastor—the electors themselves, not observing the terms of the power delivered to them, presumed to elect the aforesaid archdeacon, whom a few of the chapter had named. Whence the canons of the Morini, afterward wondering how the archdeacon had been elected as aforesaid, since there were several more worthy in the same church, conversing among themselves about the process of the election, began almost all publicly to profess that by no means had they named the above-said archdeacon; and, reckoning themselves deceived in this part, they took care to disclose to our apostolate, through that same B., to whom they assigned their testimonial letters, what had been done in this matter.

Qui coram nobis sollicite postulavit, ut eadem electione cassata faceremus ipsi ecclesiae de persona idonea canonice provideri, quum vere omnes canonici Morinenses sint parati, sicut asseruit, praestito iuramento firmare, quod praefatum archidiaconum nunquam in episcopum nominarant, et legitime possit ostendi, quod iuxta praemissam formam supradictis tribus collata fuerit auctoritas eligendi, ut videlicet de gremio ecclesiae illum eligerent, in quem omnes, vel maior et sanior pars capituli consentirent, asserens idem B., se nihilominus probaturum, quod saepe dictus electus patitur in aetate defectum. Nos vero attendentes, quia res perniciosa esset exemplo, si per surreptionis astutiam quis ascenderet ad apicem dignitatis, de consilio fratrum nostrorum ita duximus providendum, ut, praestito a contradictoribus iuramento, quod ipsi malitiose contra praefatum electum non moveant quaestionem huiusmodi, praedicti tres electores iuramenti vinculo adstringantur dicere veritatem, quot ex canonicis examinationis tempore in praefatum archidiaconum convenerunt. Et si tres simul aut duo saltem ex ipsis iurati dixerint, maiorem canonicorum partem in ipsum archidiaconum convenisse, vos contradictoribus silentium imponatis, quum contra hoc eorum esset probatio insufficiens, eo, quod singuli essent in suis testimoniis singulares.

who before us anxiously petitioned that, the same election having been quashed, we should cause that church to be canonically provided with a suitable person, since truly all the canons of Morinensis, as he asserted, are prepared, an oath having been taken, to affirm that they never named the aforesaid archdeacon as bishop; and that it can lawfully be shown that, according to the aforesaid form, authority of electing had been conferred upon the above-mentioned three, to wit, that from the bosom of the church they should elect him to whom all, or the greater and sounder part of the chapter, would consent—asserting that the same B. would nonetheless prove that the oft-said elect suffers a defect in age. We, however, considering that it would be a pernicious thing by way of example if by the craft of surreption someone should ascend to the apex of dignity, by the counsel of our brothers judged it should thus be provided: that, an oath having been taken by the contradictors that they do not maliciously move a question of this sort against the aforesaid elect, the aforesaid three electors be bound by the bond of an oath to speak the truth, how many of the canons at the time of the examination agreed upon the aforesaid archdeacon. And if the three together, or at least two of them, sworn, shall say that the greater part of the canons agreed upon that archdeacon, you shall impose silence upon the contradictors, since against this their proof would be insufficient, for the reason that each is singular in his own testimony.

Si vero per eorum depositiones constiterit, saepedictum archidiaconum exstitisse a paucioribus nominatum, tunc demum sollicite audiatis quicquid utraque pars proposuerit, ad probandum formam, secundum quam eligendi potestas praefatis tribus electoribus asseritur fuisse concessa, et, si fuerit sufficienter ostensum, quod illum de gremio ecclesiae secundum formam sibi traditam debebant eligere, in quem omnes, vel maior et sanior pars capituli conveniret, vos electionem ipsius archidiaconi omnino cassetis, et faciatis ecclesiae Morinensi per electionem canonicam de persona idonea in pontificem provideri. Alioquin, quod de ipso factum est ratum habentes, contradictores ab eius impetitione per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione postposita compescatis, praefatum B. praebenda Morinensis ecclesiae spoliantes, qui se ad hanc poenam, si forsan in probatione deficeret, obligavit; non obstante, quod super aetatis defectu obiectum est contra illum, quum idem canonicus huic obiectioni non multum institerit, et super hoc a metropolitano fuerit iudicatum, cuius sententia in rem transiit iudicatam, quum infra decendium non fuerit legitima provocatione suspensa. [Quod si non omnes etc.

But if indeed by their depositions it shall have been established that the oft-said archdeacon was named by fewer, then at last you should carefully hear whatever each party shall have proposed, to prove the form according to which the power of electing is asserted to have been granted to the aforesaid three electors; and, if it shall have been sufficiently shown that they ought to elect from the bosom of the church, according to the form handed over to them, him upon whom all, or the greater and sounder part of the chapter would agree, you should altogether annul the election of that archdeacon, and cause the church of the Morini to be provided with a pontiff by a canonical election of a suitable person. Otherwise, holding as ratified what has been done concerning him, you should restrain the contradictors from their impugnation of him by ecclesiastical censure, appeal set aside, despoiling the aforesaid B. of a prebend of the church of the Morini, who bound himself to this penalty if perchance he should fail in proof; notwithstanding what was objected against him concerning defect of age, since that same canon did not press this objection much, and on this there was judgment by the metropolitan, whose sentence has passed into a matter adjudged, since within the ten-day period it was not suspended by a legitimate provocation. [But if not all, etc.

Dat. Lat. IV. Non.

Given at the Lateran 4. of the Nones.

April. Ao. XI. 1208.]

April. Year 11. 1208.]

CAP. XXXIII.

CHAPTER 33.

Si ex septem compromissariis tres eligunt quartum, et ille consentit, et est idoneus, confirmabitur electio.

If out of seven compromissaries three choose a fourth, and he consents, and is suitable, the election will be confirmed.

Idem Episcopo Baiocensi.

The same to the Bishop of Bayeux.

Quum in iure peritus exsistas, et copiam habeas peritorum non possumus non mirari, quod super quibusdam iuris articulis nos consulere voluisti, qui nihil aut modicum dubitationis continere noscuntur. Primus siquidem tuae consultationis articulus continebat, quod cuiusdam ecclesiae decano defuncto, eiusdem loci capitulum sub hac forma in septem ex ipsis canonicis compromisit, ut illum, quem ex se vel aliis de gremio ipsius ecclesiae omnes pariter, vel maior eorum pars nominaret, idem capitulum reciperet in decanum. Unde, quum unus ex illis septem a tribus ipsorum, et alius, qui non erat de numero eorundem, a tribus aliis in decanum fuerint nominati, requisisti, uter eorum assumi debeat a capitulo in decanum.

Since you are expert in law, and have a supply of experts, we cannot but marvel that you wished to consult us concerning certain articles of law, which are known to contain nothing or only a little doubt. For the first article of your consultation contained that, the dean of a certain church having died, the chapter of the same place, under this form, compromised in seven of the canons themselves, that the same chapter should receive into the deanery him whom, from among themselves or others from the bosom of that church, all together, or the greater part of them, would nominate. Whence, since one of those seven was nominated into the deanery by three of them, and another, who was not of their number, by three others, you asked which of them ought to be assumed by the chapter as dean.

Super quo tibi taliter respondemus, quod is, qui de numero septem a tribus eorum dignoscitur nominatus, iuxta compromissi tenorem debet in decanum assumi, dummodo electioni de se factae consentiat, et aliquod canonicum non obsistat. Praeterea etc. (cf. c. 31. de off.

On which we respond to you thus, that he who, from the number seven, is discerned to have been nominated by three of them, according to the tenor of the compromise, ought to be received as dean, provided that he consents to the election made of himself, and that no canonical impediment stands in the way. Moreover etc. (cf. c. 31. on the office.

iud. del. I. 29.) [Dat.

delegated judge 1. 29.) [Dated.

Lat. X. Kal. Dec.

Lateran, the 10th day before the Kalends of December.

Pont. nostr. Ao. XI. 1208.]

In the 11th year of our Pontificate, 1208.]

CAP. XXXIV.

CHAPTER 34.

Electio imperatoris, spectat ad principes Germanos, tres praelatos, et quatuor laicos, et electio facta per eorum maiorem partem, ceteris non contemptis, tenet. Et ad Papam pertinet electum examinare, approbare, et inungere, consecrare, et coronare, si est dignus; vel reiicere, si est indignus, ut quia sacrilegus, excommunicatus, tyrannus, fatuus et haereticus, paganus, periurus, vel ecclesiae persecutor. Et electoribus nolentibus eligere, Papa supplet.

The election of the emperor pertains to the German princes, three prelates, and four laymen; and an election made by their greater part, with the others not disregarded, holds. And it pertains to the Pope to examine, approve, and anoint, consecrate, and crown the elect, if he is worthy; or to reject him, if he is unworthy, as because he is sacrilegious, excommunicated, a tyrant, a fool and a heretic, a pagan, perjured, or a persecutor of the church. And if the electors are unwilling to elect, the Pope supplies.

Et data paritate vocum eligentium, nec accedente maiori concordia, Papa potest gratificari cui vult. H. d. notanter iste textus.

And, parity of the votes of the electors being given, and no greater concord supervening, the Pope can gratify whom he wills. Here this text says this notably.

Idem Duci Caringiae.

The same to the Duke of Carinthia.

Venerabilem fratrem nostrum Salzburgensem archiepiscopum, et dilectum filium abbatem de Salem et nobilem virum marchionem orientalem, quorundam principum nuncios ad sedem apostolicam destinatos benigne recepimus, et eis benevolam duximus audientiam indulgendum. Literas quoque, quas per eos quidam nobiles principes destinarunt, diligenter perlegi fecimus, et quae continebantur in eis, notavimus universa. Inter cetera vero quidam principes hac praecipue obiectione sunt usi, dicentes, quod venerabilis frater noster Praenestinus episcopus apostolicae sedis legatus aut electoris gessit aut cognitoris personam; si electoris, in messem alienam miserat falcem suam, et electioni se ingerens principum derogaverat dignitati; si cognitoris, absente altera partium, videtur perperam processisse, quum citata non fuerit, et ideo non debuit contumax iudicari.

We kindly received our venerable brother, the archbishop of Salzburg, and our beloved son, the abbot of Salem, and the noble man, the eastern margrave, envoys of certain princes sent to the apostolic see, and we deemed it right to grant them a benevolent audience. We also caused the letters which certain noble princes sent through them to be carefully read through, and we noted all the things contained in them. Among other matters, however, certain princes used this objection chiefly, saying that our venerable brother the bishop of Praeneste, legate of the apostolic see, acted either in the person of an elector or of a cognitor; if as an elector, he sent his sickle into another’s harvest, and by thrusting himself into the election of the princes he derogated from their dignity; if as a cognitor, with the other party absent, he seems to have proceeded amiss, since it had not been cited, and therefore it ought not to have been judged contumacious.

Verum nos, qui secundum apostolicae servitutis officium sumus singulis in iustitia debitores, sicut iustitiam nostram ab aliis nolumus usurpari, sic ius principum nobis nolumus vindicare. Verum illis principibus ius et potestatem eligendi regem, in imperatorem postmodum promovendum, recognoscimus, ut debemus, ad quos de iure ac antiqua consuetudine noscitur pertinere; praesertim, quum ad eos ius et potestas huiusmodi ab apostolica sede pervenerit, quae Romanum imperium in personam magnifici Caroli a Graecis transtulit in Germanos. Sed et principes recognoscere debent, et utique recognoscunt, sicut iidem in nostra recognovere praesentia, quod ius et auctoritas examinandi personam electam in regem et promovendam ad imperium ad nos spectat, qui eum inungimus, consecramus et coronamus.

But we, who according to the office of apostolic servitude are debtors to each in justice, just as we do not wish our justice to be usurped by others, so we do not wish to vindicate to ourselves the right of the princes. Rather, we recognize for those princes the right and power of electing a king, to be afterwards promoted to emperor, as we ought, to whom by right and by ancient custom it is known to pertain; especially since to them the right and power of this sort has come from the Apostolic See, which transferred the Roman Empire in the person of the magnificent Charles from the Greeks to the Germans. But the princes also ought to recognize, and indeed do recognize, as those same men acknowledged in our presence, that the right and authority of examining the person elected as king and to be promoted to the empire pertains to us, who anoint him, consecrate, and crown.

Est enim regulariter et generaliter observatum, ut ad eum examinatio personae pertineat, ad quem impositio manus spectat. Numquid enim, si principes non solum in discordia, sed etiam in concordia sacrilegum quemcunque, vel excommunicatum in regem, tyrannum, vel fatuum, haereticum eligerent, aut paganum, nos inungere, consecrare ac coronare hominem huiusmodi deberemus? Absit omnino.

For it has been regularly and generally observed that the examination of the person pertains to him to whom the laying on of the hand pertains. For would we, if the princes, not only in discord but even in concord, should choose as king any sacrilegious person or an excommunicate, a tyrant or a fool, a heretic, or a pagan, have to anoint, consecrate, and crown such a man? Far be it altogether.

Obiectioni ergo principum respondentes, asserimus, quod legatus noster episcopus Praenestinus carissimum in Christo filium nostrum approbando regem Ottonem, et reprobando Philippum ducem Suaviae, nec electoris gessit personam, iuxta quod nobis per literas suas quidam principum opponebant, utpote qui nec fecit aliquem eligi, nec elegit, et sic electioni nequaquam ingessit se, nec cognitoris personam exhibuit, quum neutrius electionem quoad factum eligentium confirmandam duxerit, aut etiam infirmandam. Et sic ius sibi principum nullatenus usurpavit, aut venit contra illud, Exercuit autem denunciatoris officium, quia personam ducis eiusdem indignam, et personam regis denunciavit idoneam quoad imperium obtinendum, non tam propter studia eligentium, quam propter merita electorum; quamvis plures ex illis, qui eligendi regem in imperatorem promovendum de iure ac de consuetudine obtinent potestatem, consensisse perhibeantur in ipsum regem Ottonem, et ex eo, quod fautores Philippi ducis, absentibus aliis et contemptis, ipsum eligere praesumpserunt, pateat, eos perperam processisse, quum explorati sit iuris, quod electioni plus contemptus unius, quam contradictio multorum obsistat. Unde, quia privilegium meruerunt amittere, qui permissa sibi abusi sunt potestate, videri non immerito potest, quod iniuria huiusmodi non obstante ceteri uti poterint iure suo.

Answering therefore the princes’ objection, we assert that our legate, the bishop of Praeneste, by approving our dearest son in Christ, King Otto, and reprobating Philip, duke of Swabia, did not bear the person of an elector, as certain of the princes were objecting to us by their letters, inasmuch as he neither caused anyone to be elected nor did he elect, and thus he in no wise intruded himself into the election; nor did he exhibit the person of a cognitor, since he judged that the election of neither party, as to the act of the electors, should be confirmed or even invalidated. And so he by no means usurped for himself the right of the princes, nor did he come against it. He exercised, however, the office of a denunciator, because he declared the person of that duke unworthy, and the person of the king suitable for obtaining the empire, not so much on account of the parties of the electors as on account of the merits of the elected; although many of those who by right and by custom hold the power of electing a king to be promoted into emperor are reported to have consented to that King Otto; and from the fact that the favorers of Duke Philip, with the others absent and contemned, presumed to elect him, it is clear that they proceeded amiss, since it is settled law that to an election the contempt of one opposes more than the contradiction of many. Whence, because they who have abused the power permitted to them have deserved to lose the privilege, it can not without reason seem that, notwithstanding such an injury, the rest may be able to use their right.

Et quoniam dux praedictus nec ubi debuit, nec a quo debuit coronam et unctionem accepit, memoratus vero rex et ubi debuit, videlicet Aquisgrani, et a quo debuit, scilicet a venerabili fratre nostro Coloniensi archiepiscopo recepit utrumque; Nos utique non ducem, sed reliquum reputamus et nominamus regem iustitia exigente. In reprobatione vero praefati Philippi ducis Suaviae propter manifesta impedimenta personae non accusatione, sed condemnatione potius fuit opus, quia non accusatione, sed condemnatione indigent manifesta. Quod autem, quum in electione vota principum dividuntur, post admonitionem et exspectationem alteri partium favere possimus, maxime postquam a nobis unctio, consecratio et coronatio postulantur, sicut utraque pars a nobis multoties postulavit, ex iure patet pariter et exemplo.

And since the aforesaid duke received neither the crown nor the unction where he ought, nor from whom he ought, whereas the said king received both where he ought, namely at Aachen, and from whom he ought, to wit from our venerable brother the archbishop of Cologne; we indeed, justice requiring it, reckon and name not the duke, but the other as king. Moreover, in the reprobation of the aforesaid Philip, duke of Swabia, on account of manifest impediments of the person, there was need not of accusation but rather of condemnation, because manifest things require not accusation but condemnation. But that, when in an election the votes of the princes are divided, after admonition and waiting we may favor one of the parties—especially after unction, consecration, and coronation are demanded of us, as both parties have many times demanded of us—this is evident equally from law and from example.

Numquid enim, si principes admoniti et exspectati vel non potuerunt, vel noluerunt in unum propositum convenire, sedes apostolica advocato et defensore carebit, eorumque culpa ipsi redundabit in poenam? Sciunt autem principes et tua nobilitas non ignorat, quod, quum Lotharius et Corradus in discordia fuissent electi, Romanus Pontifex Lotharium coronavit, et imperium obtinuit coronatus, eodem Corrado tunc demum ad eius gratiam redeunte. Eos igitur duximus commonendos, ut, sicut nos a iuris ipsorum cessamus iniuria, sic ipsi contra ius nostrum se nequaquam iniuriosos ostendant, sed a praefato duce, iusto quidem a nobis iudicio reprobato, recedant, et praefato regi Ottoni non abnuant adhaerere, nisi tunc demum contra personam vel factum legitimum quid ab eis obiectum fuerit et ostensum.

For indeed, if the princes, having been admonished and awaited, either were not able, or were not willing, to convene into one purpose, will the apostolic see lack an advocate and defender, and will their fault redound to its punishment? But the princes know, and your nobility is not ignorant, that, when Lotharius and Conrad had been elected in discord, the Roman Pontiff crowned Lotharius, and, being crowned, he obtained the empire, Conrad only then returning to his favor. Them, therefore, we have deemed to be admonished, that, just as we refrain from doing injury to their right, so they in no way show themselves injurious against our right, but withdraw from the aforesaid duke, indeed by our just judgment reprobated, and not refuse to adhere to the aforesaid king Otto, unless only then something against the person or the legitimate act has been objected and shown by them.

(Et infra:) Sunt enim notoria impedimenta ducis Suaviae, scilicet excommunicatio publica, periurium manifestum, et persecutio divulgata, quam progenitores eius et ipse praesumpserunt in apostolicam sedem et alias ecclesias exercere. Fuit quoque a bonae memoriae Coelestino Papa praedecessore nostro propter invasionem et devastationem patrimonii beati Petri, commonitione saepe praemissa, publice ac solenniter excommunicationis vinculo innodatus, quum in Tuscia moraretur, quod ipse postmodum recognovit, dum per nuncium suum ab ipso praedecessore nostro absolutionis beneficium postulavit, et postmodum a tunc Sutrino episcopo, quem cum abbate sancti Anastasii pro liberatione venerabilis fratris nostri Salernitani archiepiscopi nos in Theutoniam miseramus, contra formam mandati nostri de facto solummodo, quia de iure non potuit, post suam electionem apud Wormatiam occulte se fecit absolvi. Unde patet, quod fuit excommunicatus electus.

(And below:) For there are notorious impediments of the Duke of Swabia, namely public excommunication, manifest perjury, and widespread persecution, which his progenitors and he himself presumed to exercise against the Apostolic See and other churches. He was also, by Celestine, Pope of good memory, our predecessor, on account of the invasion and devastation of the patrimony of blessed Peter, with admonition often premised, publicly and solemnly bound with the bond of excommunication, while he was residing in Tuscany—which he afterward acknowledged, when through his envoy he requested from that same predecessor of ours the benefit of absolution—and afterward by the then bishop of Sutri, whom, with the abbot of Saint Anastasius, we had sent into Germany for the liberation of our venerable brother, the archbishop of Salerno, against the form of our mandate, de facto only, because de iure he could not, after his election at Worms he had himself secretly absolved. Whence it is evident that he was elected excommunicated.

Et videtur non immerito, quod adhuc sit ex eadem causa excommunicationis sententia innodatus, quum praedictus episcopus eum sua auctoritate non posset absoluere, auctoritate vero nostrae delegationis nec posset plus, nec aliter liceret hoc ipsi, quam ei fuerat ab apostolica sede concessum. Ex eo etiam excommunicationis sententiae subiacere creditur manifeste, quod, quum perfidus Marcualdus, Dei et ecclesiae inimicus, cum universis fautoribus tam Theutonicis quam Latinis, excommunicationis vulgatae vinculis suae iniquitatis meritis sit adstrictus, sicut iam vobis per literas nostras directas per P. iudicem Placentinum ipsius Philippi nuncium intimasse meminimus, quas ad ipsius Philippi audientiam credimus pervenisse, ipse nihilominus, quamvis id non tantum ex relatione ipsius iudicis, sed etiam per publicam famam ad notitiam eius devenerit, eidem excommunicato non solum communicat, sed eum in malitia sua fovet, et per nuncios et literas suas exacuit furorem ipsius, ut carissimum in Christo filium nostrum Fridericum, Siciliae regem illustrem, nepotem suum, quem iam hereditate paterna privavit, adhuc privet possessione materna. Idem etiam contra proprium iuramentum, super quo nec consilium a sede apostolica requisivit, ambitionis vitio regnum sibi usurpare praesumpsit, non alium causa necessitatis in regem eligere, quod utcunque tolerabilius videretur, quum super illo iuramento prius Romana ecclesia consuli debuisset, sicut et eam quidam consuluere prudenter, apud quam ex institutione divina plenitudo residet potestatis.

And it seems not without desert that he is still bound by the same sentence of excommunication, since the aforesaid bishop could not absolve him by his own authority, and by the authority of our delegation he could neither do more, nor was it permitted to him to do this otherwise than as had been granted to him by the Apostolic See. It is also believed manifestly that he lies under the sentence of excommunication from this: that, since the faithless Marcuald, enemy of God and of the Church, together with all his supporters, both Teutonic and Latin, has been constrained by the bonds of a promulgated excommunication by the merits of his iniquity, as we already remember to have intimated to you by our letters sent through P., the Piacentine judge, the envoy of that Philip, which we believe to have come to the hearing of that Philip, he nevertheless—although this has come to his knowledge not only from the report of that judge but also through public rumor—not only communicates with that excommunicate, but fosters him in his malice, and by his envoys and letters whets his fury, so that he may further deprive our dearest son in Christ, Frederick, the illustrious king of Sicily, his nephew, whom he has already deprived of the paternal inheritance, of the maternal possession as well. The same man also, against his own oath, concerning which he did not even seek counsel from the Apostolic See, presumed, by the vice of ambition, to usurp the kingdom for himself, rather than to choose another as king by cause of necessity—which would somehow seem more tolerable—since regarding that oath the Roman Church ought first to have been consulted, as indeed certain men prudently did consult her, with whom, by divine institution, the plenitude of power resides.

Nec valet ad plenam excusationem ipsius, si iuramentum illud dicatur illicitum, quum nihilominus super eo nos prius consulere debuisset, quam contra ipsum propria temeritate venire, praesertim illo exemplo, quod quum Gabaonitae a filiis Israel per fraudem surripuerint iuramentum, ipsi tamen cognita fraude contra illud venire temere noluerunt. Utrum vero dictum iuramentum sit licitum vel illicitum, et ideo servandum an non servandum exstiterit, nemo sanae mentis ignorat ad nostrum iudicium pertinere. Quod autem Philippus de genere persecutorum exsistat, principes non credimus dubitare, quum Henricus, qui primus imperium de genere hoc accepit, bonae memoriae Paschalem Papam praedecessorem nostrum cum episcopis, cardinalibus et multis nobilibus Romanorum praesumpserit captivare.

Nor does it avail for his full exculpation if that oath be said to be illicit, since nonetheless he ought first to have consulted us about it, rather than, by his own temerity, to go against it—especially by that example, that when the Gibeonites by fraud filched an oath from the sons of Israel, they, though the fraud was known, were unwilling rashly to go against it. But whether the said oath is licit or illicit, and therefore to be observed or not observed, no one of sound mind is ignorant that it pertains to our judgment. Moreover, that Philip is of the stock of persecutors we do not believe the princes doubt, since Henry, who first received the empire from this lineage, presumed to seize Paschal, the Pope of good memory, our predecessor, together with bishops, cardinals, and many nobles of the Romans.

Fridericus autem pater ipsius Philippi contra felicis recordationis Alexandrum Papam praedecessorem nostrum longo tempore schisma fovit. Henricus frater ipsius Philippi, qualiter se habuerit circa interfectores sanctae memoriae Alberti Leodiensis episcopi, quem ipse prius coegerat exsulare, ac Conradus, qui praedictum Ostiensem episcopum ceperat, satis nostis. Qui etiam qualiter venerabilem fratrem nostrum Auximanum episcopum alapis caedi fecerit, et pilos de barba eius avelli, et tractari eum in pluribus inhoneste, qualiter quoque quosdam familiares ecclesiae Romanae naso fecerit mutilari, qualiter praedictum Salernitanum archiepiscopum captivarit, et quosdam, viros ecclesiasticos flammis torreri fecerit, quosdam vero viros in mare submergi, ad tuam et aliorum principum credimus audientiam pervenisse.

But Frederick, the father of this Philip, for a long time fostered a schism against Pope Alexander of happy memory, our predecessor. Henry, the brother of this Philip—how he conducted himself toward the slayers of Albert of Liège of holy memory, whom he had previously forced into exile, and Conrad, who had seized the aforesaid bishop of Ostia—you know well enough. Also, how he caused our venerable brother, the bishop of Osimo, to be beaten with blows, and the hairs to be plucked from his beard, and to be treated in many ways dishonorably; likewise how he caused certain familiars of the Roman Church to have their noses mutilated; how he took the aforesaid archbishop of Salerno captive; and how he caused certain ecclesiastical men to be roasted by flames, while certain others he caused to be submerged in the sea—we believe has come to your hearing and to that of the other princes.

Insuper, si praedictus dux, quod absit, imperium obtineret, libertas principum in electione periret, et imperium obtinendi de cetero ceteris fiducia tolleretur. Nam si, prout olim frater dicti ducis patri eorum, sic dux ipse fratri suo succederet, videretur imperium non ex electione, sed ex successione deberi, et in praeiudicium principum redundaret, si non nisi de domo ducis praedicti videretur aliquis ad imperium assumendus. Quum ergo nos flecti a nostro proposito nulla penitus occasione possimus, sed in ea potius firmissime persistamus, et tu nobis saepe per literas tuas duxeris suggerendum, ut eidem duci nullatenus faveremus, nobilitatem ergo tuam monentes per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, sicut de gratia nostra confidis, et nos de tua devotione speramus, de cetero a praefato duce Philippo recedas omnino, non obstante iuramento, si quod ei ratione regni fecisti, quum, eo quantum ad obtinendum imperium reprobato, iuramentum huiusmodi non debeat observari.

Moreover, if the aforesaid duke—far be it—should obtain the empire, the liberty of the princes in the election would perish, and the confidence of the others for obtaining the empire henceforth would be taken away. For if, as formerly the brother of the said duke succeeded to their father, so the duke himself should succeed to his brother, it would seem that the empire is owed not from election but from succession, and it would redound to the prejudice of the princes if it should seem that no one ought to be assumed to the empire except from the house of the aforesaid duke. Since, therefore, we can in no wise be bent from our purpose by any occasion whatsoever, but rather most firmly persist in it, and you have often by your letters led us to be urged that we should in no way favor that duke, therefore, admonishing your nobility by apostolic writings, we command that, inasmuch as you trust in our grace and we hope in your devotion, henceforth you withdraw altogether from the aforesaid Duke Philip, notwithstanding the oath, if any, which you made to him by reason of the kingdom, since, he being rejected with respect to obtaining the empire, an oath of this kind ought not to be observed.

Praedicto vero regi Ottoni, quem nos, concedente Domino, ad coronam imperii disponimus evocare, patenter adhaereas et potenter; ut quum ei ad commonitionem nostram adhaeseris, inter primos gratiam et benevolentiam eius obtinere praecipue merearis, ad quod nos pro tuae nobilitatis amore dabimus operam efficacem [Dat. Laterani.]

But to the aforesaid king Otto, whom we, with the Lord granting, are arranging to call to the crown of the empire, you should adhere openly and powerfully; so that, when at our admonition you shall have adhered to him, you may especially deserve to obtain among the first his grace and good will, to which end we, for love of your nobility, will give effective effort [Given at the Lateran.]

CAP. XXXV.

CHAPTER 35.

Absentes ad electionem de provincia sunt vocandi, et confirmatur electio maioris et sanioris partis.

Those absent from the province are to be summoned to the election, and the election by the greater and sounder part is confirmed.

Idem.

The same.

Coram dilecto filio nostro tituli sanctae Pudentianae presbytero cardinali (Et infra:) Si vero utriusque partis fuerit cassata electio, vos, fratribus omnibus, qui fuerint in provincia, convocatis, quod maiori et saniori parti eorum super praedictis videritis complacere, per censuram ecclesiasticam faciatis firmiter observari.

In the presence of our beloved son, the presbyter cardinal of the title of Saint Pudentiana (And below:) But if indeed the election of both parties shall have been quashed, you, having convoked all the brethren who shall be in the province, shall cause that which you shall see to please the greater and sounder part of them concerning the aforesaid matters to be firmly observed through ecclesiastical censure.

CAP. XXXVI.

CHAPTER 36.

Cassatur electio partis maioris facta, contempta minori parte, etiam si est unus solus; non tamen ius eligendi devolvitur ad minorem. H. d. secundum intellectum communem.

The election made by the greater party is cassated, the lesser party being contemned, even if it be a single person alone; nevertheless, the right of electing is not devolved to the lesser. H. d. according to the common understanding.

Idem Parmensi Episcopo et eius Coniudicibus.

The same to the Bishop of Parma and his Co-judges.

Bonae memoriae S. Cremonensi episcopo in extremis agente, quum de convalescentia ipsius desperaretur, Cremonense capitulum H. canonicum suum, Regii disciplinis scholasticis insistentem, ad certum terminum in vigilia Pentecostes pro futuri electione pontificis citari fecerunt. Verum secunda feria post Pentecosten, dicto episcopo viam universae carnis ingresso, capitulum, antequam corpus illius esset sepulturae traditum, absente canonico memorato, in quatuor de ipso capitulo et tres de clero civitatis potestatem eligendi pontificem contulerunt, expresso, ut minor pars illorum VII. sequeretur in electione maiorem.

While S., bishop of Cremona, of good memory, was at the point of death, when his recovery was despaired of, the Cremonese chapter caused their canon H., engaged in scholastic disciplines at Reggio, to be cited to a certain term on the vigil of Pentecost for the election of the future pontiff. However, on the Monday after Pentecost, the said bishop having entered the way of all flesh, the chapter, before his body was committed to burial, the aforesaid canon being absent, conferred the power of electing a bishop upon four from the chapter itself and three from the clergy of the city, with it expressed that the lesser part of those 7. should follow the greater in the election.

Habito itaque post mortem, sed ante sepulturam tamen ipsius episcopi, de futuri pastoris electione tractatu, quum vota illorum scinderentur in partes, quatuor in archipresbyterum, duobus in archidiaconum, uno in alium consentientibus, tandem, illo sepulto, minoris partis arbitrio ad iudicium accedente maioris, eundem archipresbyterum concorditer elegerunt. Cui electioni archidiaconus cum capitulo et clero civitatis nullo contradicente consensit. Verum adveniens postmodum Hu., et asserens se fuisse contemptum ac propter hoc electionem huiusmodi nullius fuisse momenti, quasi ius eligendi devolutum fuisset ad ipsum pro se, prout potuit archidiaconum memoratum elegit.

Accordingly, a discussion having been held after the death, but yet before the burial, of the bishop himself, about the election of the future pastor, when their votes were split into parties—four agreeing on the archpresbyter, two on the archdeacon, and one on another—at length, after he was buried, the judgment of the lesser part acceding to that of the greater, they unanimously elected the same archpresbyter. To which election the archdeacon, with the chapter and the clergy of the city, consented, no one contradicting. But afterwards Hu. arriving, and asserting that he had been contemned and that on that account such an election was of no moment, as if the right of electing had devolved upon himself for his own benefit, he elected, so far as he could, the aforesaid archdeacon.

Constituto autem dicto H. pro sua electione, et dilecto filio nostro I. pro electione archipresbyteri coram nobis, electionem ab ipso H. post electionem archipresbyteri non cassatam, licet de viro multae literaturae, honestae vitae et clarae famae, non tamen sine multa temeritate praesumptam, quum de priori nostrum deberet exspectare iudicium, antequam procederet ad secundam, duximus irritandam, in poenam interdicentes eidem contradictionis vocem, in primo consensu capitulo permanente. Electionem autem archipresbyteri, quamvis laudabile testimonium perhibeatur de ipso, iustitia exigente cassavimus, tum quia, corpore dicti episcopi nondum tradito sepulturae, habuerunt de ipsa electione tractatum contra canonicas sanctiones, tum quia inventus est H. fuisse contemptus, licet unus solus exstiterit, quum plus in talibus consueverit contemptus unius obesse, quam multorum contradictio in praesenti. Nec praedicta debet dici citatio valuisse, quia, quum episcopi mortem praevenerint, temeraria nimis exstitit, et ideo non potuit arcere citatum.

However, with the said H. set up for his own election, and our beloved son I. for the election of the archpriest, before us, we have deemed to be annulled the election by that same H., made after the election of the archpriest had not been quashed—although of a man of much literature, of honest life, and of clear fame—yet not without much temerity presumed, since he ought to have awaited our judgment concerning the former before he proceeded to the second; by way of penalty we interdict to him the voice of contradiction, the chapter remaining in the first consent. But the election of the archpriest, although laudable testimony is borne concerning him, justice requiring it we have quashed, both because, the body of the said bishop not yet consigned to burial, they held a discussion about that election contrary to canonical sanctions, and because H. was found to have been contemned, though he alone, since in such matters the contempt of one is wont to harm more than the contradiction of many in the present case. Nor ought the aforesaid citation be said to have been valid, because, since they anticipated the bishop’s death, it proved too rash, and therefore could not restrain the one cited.

Adhaec volentes Cremonensi ecclesiae speciali sollicitudine providere, concedimus et mandamus ut si capitulum voluerit in suo perdurare consensu, ipsum archiepiscopum auctoritate nostra in pastorem Cremonensi ecclesiae concedatis, alioquin nisi forte infra VIII. dies de persona idonea in pontificem sibi et ecclesiae suae providerint per electionem canonicam et concordem, vos eisdem auctoritate sedis apostolicae de ipso archipresbytero vel archidiacono seu alio viro idoneo providere curetis.

Moreover, wishing to provide for the Church of Cremona with special solicitude, we grant and command that if the chapter should wish to persist in its consent, you, by our authority, grant that same archbishop as pastor to the Church of Cremona, otherwise, unless perhaps within 8. days they shall provide by a canonical and concordant election a suitable person as pontiff for themselves and their church, you should take care for them, by the authority of the Apostolic See, to provide from the said archpriest or archdeacon, or another suitable man.

CAP. XXXVII.

CHAPTER 37.

Non monachus in praelatum regularem eligi non potest.

One who is not a monk cannot be elected as a regular prelate.

Idem.

The same.

Quum ad nostram nuper notitiam pervenisset, quod H., qui se pro abbate Lexoviensi gerebat, non fuit ante monachus quam electus, nos attendentes, quod contra regulares traditiones illud fuerat attentatum, quum nullam spem vel promissionem habens, ut abbas fiat, debeat monachari, electionem de ipso factam de consensu fratrum nostrorum curavimus irritare. Quocirca fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus tam monachis quam aliis fidelibus monasterii memorati studeatis ex parte nostra districtius inhibere, ne praefato H. ullam obedientiam vel reverentiam propter iam dictam electionem audeant exhibere, et si quid in eodem monasterio, disponendo iam perperam attentavit, nullius robur habere volumus firmitatis, sed penitus irritari. [Quod si contra etc.

When it had lately come to our notice that H., who was comporting himself as abbot of Lisieux, had not been a monk before he was elected, we, considering that this had been attempted against the regular traditions—since one ought to be monachized, having no hope or promise that he be made abbot—took care, with the consent of our brethren, to annul the election made of him. Wherefore we command your fraternity by apostolic writings that you strive, on our part, to inhibit more strictly both the monks and the other faithful of the aforesaid monastery, lest they dare to exhibit any obedience or reverence to the aforesaid H. on account of the already-said election; and if in that same monastery, in his disposing, he has already attempted anything amiss, we will that it have the strength of no firmness, but be utterly annulled. [But if contrary, etc.

Dat. Lat. III.

Given at the Lateran 3.

Id. Ian. 1199.]

Ides of January, 1199.]

CAP. XXXVIII.

CHAPTER 38.

In abbatem eligi non potest, nisi instructus in regula monachali.

No one can be elected abbot, unless he is instructed in the monastic rule.

Idem Magistro C. Presbytero cardinali, sedis apostolicae Legato.

The same to Master C., Presbyter cardinal, Legate of the apostolic see.

Officii tui prosequeris laudabilem actionem, quum super illis, de quibus dubitas, per nos postulas edoceri. Sane nobis tuis literis intimasti, quod, quum monasterium quoddam possessionibus convenienter ditatum, sed positum in medio nationis pravae pariter et perversae, pastore careret, monachi de electione abbatis tractantes, necessarium duxerint personam eligere aliquam, cuius potentia valeret a persecutoribus liberari; quum non possent sui ordinis idoneam invenire personam, in quendam virum nobilem oculos direxerunt, per quem poterant melius defensari, et consilio quorundam iuris peritorum patrem adierunt ipsius, humiliter postulantes, quod filium suum induceret, ut habitum susciperet monachalem, nullam patri de ipsius promotione fiduciam tribuentes. Et pater ad hoc induxit filium providum et discretum, literatum, XXV.

You prosecute a praiseworthy action of your office, when concerning those matters about which you doubt, you ask through us to be instructed. Truly you have intimated to us by your letters that, since a certain monastery, suitably endowed with possessions, but placed in the midst of a nation wicked and likewise perverse, lacked a pastor, the monks, treating of the election of an abbot, judged it necessary to choose some person, by whose power they might be freed from persecutors; since they could not find a suitable person of their own order, they directed their eyes to a certain noble man, through whom they could be better defended, and by the counsel of certain jurists they approached his father, humbly requesting that he induce his son to assume the monastic habit, granting the father no assurance concerning his promotion. And to this the father induced his son, prudent and discreet, literate, 25.

annorum aetatis, qui effectus est monachus, nulla spe, ut asserit, de sublimatione tributa; sed die, in quo monachus est effectus, fuit in abbatem electus: cuius electio exstitit per dilectum filium nostrum G. de Lab. subdiaconum nostrum rectorem Messanensem apostolicae sedis legatum, qui omnibus praedictis interfuit, confirmata. Quum autem idem sit paratus purgare se, quod nulla fuit ad hoc ambitione inductus, per literas nostras postulas edoceri, utrum dictus legatus electionem huiusmodi confirmare, vel dispensare potuit, vel quod factum est stare possit, et utrum, electione rite cassata, iterum valeat eligi in abbatem?

25 years of age, who was made a monk, with no hope, as he asserts, of promotion having been granted; but on the day on which he was made a monk, he was elected as abbot: whose election was confirmed by our beloved son G. de Lab., our subdeacon, rector of Messina, legate of the apostolic see, who was present at all the aforesaid. But since that same man is prepared to clear himself that he was induced to this by no ambition, you ask to be instructed by our letters whether the said legate could confirm an election of this sort, or dispense, or whether what has been done can stand, and whether, the election having been duly quashed, he may again be able to be elected as abbot?

Nos autem consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum ex his, quae in continenti subsecuta sunt, ostendatur, quod talis taliter non possit eligi in abbatem, maxime pro eo, quod ante, quam esset discipulus, voluit esse magister, electionem illam irritam esse decrevimus et inanem. Verum, postquam fuerit in regula competenter instructus, si urgens necessitas et evidens utilitas ipsius monasterii postulaverit, purgatione recepta poterit in abbatem assumi, ne monasterium opprimatur incursibus malignorum. [Secundo etc.

But we respond to your consultation in such a manner, that, since from those things which followed in the immediate sequence it is shown that such a one cannot be elected abbot in such a way, especially for this reason, that before he was a disciple he wished to be a master, we have decreed that election to be void and null. In truth, after he shall have been competently instructed in the Rule, if urgent necessity and evident utility of the monastery itself shall have demanded it, after purgation has been received he may be assumed to the abbacy, lest the monastery be oppressed by the incursions of the malign. [Secondly etc.

ñ cf. c. 11. de testam. III. 26.]

Note cf. ch. 11. on testaments 3. 26.]

CAP. XXXIX.

CHAPTER 39.

Electio alias canonica confirmatur, licet quidam eligentium essent minori excommunicatione ligati.

The election, otherwise canonical, is confirmed, although certain of the electors were bound by the lesser excommunication.

Idem.

The same.

Illa quotidiana instantia, [sollicitudo videlicet ecclesiarum omnium, quae ministerium cingit apostolicae servitutis, potissimum nos inducit, ut ad illarum consolationem intendamus sollicite, ac benigne iusta desideria earundem effectu celeri prosequendo, quae pastorum sunt solatio destitutae, ne pro pastoris carentia in spiritualibus et temporalibus sustineant detrimentum, et grex dominicus luporum morsibus relinquatur, si non sit qui noctis vigilias custodiat super eum. Sane quum venerabilis frater noster, Albertus archiepiscopus vester, tunc electus, ad nostram praesentiam accessisset, nos ecclesiae Magdeburgensi, quae non solum in prosperis, verum etiam in adversis sacrosanctae Romanae ecclesiae, matri suae, devota semper exstitit, tanquam filiae speciali sollicitudine volentes paterna consulere, iam pridem diligenter auditis et intellectis, quae dilecti filii Ö S. Sebastiani, Ö S. Mariae, et Ö de Mildense praepositi, et C. et C. maioris ecclesiae, et magister Gernandus S. Nicolai, et Litulfus S. Petri canonici Magdeburgenses tam verbis quam scriptis proposuerant sollicite coram nobis.] Quia pro certo didicimus, electionem de ipso factam canonicam exstitisse, ipsam auctoritate apostolica duximus confirmandam, supplentes de plenitudine potestatis, si quis in ea ex eo fuisset defectus, quod quidam interfuerunt electioni eiusdem, qui ex sola participatione in simplicis excommunicationis laqueum inciderunt, [sicut etc. Dat.

That daily insistence,
[the solicitude, namely, of all the churches, which girds the ministry of apostolic servitude, most especially induces us to aim earnestly at their consolation, and kindly to pursue with swift effect their just desires, they who are deprived of the solace of shepherds, lest, for lack of a shepherd, they suffer detriment in spirituals and temporals, and the Lord’s flock be left to the bites of wolves, if there be not one who keeps the night-watches over it. Indeed, when our venerable brother, Albert, your archbishop, then bishop-elect, had come into our presence, we, wishing with paternal care to provide for the church of Magdeburg—which not only in prosperous things but also in adverse things has always stood devoted to the most-holy Roman Church, its mother—just as for a daughter with special solicitude, long since, after diligently hearing and understanding what the beloved sons, the provosts of Ö St. Sebastian, Ö St. Mary, and Ö of Mildense, and C. and C. of the major church, and Master Gernandus of St. Nicholas, and Litulfus of St. Peter, canons of Magdeburg, had solicitously proposed both by words and in writings before us.] Because we have learned for certain that the election made of him was canonical, we have deemed it to be confirmed by apostolic authority, supplying from the plenitude of power, if there had been any defect in it, from this: that certain men were present at the same election who, by mere participation, had fallen into the snare of simple excommunication, [just as etc. Given.

Romae ap. S. Petrum VI. Id. Febr. Ao. IX. 1207.]

At Rome, at St. Peter’s, February 8, in the 9th year, 1207.]

CAP. XL.

CHAPTER 40.

Si postulatio cum electione concurrit, et numerus postulantium est duplo maior, et postulatus est idoneus, postulatio admittitur reiecta electione. Si vero indignus, et hoc maior pars postulantium ignoravit, postulatio et electio reprobatur. Si vero sciebant, et electus est idoneus, confirmatur electio, et idem, si numerus postulantium non est duplo maior.

If a postulation concurs with an election, and the number of postulants is twice as great, and the postulated is worthy, the postulation is admitted with the election rejected. But if he is unworthy, and the greater part of the postulants was ignorant of this, the postulation and the election are reprobated. But if they knew, and the elected is worthy, the election is confirmed; and the same, if the number of postulants is not twice as great.

Hoc dicit intelligendo secundum quod continet ius commune.

He says this, understanding in accordance with what the common law contains.

Item Magister Maximo Notario nostro.

Likewise, to Master Maximus, our Notary.

Scriptum est in Apocalypsi Ioannis, quod in medio sedis et in circuitu sedis erant quatuor animalia, [plena oculis ante et retro; primum animal simile leoni, secundum animal simile vitulo tertium animal habens faciem quasi hominis, et quartum animal simile aquilae volanti; et quatuor animalia singula eorum alas senas habebant. Sedes ista Romana ecclesia intelligitur, quae usitato vocabulo sedes apostolica nuncupatur, utique sedes agni sedes viventis in saecula saeculorum; in medio cuius quasi filiae in gremio resident et in circuitu adstunt quasi famulae in obsequio quatuor patriarchales ecclesiae, Alexandrina, Antiochena, Hierosolymitana et Constantinopolitana, quae per illa quatuor animalia designantur. Marcus enim Alexandrinam fundavit et rexit ecclesiam, qui secundum visionem Ezechielis accipitur per leonem, eo, quod evangelium inceperit a rugitu, dicendo: "Vox clamantis in deserto," et quia, quemadmodum leo catulum suum post diem tertium suo asseritur excitare rugitu, sic Deus Pater filium suum, qui leo de tribu Iuda esse describitur, de cuius resurrectione principaliter tractat Marcus, divinitatis suae potentia post triduum a mortuis suscitavit.

It is written in the Apocalypse of John, that in the midst of the seat and in the circuit of the seat there were four animals, [full of eyes before and behind; the first animal like a lion, the second animal like a calf, the third animal having a face as if of a man, and the fourth animal like a flying eagle; and the four animals, each of them, had six wings. This seat is understood as the Roman Church, which by a customary term is called the apostolic see, namely the seat of the Lamb, the seat of the One living unto the ages of ages; in the midst of which as daughters in the lap sit, and around as handmaids in attendance stand, the four patriarchal churches, Alexandrian, Antiochene, Hierosolymitan, and Constantinopolitan, which are designated by those four animals. For Mark founded and ruled the Alexandrian church, who according to the vision of Ezekiel is taken by means of the lion, because he began the gospel from a roar, saying: "The voice of one crying in the desert," and because, just as the lion is asserted to rouse its cub after the third day by its own roar, so God the Father raised his Son, who is described as the lion of the tribe of Judah, about whose resurrection Mark primarily treats, by the power of his divinity after three days from the dead.

Unde in die resurrectionis dominicae ipsius evangelium antonomastice in ecclesia recitatur. Lucas autem fuit natione Antiochenus; qui propterea in vituli figura describitur, in quo sacerdotalis hostia designatur, quoniam a sacerdotio inchoans evangelium, de immolatione tractavit praecipue summi sacerdotis et veri, qui est hostia salutaris, vitulus videlicet saginatus, quem pater iussit occidi pro filio prodigo redeunte. Unde bene per ipsum Antiochena ecclesia designatur, in qua primum Apostolorum princeps in summi sacerdotii cathedram a fidelibus exstitit sublimatus.

Whence on the day of the Lord’s Resurrection his Gospel is read antonomastically in the church. But Luke was by nation an Antiochene; for which reason he is described in the figure of the calf, in which the sacerdotal host is designated, since, beginning his Gospel from the priesthood, he treated especially of the immolation of the highest and true priest, who is the saving host, namely the fatted calf which the Father ordered to be slain for the prodigal son on his return. Whence rightly through him the Antiochene church is signified, in which first the Prince of the Apostles stood forth, exalted by the faithful to the chair of the supreme priesthood.

Matthaeus quidem fuit natione Iudaeus, et evangelium primus descripsit etiam hebraice in Iudaea, et ob hoc per hominis speciem designatur, quod ab incarnatione Christi suum inchoans evangelium, principaliter humanam eius nativitatem ostendit, quam ipse Christus de Iudaeis et in Iudaea pro nobis assumens, Hierosolymitanam ecclesiam metropolim Iudaeorum sua humana praesentia consecravit, de qua dictum fuerat per Prophetam: "Homo factus est in ea, et ipse fundavit eam altissimus." Ioannes vero Asianam fundavit ecclesiam, et Apocalypsim septem ecclesiis, quae sunt in Asia, ipse descripsit, quibus et ceteris Graecorum ecclesiis Constantinopolitana tandem praeferri meruit et praeponi per aquilam merito designata, quia sicut aquila volatu omnes aves excellit, et oculorum eius intuitum solis radius non offendit, sic Ioannes tribus aliis animalibus in terra relictis, supra coelos coelorum ascendens, veram lucem oculis inverberatis adspexit, et a divina verbi nativitate suum evangelium inchoavit; qui, licet inter universos Evangelistas fuerit ultimus tempore, praecipuus tamen exstitit dignitate quoniam, in coena supra pectus Christi recumbens, fluenta doctrinae de ipso sacri dominici pectoris fonte potavit. Sic Constantinopolitana ecclesia, licet posterior tempore, postmodum propter honorificentiam piissimi Constantini praelata est aliis dignitate; sicque facti sunt primi novissimi, et novissimi primi, ut merito ipsi dicatur: "Multae filiae congregaverunt divitias, sed tu sola supergressa es universas." Ad cuius ecclesiae regimen talis est pontifex assumendus, qui ad similitudinem illorum quatuor animalium ante et retro plenus sit oculis, ut pleno lumine veteris et novi testamenti mysteria contempletur, per experientiam videns praeterita, et futura praevidens per cautelam. Debet etiam habere sex alas, scilicet sex legum notitiam, naturalis, MosaWcae, et propheticae, evangelicae, apostolicae et canonicae, quibus perfecto libramine inter coelum volans et terram, de terris ad coelestia et de temporalibus transvolet ad aeterna.] Sane ad hanc ecclesiam, scilicet Constantinopolitanam, duo [quaedam] animalia sunt vocata, utinam plena oculis, et alas habentia senas, videlicet venerabilis frater noster Eradiensis archiepiscopus, et dilectus filius plebanus sancti Pauli de Venetiis, sicut per procuratores tam postulantium archiepiscopum, quam eligentium plebanum fuit propositum coram nobis.

Matthew indeed was by nation a Jew, and he first wrote out the gospel also in Hebrew in Judea; and on this account he is designated by the appearance of a man, because, beginning his gospel from the incarnation of Christ, he chiefly shows His human nativity—by which Christ Himself, assuming it from the Jews and in Judea for us, consecrated the Jerusalem church, the metropolis of the Jews, by His human presence—of which it had been said through the Prophet: “A man was made in her, and the Most High Himself founded her.” John, however, founded the Asian church, and he himself wrote the Apocalypse to the seven churches which are in Asia, to which and to the other churches of the Greeks the Constantinopolitan at length deserved to be preferred and set over, rightly designated by the eagle, because just as the eagle excels all birds in flight, and the ray of the sun does not offend the gaze of its eyes, so John, with the three other animals left upon earth, ascending above the heavens of heavens, beheld the true light with unlashed eyes, and from the divine nativity of the Word he began his gospel; who, although among all the Evangelists he was last in time, nevertheless stood out as preeminent in dignity, since, at the supper reclining upon the breast of Christ, he drank the streams of doctrine from the very fount of the sacred Lord’s breast. Thus the Constantinopolitan church, although later in time, afterwards because of the honor of the most pious Constantine was preferred to the others in dignity; and thus the first became last, and the last first, so that to her it is rightly said: “Many daughters have gathered riches, but you alone have surpassed all.” To the governance of which church such a pontiff is to be assumed as, after the likeness of those four animals, shall be full of eyes before and behind, that with full light he may contemplate the mysteries of the Old and New Testaments, by experience seeing things past, and by caution foreseeing things to come. He ought also to have six wings, that is, knowledge of six laws: natural, Mosaic, and prophetic, evangelical, apostolic, and canonical, with which, by a perfect balance flying between heaven and earth, he may wing his way from earthly things to heavenly and from temporal to eternal.] Indeed, to this church, namely the Constantinopolitan, two [certain] animals have been called—would that they be full of eyes and have six wings—namely our venerable brother the archbishop of Eradiensis, and the beloved son, the plebanus of Saint Paul of Venice, as was set forth before us by the procurators both of those petitioning for the archbishop and of those electing the plebanus.

[Proposuerunt siquidem procuratores electorum plebani, quod, quum ecclesia Constantinopolitana vacante canonici Ph. decanum suum sibi elegerint in pastorem, et nos cassaverimus electionem eandem, quia quibusdam exclusis, qui adesse debuerunt, exstitit celebrata, ne diu gregi fidelium deesset cura pastoris, tam canonici quam quidam alii, qui se in electione Constantinopolitani patriarchae ius habere dicebant, ut de electione tractarent, adinvicem convenerunt. Quumque septem personae pro septem praepositis se offerrent, et quidam alii pro ceteris praelatis se tractatui electionis ingererent, post multam concertationem tam illas septem personas quam duas alias ad universitatis instantiam, quae tamen duas tantum voces haberent, salvo in omnibus iure suo tam in praesenti quam in futuro, pro bono concordiae receperunt. Sed factum est, quod humani generis inimico, qui unitatem ecclesiae scindere nititur, superseminante zizania messi dominicae, in duas partes sunt vota divisa, novem de canonicis et novem aliis praenominatis personis postulantibus archiepiscopum memoratum, et quindecim canonicis et praeposito sanctorum Apostolorum plebanum eligentibus supradictum; cuius electioni cantor, qui pro utilitate absens erat ecclesiae, et ante tractatum electionis per literas suas consensum expresserat de plebano, si aliis complaceret, et octo alii canonici, qui electionis tempore non fuere praesentes, suum praestitere consensum; et sic in plebanum praedictum vota viginti quatuor canonicorum et unius praepositi convenerunt.

[The procurators of the electors of the plebanus set forth that, when, the Church of Constantinople being vacant, the canons had elected their dean, Ph., for themselves as pastor, and we quashed that same election because it had been celebrated with certain persons excluded who ought to have been present, lest the care of a pastor should be long lacking to the flock of the faithful, both the canons and certain others who said that they had a right in the election of the Patriarch of Constantinople came together with one another to treat concerning the election. And when seven persons offered themselves for the seven provosts, and certain others thrust themselves into the discussion of the election on behalf of the other prelates, after much disputation they received both those seven persons and two others, at the instance of the whole body, who nevertheless should have only two voices, saving in all things their right both in the present and in the future, for the good of concord. But it came to pass, the Enemy of the human race, who strives to rend the unity of the Church, oversowing tares in the Lord’s harvest, that the votes were divided into two parts: nine of the canons and nine of the other aforesaid persons petitioning the aforesaid archbishop, and fifteen canons and the provost of the Holy Apostles electing the aforesaid plebanus; to whose election the cantor, who was absent for the advantage of the church and had, before the discussion of the election, expressed by his letters his consent concerning the plebanus, if it should please the others, and eight other canons, who were not present at the time of the election, gave their consent; and thus for the aforesaid plebanus the votes of twenty-four canons and of one provost came together.

Dicebant ergo postulantium numerum esse minorem, quum decem et octo tantum archiepiscopum postularent; de quibus quosdam eorum, quos cum praefata protestatione sui iuris admiserant, excludere nitebantur, duos videlicet de Blakerna et Buccaleone praepositos; quia, quum per exemptionis privilegium a sede apostolica impetratum se subtraxerint oneri, tacite renunciasse videbantur honori, ut ad electionem non pertinerent illius, cui electo nullatenus subiacerent. Alii quatuor non erant praepositi, sed aliarum ecclesiarum clerici, qui se tractatui electionis suorum praepositorum nomine ingerebant, quia eorum domini adeo erant absentes, quod ad tractatum electionis vocari commode nec poterant, nec debebant; quoniam, si absentes possent per procuratores adesse, vix iura devolverentur absentium ad praesentes, quum raro contingeret, quod per se vel per alios interesse non possent. Septimus autem, qui praesens exstiterat, iam electus et confirmatus in archiepiscopum Verricensem et translatus ad suam ecclesiam, possessionem eiusdem adeptus fuerat corporalem.

They were therefore saying that the number of the petitioners was smaller, since only eighteen were petitioning for the archbishop; of these they were striving to exclude certain ones whom they had admitted with the aforesaid protestation of their own right, namely the provosts of Blachernae and of Boukoleon; because, since by a privilege of exemption obtained from the Apostolic See they had withdrawn themselves from the burden, they seemed tacitly to have renounced the honor, so that they should not pertain to the election of him to whom, once elected, they would in no wise be subject. Four others were not provosts, but clerics of other churches, who were thrusting themselves into the transaction of the election in the name of their own provosts, because their lords were so absent that they could neither conveniently be called to the discussion of the election nor ought they to be; since, if the absent could be present by procurators, scarcely would the rights of the absent devolve upon the present, since it would rarely occur that they could not be present either by themselves or by others. The seventh moreover, who had been present, had already been elected and confirmed as archbishop of Verria and, transferred to his church, had obtained corporal possession of the same.

Et licet universitas clericorum quatuor prius pro se postularet admitti, quia tamen pars canonicorum tot nolebat admittere, ne numerus aliorum nimis excresceret, ita tandem pro bono pacis exstitit ordinatum, ut duo tantum admitterentur ex illis cum protestatione praedicta, et ideo eligentes asserebant illos duas tantum voces et non ceterorum habere, maxime quum triginta praepositurae fuerint ad septem redactae, quae tamen nondum fuerunt auctoritate sui iudicis approbatae. Conventuales autem ecclesias ultra quinque vel sex tunc temporis esse negabant, et, si plures fuissent, tempore tamen electionis praedictae praelatos earum dicebant non fuisse praesentes. De malo denique zelo intendebant arguere postulantes eo, quod, ut proponebant, illiteratum et impudicum ex certa scientia postularant; cuius incontinentiam dicebant per filium in monachatu genitum paternae libidinis testem posse probari.

And although the universitas of the clerics had earlier petitioned that four be admitted for themselves, because, however, the party of the canons did not wish to admit so many, lest the numerus of the others should excresce too greatly, thus at length for the good of peace it was ordained that only two of them be admitted with the aforesaid protestation; and therefore the electors asserted that those men had only two votes and not those of the rest, especially since thirty provostships had been reduced to seven, which, however, had not yet been approved by the authority of their judge. Moreover, they denied that there were, at that time, conventual churches beyond five or six; and, if there were more, they said that at the time of the aforesaid election their prelates were not present. Finally, out of evil zeal they intended to argue against the petitioners on the ground that, as they proposed, they had, with certain knowledge, petitioned for an illiterate and impudent man; whose incontinence, they said, could be proved by a son begotten in the monastic state, a witness of paternal libido.

Eundem etiam archiepiscopum de ambitione notabant eo, quod in vigilia Nativitatis dominicae se suae subtraxit ecclesiae, et esset in urbe regia, ubi tunc erat postulatio celebranda, et passus est cum hymno "Te deum laudamus" se in sede locari, in qua profestis diebus residere consueverat patriarcha. Qui etiam auctoritate propria bona patriarchatus post mortem patriarchae distribuens, eiusdem sigillo violenter arrepto de scrinio camerarii, literas quasdam, quibus illud impressit, misit Ravennam, et quandam pecuniae summam ibi depositam auctoritate literarum illarum sibi fecit afferri, eandemque distribuit pro suae voluntatis arbitrio in ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae praeiudicium et gravamen, quod totum et alia in capitulo fuere proposita, quum quidam de ipso postulando tractarent. Unde petebant, ut, quum pars postulantium archiepiscopum esset numero minor, inferior zelo, et a suo iure ceciderit postulando scienter indignum, electionem confirmare factam de dicto plebano canonice dignaremur; maxime quum ipsi usi fuerint iure communi personam eligibilem eligendo, quod ordinarii iuris exsistit, et alii iuris communis contempto beneficio ad extraordinarium auxilium transvolarint.

They also marked that same archbishop with ambition, for that on the Vigil of the Lord’s Nativity he withdrew himself from his own church and was in the royal city, where at that time the postulation was to be celebrated, and he allowed himself, with the hymn "Te deum laudamus," to be placed in the seat in which on workdays the patriarch was accustomed to sit. He also, by his own authority distributing the goods of the patriarchate after the death of the patriarch, having violently snatched the same one’s seal from the coffer of the chamberlain, sent certain letters, on which he impressed it, to Ravenna, and by authority of those letters had brought to himself a certain sum of money deposited there, and distributed the same at the discretion of his own will to the prejudice and burden of the church of Constantinople; all which and other things were proposed in chapter, when certain men were treating about postulating him. Whence they were asking that, since the party of petitioners for the archbishop was smaller in number, inferior in zeal, and had fallen from its right by knowingly postulating an unworthy man, we would deign to confirm the election canonically made of the said plebanus; especially since they themselves had used the common law by choosing an eligible person, which pertains to ordinary law, and the others, despising the benefit of the common law, have flown to extraordinary aid.

Ad haec procuratores partis alterius responderunt, quod universi praelati conventualium ecclesiarum apud Constantinopolim exsistentium per nostram constitutionem in electione Constantinopolitani patriarchae ius habent. Unde universitas praelatorum, de qua in eadem constitutione cavetur expresse, restringi non debet ad septem, quum ratione suae dignitatis in hoc bene fuerit ecclesiae memoratae provisum; tum ut sanior haberetur super electione tractatus, quum integrum sit iudicium plurimorum sententiis confirmatum; tum etiam, ut per numerum praelatorum illis posset occurri, qui Dei sanctuarium iure volebant hereditario possidere. Addebant etiam, quod praefatae constitutionis beneficium duo exempti praepositi per exemptionis privilegium nullatenus amiserunt, quum ea, quae in favorem alicuius introducta sunt, in eius laesionem non debeant redundare, et per privilegia Pontificum Romanorum addi, non subtrahi consueverit illis, quibus specialiter indulgentur, propter praedictam maxime rationem, ut illis obsisterent prudenter, qui Domini sanctuarium moliuntur in ius hereditarium usurpare.

To these things the procurators of the other party responded that all the prelates of the conventual churches existing at Constantinople have, by our constitution, a right in the election of the Constantinopolitan patriarch. Whence the entire body of prelates, about which in the same constitution it is expressly provided, ought not to be restricted to seven, since by reason of its dignity it was well provided in this respect for the aforesaid church—both that a sounder deliberation might be had concerning the election, since a judgment is entire when confirmed by the sentences of many, and also that by the number of prelates one might be able to counter those who wished to possess the sanctuary of God by hereditary right. They added also that the benefit of the aforesaid constitution the two exempt provosts had by no means lost through the privilege of exemption, since those things which have been introduced in favor of someone ought not to redound to his injury, and by the privileges of the Roman Pontiffs it has been customary that there be added, not subtracted, to those to whom they are specially granted—especially for the aforesaid reason, that they might prudently withstand those who are endeavoring to usurp the sanctuary of the Lord into a hereditary right.

Unde iidem excludi non poterant nec debebant, ea etiam ratione, quod septem nomine septem praepositorum et duo vice ac nomine viginti trium praelatorum pro ipsa universitate fuerint a canonicis ad tractatum electionis admissi; et sic, quum in postulatum vota septem praepositorum et decem et octo praelatorum praesentium, et aliorum sex absentium, quorum procuratores erant in civitate praesentes, consensu mediante illorum concurrerint, pro parte sua ultra duplo maiorem numerum allegabant; quum in plebanum quindecim tantum canonici et unus praepositus a principio consensissent, nec aliquid ei iuris accreverit in hoc casu per subsequentem consensum novem canonicorum, qui electionis tempore non fuere praesentes, nec vocari potuerint commode nec deberent; praesertim quum octo ex illis tanto tempore fuissent absentes, quod secundum constitutionem patriarchae ac capituli Constantinopolitanorum pro canonicis nullatenus haberentur. Auctoritatem etiam introducebant pro se, quum regulariter maioris auctoritatis praelatus quam simplex canonicus habeatur. Bonum vero zelum ea ratione probabant, quod Venetum pro vitando scandalo longa conversatione notum, laudabili administratione probatum, carum clericis, et acceptum laicis postularant; in quem assensus principis, suffraganeorum vota plebisque desiderium concurrebant; nec debebant aliquid sinistrum de ille praesumere, quem et excellentia dignitatis et communis reddebat fama praeclarum.

Whence the same men could not and ought not to be excluded, for this reason also, that seven, in the name of the seven provosts, and two, in the stead and name of the twenty-three prelates, had been admitted by the canons to the tractation of the election on behalf of the universitas itself; and thus, since in the postulation the votes of the seven provosts and of eighteen prelates present, and of another six absent—whose procurators were present in the city—had concurred, their consent intervening, they alleged on their side a number more than twice as great; whereas for the pleban only fifteen canons and one provost had from the beginning agreed, nor did any right accrue to him in this case by the subsequent consent of nine canons, who at the time of the election were not present, nor could conveniently, nor ought they, to have been summoned; especially since eight of them had been absent for so long a time that, according to the constitution of the patriarch and the chapter of the Constantinopolitans, they would in no wise be held as canons. They also introduced authority for themselves, since regularly a prelate is held to be of greater authority than a simple canon. Their good zeal they proved for this reason, that they had postulated a Venetian, known by long residence (conversatio), approved by laudable administration, dear to the clerics and acceptable to the laity; in whom the assent of the prince, the votes of the suffragans, and the desire of the people were concurring; nor ought they to presume anything sinister concerning him, whom both the excellence of dignity and common fame rendered illustrious.

Nec etiam erant adversarii audiendi, qui promotionis eius tempore tacuerunt, nisi forte aliquid novum proponerent, vel quod postmodum didicissent, maxime quum obiectam notam incontinentiae, si qua forsitan praecessisset in ipso, quod tamen inficiabantur omnino, subsequens longae conversationis delevisset honestas. Proposuerunt etiam, quod nisi pars altera se ab iniuriis temperaret, intendebant quaedam proponere tam in personas eligentium quam electi. Ad excusationem vero eiusdem archiepiscopi super obiectione ambitus proponebant, quod idem ex honesta et probabili causa Constantinopolim venerat, et habebat necesse frequenter accedere, tum propter negotia patriarchalis ecclesiae, tum etiam propter exsecutionem ultimae voluntatis patriarchae defuncti suae discretioni commissae; qui licet interfuerit vesperis et matutinis in patriarchali ecclesia ob solennitatem diei, in loco tamen decani resedit, nec aliquid de patriarchalibus usurpavit.

Nor were the adversaries to be heard who kept silence at the time of his promotion, unless perhaps they were to propose something new, or what they had learned afterward, especially since the honesty of a long-continued conduct would have effaced the imputed mark of incontinence, if any perhaps had preceded in him—which, however, they utterly denied. They further proposed that, unless the other party restrained itself from injuries, they intended to bring forward certain matters concerning both the persons of the electors and of the elected. But in excuse of that same archbishop on the objection of ambition, they submitted that he had come to Constantinople for an honest and probable cause, and had need to approach frequently, both on account of the business of the patriarchal church and also for the execution of the last will of the deceased patriarch committed to his discretion; who, although he was present at vespers and matins in the patriarchal church by reason of the day’s solemnity, nevertheless sat in the place of the dean, and usurped nothing of the patriarchal prerogatives.

Ipsum etiam literatum, etsi non eminenter, competenter tamen esse dicebant, sufficientem intelligentiam et eloquentiam de scripturis et in scripturis habentem; nihilominus allegantes, quod, etsi quaedam conventuales ecclesiae tunc vacarent, aut forsan propter pauperiem non haberent numerum clericorum, ipsum capitulum, aut etiam unus, qui vicem capituli retineret, ad electionem pro praelato deberet admitti, quum in talibus saepe capitulum vicem consueverit supplere praelati, et nomen ac ius universitatis multotiens devolvatur ad unum et retineatur in uno. De malo nihilominus zelo arguebantur electores plebani eo, quod hominem elegerant, quem electionis tempore credebant in minoribus ordinibus constitutum, asserentes, quod in vigilia nativitatis dominicae altera pars apud Constantinopolim consenserat in plebanum, qui se paulo ante apud Venetias fecerat in subdiaconum promoveri. Ex quo inferebatur, quod, si hoc actum fuerit ex condicto, non poterat ambitione carere.

They said that he himself was also literate—though not eminently, yet competently—having sufficient intelligence and eloquence of the Scriptures and in the Scriptures; nonetheless alleging that, even if certain conventual churches were then vacant, or perhaps on account of poverty did not have the number of clerics, the chapter itself, or even one who retained the vice of the chapter, ought to be admitted to the election for a prelate, since in such cases the chapter is often accustomed to supply the vice of the prelate, and the name and right of the universitas is many times devolved unto one and retained in one. The electors of the pleban were nevertheless charged with ill zeal, for that they had elected a man whom at the time of the election they believed to be constituted in the minor orders, asserting that on the Vigil of the Lord’s Nativity the other party at Constantinople had agreed upon a pleban, who a little before at Venice had caused himself to be promoted into the subdiaconate. Whence it was inferred that, if this was done by prearrangement, it could not be free from ambition.

Si vero praeordinatum non exstitit, quum propter locorum distantiam hoc ad eligentes tam brevi tempore nequiverit pervenisse, sequitur, quod secundum conscientias suas ineligibilem eligebant; vel si error ad excusationem accusatione non vacuam allegetur, in confessionem negligentia veniet, quae super iis non multum distat a culpa. Adiiciebant etiam, quod magis erat extraordinarium consentire in hominem, non solum extra totum patriarchatum, verum etiam extra totum imperium constitutum, quam in vicinum et familiarem, suffraganeum eiusdem ecclesiae, de cuius pastoris electione tractatur. Personam quoque plebani de vehementi ambitione notabant, dicentes, quod ipse per literas suas quosdam Constantinopolitanos canonicos expresse rogaverat, ut eum in suum eligerent patriarcham; quod pars adversa negabat.

But if indeed it had not been pre‑ordained, since on account of the distance of the places this could not have reached the electors in so short a time, it follows that they were choosing, according to their consciences, one ineligible; or, if error be alleged as an excuse not void of accusation, it will amount to a confession of negligence, which in these matters does not differ much from fault. They added also that it was more extraordinary to consent to a man established not only outside the whole patriarchate but even outside the whole empire, than to a neighbor and familiar, a suffragan of the same church, concerning whose pastor’s election the matter is being handled. They likewise marked the person of the pleban with vehement ambition, saying that he by his own letters had expressly entreated certain Constantinopolitan canons to elect him as their patriarch; which the opposing party denied.

Unde petebant postulatores archiepiscopi saepedicti, ut, quum esset altera pars zelo, auctoritate ac numero minor, cassato quod factum fuerat de plebano, postulationem ipsorum admittere dignaremur.] Verum quia de his, quae per assertionem partium in iudicium deducta fuerant, nobis non potuit fieri plena fides, quamvis super his, quae de numero dicta sunt postulantium, per quoddam instrumentum publicum, nec non per confessionem procuratoris adversae partis in iudicio quidem factam, sed postea revocatam, pars altera assereret suam intentionem esse fundatam, causam discretioni tuae duximus committendam, per apostolica scripta mandantes, quatenus super his et aliis inquiras diligentissime veritatem, de meritis electi et postulati apud Venetias, ubi nati fuerunt et diutius conversati, de studiis autem eligentium et postulantium, et omnibus generaliter, quae causam possunt instruere, apud Constantinopolim, ubi huiusmodi postulatio et electio celebratae fuerunt, et, si partes consenserint, procedas hoc modo, ut, si constiterit de mutuo convenisse consensu, quod ad electionem patriarchae septem admitterentur praepositi, sive per se ipsos sive per alios, et duo alii ex parte universitatis pro ceteris conventualium ecclesiarum praelatis, totque tunc temporis conventuales ecclesias habuisse praelatos, quod cum septem praepositis et novem canonicis, quos quidem canonicos constat in postulatione praefati archiepiscopi convenisse, duplo maiorem facerent numerum quam sexdecim electores plebani, tu vice nostra postulationem admittas, (nisi probatum fuerit, postulato aliquid obviare de canonicis institutis, quod promotionem ipsius debeat impedire), ac plebani electione cassata ipsum archiepiscopum absolvas a vinculo, quo Eradiensi ecclesiae tenetur, concedendo ipsum Constantinopolitanae ecclesiae in pastorem. Quod si ad faciendum duplo maiorem numerum simul omnes praedicti minime sufficerent, sive dignus sive indignus fuerit postulatus, tu, postulatione repulsa, electionem plebani auctoritate nostra confirmes, dummodo nihil obsistat eidem, quod ipsum tanto praesulatu reddat indignum. Si vero numerus postulantium inventus fuerit duplo maior, quemadmodum praedictum est, et persona postulata reperta fuerit indigna, tu tam postulationem, quam electionem non differas reprobare, nisi forsan omnes aut maior pars postulantium praesumptione damnabili postulaverint scienter indignum, ut hac vice merito debeant eligendi seu postulandi potestate privari.

Whence the petitioners of the oft-said archbishop asked that, since the other party was lesser in zeal, authority, and number, with what had been done concerning the plebanus annulled, we would deign to admit their postulation.] But because concerning those things which had been brought into judgment by the assertions of the parties full faith could not be made to us—although regarding those matters that were said about the number of the postulants, by a certain public instrument and also by the confession of the procurator of the opposing party, indeed made in court but afterwards revoked, the other party asserted that its intention was well founded—we judged the cause to be committed to your discretion, by apostolic writings mandating that you investigate most diligently the truth about these and other things: concerning the merits of the elected and the postulated at Venice, where they were born and dwelt longer; concerning, moreover, the aims of the electors and the postulants; and, in general, all things which can inform the cause, at Constantinople, where the postulation and election of this kind were celebrated; and, if the parties shall consent, proceed in this way: that, if it shall be established that by mutual agreement it was arranged that seven praepositi should be admitted to the election of the patriarch, whether by themselves or through others, and two others on the part of the universitas on behalf of the other prelates of the conventual churches, and that at that time there were so many conventual churches having prelates that, together with the seven praepositi and the nine canons (which canons are agreed to have assembled in the postulation of the aforesaid archbishop), they would make a number double that of the sixteen electors of the plebanus, you, in our stead, should admit the postulation (unless it shall have been proved that something from canonical institutes stands in the way of the postulated, which ought to impede his promotion), and, the election of the plebanus having been annulled, you should absolve that archbishop from the bond by which he is held to the Eradiensis church, granting him to the church of Constantinople as pastor. But if, to make a number double, all the aforesaid together should by no means suffice, whether the postulated be worthy or unworthy, you, the postulation having been rejected, should confirm by our authority the election of the plebanus, provided that nothing opposes him which would render him unworthy of so great a prelateship. If indeed the number of postulants shall be found double, as aforesaid, and the person postulated shall be found unworthy, you should not delay to disapprove both the postulation and the election, unless perhaps all or the greater part of the postulants, by damnable presumption, knowingly postulated one unworthy, so that on this occasion they ought deservedly to be deprived of the power of electing or postulating.

Et hoc quoque casu electionem confirmes, si eam de persona idonea constiterit celebratam. [Porro etc. Dat.

And in this case also confirm the election, if it shall have been established that it was celebrated concerning a suitable person. [Furthermore, etc. Given.]

Signiae XV. Kal. Sept. Pont.

At Signia, 15 days before the Kalends of September. Pontificate.

nostr, Ao. XV. 1212.]

of our pontificate, in the year 15, 1212.]

CAP. XLI.

CHAPTER 41.

Si illi, ad quos spectat electio, negligunt eligere praelatum cathedralis vel regularis ecclesiae infra tres menses, proximus superior ecclesiam ordinabit; quod si intra tres alios menses non fecerit, canonice punietur.

If those to whom the election pertains neglect to elect a prelate of a cathedral or regular church within three months, the next superior will set the church in order; but if he does not do it within three other months, he will be punished canonically.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the general council.

Ne pro defectu pastoris gregem dominicum lupus rapax invadat, aut in facultatibus suis ecclesia viduata grave dispendium patiatur, volentes in hoc etiam occurrere periculis animarum, et ecclesiarum indemnitatibus providere, statuimus, ut ultra tres menses cathedralis vel regularis ecclesia praelato non vacet. Infra quos, iusto impedimento cessante si electio celebrata non fuerit, qui eligere debuerant, eligendi potestate careant ea vice, ac ipsa eligendi potestas ad eum, qui proximo, praeesse dignoscitur, devolvatur. Is vero, ad quem fuerit devoluta potestas, Deum prae oculis habens, non differat ultra tres menses cum consilio capituli sui et aliorum virorum prudentium viduatam ecclesiam de persona idonea ipsius quidem ecclesiae, vel alterius, si digna non reperiatur in illa, canonice ordinare, si canonicam voluerit effugere ultionem.

Lest on account of a defect of a pastor the Lord’s flock be invaded by a ravening wolf, or the church, widowed in its resources, suffer a grave dispendium, wishing herein also to forestall dangers of souls and to provide for the indemnities of churches, we decree that a cathedral or regular church not remain vacant of a prelate beyond three months. Within which, a just impediment ceasing, if the election shall not have been celebrated, those who ought to have elected shall lack the power of electing on that occasion, and the very power of electing shall devolve upon him who is recognized as the next to preside. He, moreover, upon whom the power shall have been devolved, having God before his eyes, shall not defer beyond three months, with the counsel of his chapter and of other prudent men, to canonically appoint for the widowed church a suitable person from that church itself, or from another, if a worthy one be not found in it, if he shall wish to escape canonical punishment.

CAP. XLII.

CHAPTER 42.

Per aliquam de tribus formis hic contentis, scilicet scrutinii, compromissi et inspirationis, procedi debet ad electionem in ecclesiis cathedralibus; aliter electio celebrata non valet, et contra facientes privandi sunt ea vice potestate eligendi. H. d. usque ad § Illud. ñ § 1. Interdicit procuratorem in electionis negotio constitui, nisi concurrant hic contenta usque ad § Electiones.

By some one of the three forms contained here, namely of scrutiny, compromise, and inspiration, one must proceed to an election in cathedral churches; otherwise an election held is not valid, and those acting to the contrary are to be deprived on that occasion of the power of electing. H. d. up to § That. ñ § 1. It forbids that a procurator be constituted in the business of an election, unless the things contained here concur up to § Elections.

Abbas Siculus. ñ § 2. Praecipit electiones solenniter publicari, et clandestinas reprobari. H. d. usque ad finem.

The Sicilian Abbot. ñ § 2. He prescribes that elections be solemnly published, and that clandestine ones be reprobated. In this title up to the end.

Abbas Siculus.

The Sicilian Abbot.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Quia propter diversas electionum formas, quas quidam invenire conantur, et multa impedimenta proveniunt, et magna pericula imminent ecclesiis viduatis, statuimus, ut, quum electio fuerit celebranda, praesentibus omnibus, qui debent, et volunt et possunt commode interesse, assumantur tres de collegio fide digni, qui secrete et sigillatim vota cunctorum diligenter exquirant, et in scriptis redacta mox publicent in communi, nullo prorsus appellationis obstaculo interiecto, ut is collatione habita eligatur, in quem omnes, vel maior et sanior pars capituli consentit. Vel saltem eligendi potestas aliquibus viris idoneis committatur, qui vice omnium ecclesiae viduatae provideant de pastore. Aliter electio facta non valeat, nisi forte cornmuniter esset ab omnibus, quasi per inspirationem abque vitio celebrata.

Because, on account of the diverse forms of elections which some try to devise, many impediments arise and great dangers threaten widowed churches, we decree that, when the election is to be celebrated, with all present who ought, and wish, and can conveniently be present, three men be taken from the college, worthy of faith, who shall secretly and individually solicit the votes of all, and, having put them into writing, shall at once publish them in common, with absolutely no obstacle of appeal interposed, so that, a collation having been held, he be chosen upon whom all, or the greater and sounder part of the chapter, consents. Or at least let the power of choosing be committed to some suitable men, who, in the stead of all, may provide a pastor for the widowed church. Otherwise an election made shall not be valid, unless perhaps it were commonly by all, as if by inspiration, celebrated without fault.

Qui vero contra praescriptas formas eligere attentaverint, eligendi ea vice potestate priventur. § 1. Illud autem penitus interdicimus, ne quis in electionis negotio procuratorem constituat, nisi sit absens in eo loco, de quo debeat advocari, iustoque impedimento detentus venire non possit, super quo, si opus fuerit, fidem faciat iuramento, et tunc, si voluerit, uni committat de ipso collegio vicem suam. § 2. Electiones quoque clandestinas reprobamus, statuentes, ut, quam cito electio fuerit celebrata, solenniter publicetur.

But those who shall have attempted to elect contrary to the prescribed forms, let them be deprived of the power of electing on that occasion. § 1. We utterly interdict this, that no one constitute a procurator in the business of an election, unless he be absent in that place from which he ought to be summoned, and, detained by a just impediment, cannot come—concerning which, if need be, he shall make good faith by an oath—and then, if he wishes, let him commit his turn/role to one person from the college itself. § 2. We also reprobate clandestine elections, establishing that, as soon as the election shall have been celebrated, it be solemnly published.

CAP. XLIII.

CHAPTER 43.

Consentiens electioni de se factae per abusum potestatis saecularis, efficitur ineligibilis ad dignitatem, et electio est nulla. Eligentes autem a beneficiis per triennium suspenduntur, et tunc sunt privati potestate eligendi.

Consenting to an election of himself made through abuse of secular power, he is rendered ineligible to the dignity, and the election is null. The electors, however, are suspended from benefices for three years, and then they are deprived of the power of electing.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Quisquis electioni de se factae per saecularis potestatis abusum consentire praesumpserit contra canonicam libertatem, et electionis commodo careat, et ineligibilis fiat, nec absque dispensatione ad aliquam valeat eligi dignitatem. Qui electionem huiusmodi, quam ipso iure irritam esse censemus, praesumpserint celebrare, ab officiis et beneficiis penitus suspendantur per triennium, eligendi tunc potestate privati.

Whoever shall have presumed to consent to an election of himself brought about through an abuse of secular power, against canonical liberty, let him both lack the advantage of the election and become ineligible, nor without dispensation let him be able to be elected to any dignity. Those who shall have presumed to celebrate such an election, which we judge to be null by the law itself, let them be utterly suspended from offices and benefices for three years, then deprived of the power of electing.

CAP. XLIV.

CHAPTER 44.

Si praelatus per negligentiam confirmavit indignum electum ad regimen animarum, perdit potestatem confirmandi primum successorem, et a perceptione proprii beneficii suspenditur, et promotus deiicitur. Si vero per malitiam hoc fecit, gravius punitur. Electi vero immediate subiecti Papae, per se aut per personas instructas debent adire Papam, et petere confirmationem.

If a prelate through negligence has confirmed an unworthy elect to the regimen of souls, he loses the power of confirming the first successor, is suspended from the reception of his own benefice, and the promoted is deposed. But if he did this through malice, he is punished more grievously. Those elected, however, who are immediately subject to the Pope ought, either in person or through instructed persons, to approach the Pope and ask for confirmation.

Et si sint electi in concordia, et valde remoti, videlicet ultra Italiam constituti, interim administrant, ita tamen, quod nil alienent; benedicuntur autem et consecrantur, prout consueverunt.

And if they be elected in concord, and are very remote, namely situated beyond Italy, in the meantime they administer, yet in such a manner that they alienate nothing; moreover, they are blessed and consecrated, as they have been accustomed.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Nihil est, quod ecclesiae Dei magis officiat, quam quod indigni assumantur praelati ad regimen animarum. Volentes igitur huic morbo adhibere necessariam medelam, irrefragabili constitutione sancimus, quatenus, quum quisquam ad regimen animarum fuerit electus, is, ad quem pertinet ipsius confirmatio, diligenter examinet et electionis processum, et personam electi, ut, quum omnia rite concurrerint, munus ei confirmationis impendat, quia, si secus fuerit incaute praesumptum, non solum deiiciendus est indigne promotus, verum etiam indigne promovens puniendus. Ipsum quoque decernimus hac animadversione puniri, ut, quum de ipsius constiterit negligentia, maxime si hominem insufficientis scientiae, vel inhonestae vitae, vel aetatis illegitimae approbaverit, non solum confirmandi primum successorem illius careat potestate, verum etiam, ne aliquo casu poenam effugiat, a perceptione proprii beneficii suspendatur, quousque, si aequum fuerit, indulgentiam valeat promereri.

There is nothing that does more harm to the Church of God than that unworthy prelates are taken up to the governance of souls. Wishing, therefore, to apply a necessary remedy to this sickness, we sanction by an irrefragable constitution that, when anyone shall have been elected to the governance of souls, he to whom the confirmation of the same pertains shall diligently examine both the process of the election and the person of the elected, so that, when all things have duly concurred, he may impart to him the confirmation; because, if otherwise it has been incautiously presumed, not only must the unworthily promoted be deposed, but the one promoting unworthily must also be punished. We likewise decree that he himself be punished by this animadversion, namely, that, when his negligence has been established, especially if he shall have approved a man of insufficient knowledge, or of dishonorable life, or of illegitimate age, he shall not only lack the power of confirming that man’s first successor, but also, lest by any chance he escape the penalty, let him be suspended from the receipt of his own benefice, until, if it shall be equitable, he may be able to merit indulgence.

Si vero convictus fuerit in hoc per malitiam excessisse, graviori subiaceat ultioni. § 1. Episcopi quoque tales ad sacros ordines et ecclesiasticas dignitates promovere procurent, qui commissum sibi officium digne valeant adimplere, si et ipsi canonicam cupiunt effugere ultionem. § 2. Ceterum qui ad Romanum pertinent immediate Pontificem, ad percipiendam sui confirmationem officii eius se conspectui, si commode fieri potest, personaliter repraesentent, aut personas transmittant idoneas, per quas diligens inquisitio super electionibus et electis possit haberi, ut sic demum per ipsius circumspectionem consilii sui plenitudinem officii assequantur, quum eis nihil obstiterit de canonicis institutis, ita, quod interim valde remoti, videlicet ultra Italiam constituti, si electi fuerint in concordia, dispensative propter necessitates ecclesiarum et utilitates in spiritualibus et temporalibus administrent; sic tamen, ut de rebus ecclesiasticis nihil penitus alienent.

If, however, he should be convicted to have exceeded in this through malice, let him be subject to a graver vengeance. § 1. Let bishops also endeavor to promote to sacred orders and ecclesiastical dignities such men as can worthily be able to fulfill the office committed to them, if they themselves also desire to escape canonical vengeance. § 2. Moreover, those who pertain immediately to the Roman Pontiff, for receiving the confirmation of their office, should present themselves to his presence, if it can conveniently be done, personally, or send suitable persons, through whom a diligent inquisition concerning the elections and the elect may be had, so that only then, through his circumspection, by his counsel, they may attain the plenitude of office, when nothing from the canonical institutes has stood in their way, in such wise, however, that in the meantime those very remote, namely situated beyond Italy, if they shall have been elected in concord, may administer by way of dispensation on account of the necessities of the churches and advantages in things spiritual and temporal; yet thus, that they alienate nothing at all of ecclesiastical goods.

Munus vero benedictionis seu consecrationis recipiant, sicut hactenus recipere consueverunt.

But let them receive the rite of benediction or consecration, just as they have hitherto been accustomed to receive.

CAP. XLV.

CHAPTER 45.

Expensae necessariae, quas facit capitulum pro electione praelati, de bonis praelaturae debent fieri vel reddi.

Necessary expenses, which the chapter incurs for the election of a prelate, ought to be made or reimbursed out of the goods of the prelature.

Honorius III. Capitulo Constantinopolitano.

Honorius III. To the Constantinopolitan Chapter.

Ut praeteritae contentionis decisa materia futuris litigiis occasio amputetur, praesentium auctoritate statuimus, ut expensae necessariae, quas capitulum Constantinopolitanum vel eius nuncii vacante sede pro electionis negotio fecerint, de bonis patriarchatus fiant totaliter vel reddantur, dummodo ipsi bona decedentis patriarchae non occupent vel usurpent.

So that, the matter of the past contention having been decided, an occasion for future litigations may be cut off, by the authority of these presents we decree that the necessary expenses which the Constantinopolitan chapter or its envoys, with the see vacant, shall have made for the business of the election, be made entirely from the goods of the patriarchate or be repaid, provided that they themselves do not seize or usurp the goods of the deceased patriarch.

CAP. XLVI.

CHAPTER 46.

Electio post collationem ex intervallo celebrata non valet. H. d. secundum opinionem magis communem.

An election celebrated after a collation, with an interval intervening, is not valid. I.e., according to the more common opinion.

Idem Electo Lugdunensi.

The Same to the Elect of Lyons.

Quum post petitam instanter et demum obtentam venerabilis fratris nostri quondam Lugdunensis archiepiscopi cessionem vota canonicorum Lugdunensium in te, tunc ipsorum praepositum, concorditer convenisset, quia tandem examinato, sicut decuit, processu electionis tuae, invenimus eam post publicationem consensuum et collationis tractatum aliquamdiu fuisse protractam, assensumque tuum prius, quam electus fueris, requisitum, electionem eandem ex ipsius duntaxat inordinato processu iustitia cassavimus exigente. [III. id. Ian.

When, after the resignation of our venerable brother, formerly archbishop of Lyon, had been urgently sought and at length obtained, the votes of the canons of Lyon had concordantly converged upon you, then their provost, because at last, the process of your election having been examined, as was fitting, we found that, after the publication of the consents and the discussion of the collation, it had been protracted for some time, and that your assent had been requested before you had been elected, we, justice demanding it, quashed that same election solely on account of its inordinate process. [3rd day before the Ides of January.

Ao. VIII. ñ 1224.]

Year 8. no. 1224.]

CAP. XLVII.

CHAPTER 47.

Monachus unius monasterii alterius factus abbas, in electione abbatis prioris monasterii vocem non habet, etiamsi tale ius ab abbate et monachis prioris monasterii sibi fuit reservatum.

A monk of one monastery who has become abbot of another has no voice in the election of the abbot of the former monastery, even if such a right had been reserved to himself by the abbot and the monks of the former monastery.

Idem Eboracensi Priori, et Magistro Guidoni de Canopo.

The same to the Prior of York, and to Master Guido of Canopo.

Constitutis in praesentia nostra procuratoribus dilectorum filiorum sancti Taurini Eboracensis et sancti Leofredi de Cruce abbatum, ac monasterii Fiscanensis, dilectum fratrem nostrum B. tit. SS. Ioannis et Pauli presbyterum cardinalem dedimus auditorem, coram quo proposuerunt procuratores praedictorum abbatum, quod vacante praefato monasterio, quod immediate ad Romanam ecclesiam pertinet, monachi eiusdem loci contemptis praefatis abbatibus, qui commode poterant et debebant de iure vocari, ad electionem abbatis temere procedentes, Ethard. quondam abbatem S. Iudoci ad eiusdem regimen minus idoneum eligere praesumpserunt, quare petebant electionem huiusmodi penitus irritari.

With the procurators of the beloved sons, the abbots of Saint Taurinus of York and Saint Leofred of the Cross, and of the monastery of Fécamp, having been constituted in our presence, we gave as auditor our beloved brother B., presbyter cardinal of the title of Saints John and Paul, before whom the procurators of the aforesaid abbots proposed that, the aforesaid monastery being vacant, which pertains immediately to the Roman Church, the monks of the same place, the aforesaid abbots being disregarded, who could conveniently and by right ought to be called, rashly proceeding to the election of an abbot, presumed to elect Ethard., formerly abbot of St. Josse, less suitable for the governance of the same, wherefore they sought that an election of this kind be utterly annulled.

Quum autem procuratores ipsorum abbatum iussi essent exprimere, quo iure ipsi abbates deberent electioni abbatis Fiscanensis monasterii interesse responderunt, quod olim, quum assumerentur in suorum monasteriorum abbates, fuit specialiter indultum eis ab abbate et conventu monasterii Fiscanensis, ut haberent vocem in capitulo eorundem. Nos autem rationem huiusmodi frivolam reputantes, de consilio fratrum nostrorum super hoc perpetuum silentium imponimus abbatibus supradictis.

But when the procurators of those abbots had been ordered to express by what right those abbots ought to take part in the election of the abbot of the monastery of Fécamp, they replied that formerly, when they were assumed as abbots of their monasteries, it was specially indulted to them by the abbot and convent of the monastery of Fécamp that they should have a voice in the chapter of the same. But we, deeming such a rationale frivolous, by the counsel of our brothers impose perpetual silence upon the aforesaid abbots in this matter.

CAP. XLVIII.

CHAPTER 48.

Electio debet fieri verbo, et de illo, in quem consenserit maior pars capituli, et non respectu aliarum partium.

The election ought to be made by word, and of him on whom the greater part of the chapter has consented, and not with respect to other parties.

Idem Rothomagensi Capitulo.

The same to the Chapter of Rouen.

Ecclesia vestra destituta pastore, et votis vestris, quum de futura praelati haberetis successione tractatum, in diversa divisis, quidam in Thomam, quidam in cancellarium, et quidam singulares in singulares personas eiusdem ecclesiae consensistis. Verum quum super his in nostra et nostrorum fratrum praesentia multa fuissent hinc inde proposita, invenimus, quod illi, qui sua in Thomam desideria dirigebant, licet maiorem partem facerent partium comparatione minorum, non tamen ad maiorem partem capituli pervenerunt. Consideravimus nihilominus, quod post publicationem consensuum et collationis tractatum ad electionem nullus habitus est processus, quamvis deportationis solennitas etiam post appellationem legitimam fuerit subsecuta, quam pro electione nec deceret, nec etiam expediret haberi.

Your church, being deprived of a pastor, and your wishes—when you were holding discussion about the future succession of a prelate—being divided into different directions, some of you consented to Thomas, some to the chancellor, and some individuals to individual persons of the same church. But when many things had on these matters been proposed on this side and that in our presence and in that of our brothers, we found that those who were directing their desires toward Thomas, although they made the greater part of the parties in comparison with the lesser, nevertheless did not attain to the greater part of the chapter. We have considered nonetheless that after the publication of the consents and a discussion of the collation no process was undertaken toward an election, although the solemnity of conveyance even after a legitimate appeal had followed—something which, in regard to an election, it would neither be fitting nor even expedient to have.

Unde de fratrum nostrorum consilio quod factum est de T. praedicto cassavimus, petitione consentientium etiam in cancellarium non admissa.

Whence, by the counsel of our brothers, we annulled what was done concerning the aforesaid T., the petition of those consenting even for the chancellor not being admitted.

CAP. XLIX.

CHAPTER 49.

Non professus in abbatem eligi non potest.

One not professed cannot be elected as abbot.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory 9.

Quum in magistrum assumi non debeat qui formam discipuli non assumpsit, nec sit praeficiendus qui subesse non novit, nos, intellecto per te, quod in quibusdam regularibus domibus, iure tibi dioecesano subiectis, sunt quidam in abbates non professi ordinem regularem assumpti, mandamus, quatenus, quum tales abbates esse non debeant, qui per professionem monachi et regulares canonici non fuerint, ad amotionem eorum, quos tales inveneris, sublato appellationis impedimento, procedas.

Since he who has not assumed the form of a disciple ought not to be taken up as a master, nor should he be put in charge who does not know how to be subject, we, having understood through you that in certain regular houses, subject to you by diocesan right, there are certain persons who, not professed of the regular order, have been assumed as abbots, command that, since such ought not to be abbots who have not by profession been monks and regular canons, you proceed to the removal of those whom you shall find to be such, the impediment of appeal being set aside.

CAP. L.

CHAPTER 50.

Electio facta a non maiori parte capituli et omissa collatione non valet.

An election made by not the greater part of the chapter, and with the collation omitted, is not valid.

Idem Cumanensi Capitulo.

The same to the Chapter of Cumae.

Cumana ecclesia pastoris solatio destituta, et congregatis die ad celebrandam electionem praefixa, qui praesentes erant de Cumanis canonicis, ac tribus abbatibus, [videlicet S. Abundii, S. Carpophari et S. Iuliani Cumani] qui vocem in electione habere noscuntur, capellani et clerici civitatis, electioni se debere interesse dicentes, sub huiusmodi protestatione admissi fuerunt, quod vox eorum, qui non deberent interesse de iure vel consuetudine, non valeret. Tandem praemisso iuxta formam concilii generalis scrutinio, VII. de canonicis, unus abbatum, XI. capellani et novem clerici in eiusdem ecclesiae archipresbyterum convenerunt, novem canonicis, uno de abbatibus, uno capellano et XI. clericis in ipsius ecclesiae archidiaconum dirigentibus vota sua.

The Cuman church, deprived of the solace of a pastor, and, on the day appointed for celebrating the election having been assembled, those who were present of the Cuman canons and the three abbots, [namely St. Abundius, St. Carpophorus, and St. Julian of Cumae], who are known to have a voice in the election, the chaplains and the clerics of the city, claiming that they ought to take part in the election, were admitted under this protestation, that the vote of those who ought not to take part by right or by custom should not be valid. Finally, after a scrutiny had been conducted according to the form of the general council, 7. of the canons, one of the abbots, 11. chaplains and nine clerics agreed upon the archpriest of the same church, while nine canons, one of the abbots, one chaplain and 11. clerics were directing their votes toward the archdeacon of that church.

[Quumque super electione utriusque procuratores eorum ad nostram praesentiam accessissent, dil. filium nostrum O. S. Nicolai in Carcere Tulliano diaconum Cardinalem eis deputavimus auditorem, qui quum ea quae fuerunt proposita coram ipso nobis fideliter retulisset,] Quum decem et octo fuerint canonici, tres abbates, XX. clerici et XIV. capellani, neutram electionem comperimus ad maiorem partem totius capituli pervenisse.

[And when, moreover, the procurators of each side had come into our presence concerning the election, we deputed to them as auditor our beloved son O., Cardinal Deacon of St. Nicholas in Carcere Tulliano, who, when he had faithfully reported to us the things that had been proposed before him,] Since there were eighteen canons, three abbots, 20 clerics, and 14 chaplains, we found that neither election had come to the greater part of the whole chapter.

Nec probatum fuerat, [ab eisdem procuratoribus] quod clerici admitti debuerint, nec quod capellani admissi fuerint de consuetudine vel de iure. Nam etsi capellani duabus electionibus episcoporum interfuerint, et scrutatores dederint voluntatum, non tamen inquisita vota sua fuisse, vel eos aliquos elegisse probatur. Sed et si inquisita fuissent vota, vel ipsi aliquos elegissent, per hoc tamen non constitit, id eis de iure competere, vel ex consuetudine iam praescripta.

Nor had it been proved, [by those same procurators], that the clerics ought to have been admitted, nor that the chaplains had been admitted by custom or by law. For although the chaplains had taken part in two elections of bishops, and had appointed scrutineers of the wills (votes), nevertheless it is not proved that their own votes were taken, or that they elected anyone. But even if the votes had been taken, or they themselves had elected some persons, nonetheless it is not thereby established that this pertains to them by right, or from a custom already prescribed.

Unde nos electiones ipsas praesumptas etiam contra formam concilii generalis, quum collatio in communi omissa fuerit, quae post publicationem scrutinii fieri debuisset, de fratrum nostrorum consilio sententialiter duximus irritandas, [et] electores hac vice eligendi potestate privantes, [Dat. Laterani XII. Kal.

Whence we, the elections themselves presumed even against the form of the General Council, since the conference in common had been omitted, which ought to have been done after the publication of the scrutiny, by the counsel of our brothers have judged to be annulled by formal sentence, [and] depriving the electors on this occasion of the power of electing, [Dated at the Lateran 12 Kal.

April Ao. II. ñ 1228.]

April Year 2. no. 1228.]

CAP. LI.

CHAPTER 51.

Per compositionem factam cum praelato et capitulo non potest ius eligendi competere laico, etiam patrono in ecclesia collegiata.

By a composition made with the prelate and the chapter, the right of electing cannot pertain to a layman, even a patron, in a collegiate church.

Idem Abbati Cluniacensi.

The same to the Abbot of Cluny.

Sacrosancta Romana ecclesia (Et infra:) Sane proposuisti in nostra praesentia, quod super ordinatione prioris monasterii sancti Pancratii, ad Cluniacensem ecclesiam pertinentis, cum comite de Varenna patrono ipsius quidam praedecessor tuus de consensu capituli sui compositionem quandam inivit iuri contrariam et ecclesiae ipsi damnosam, videlicet, ut in optione sit ipsius comitis, assumere ad prioratum dicti monasterii, Cluniacensi et de Caritate prioribus duntaxat exceptis, unum de duobus melioribus totius Cluniacensis ordinis, quos abbas duxerit nominandos. (Et infra:) Attendentes itaque, quod ius eligendi in collegiata ecclesia non cadit in laicum, et ideo id esset perniciosum exemplo, et redundaret in dispendium ecclesiasticae libertatis, volumus, ut dictum prioratum libere possis, non obstante compositione ipsa, sicut alios prioratus tibi subditos ordinare, denunciando ordinationem factam patrono, ut suum, si voluerit, honestum impertiatur assensum.

The most holy Roman church (And below:) Indeed you set forth in our presence that, concerning the ordination of the prior of the monastery of Saint Pancratius, pertaining to the Cluniac church, with the count of Varenna, its patron, a certain predecessor of yours, with the consent of his chapter, entered into a certain composition contrary to right and damaging to that church, namely, that it be at the option of that count to take for the priory of the said monastery, the priors of Cluny and of La Charité only excepted, one of the two best of the whole Cluniac order, whom the abbot should deem to be named. (And below:) Considering therefore that the right of electing in a collegiate church does not fall to a layman, and therefore this would be pernicious by way of example and would redound to the detriment of ecclesiastical liberty, we will that you may freely, the composition itself notwithstanding, ordain the said priory, as you ordain the other priories subject to you, by giving notice of the ordination made to the patron, that he may, if he will, impart his honorable assent.

CAP. LII.

CHAPTER 52.

Si per Papam mandatur habentibus eligere, quod eligant cum consilio aliquorum, alioquin conciliarii provideant, eligentes debent consilium requirere in tractatu electionis, et congruo tempore exspectare responsum; alias electio non tenet.

If by the Pope it is mandated to those who have to elect, that they should elect with the counsel of some persons, otherwise let the counsellors make provision, the electors ought to require counsel in the tractation of the election, and to await an answer for a congruous time; otherwise the election does not hold.

Idem Decano et Capitulo S. Ioannis et sancti Stephani Bisuntinensis.

The same to the Dean and Chapter of St. John and St. Stephen of Besançon.

Quum in veteri lege (Et infra:) Porro iam dudum vobis dedimus in mandatis, ut infra quadraginta dies post susceptionem literarum nostrarum cum consilio sancti Benigni et Morismundi abbatum et fratris G. de ordine Praedicatorum eligeretis personam idoneam canonice in pastorem; alioquin dicti consiliarii vobis de archiepiscopo providerent. Verum die ad eligendum praefixa sex ex vobis potestatem eligendi dedistis, usque ad consumptionem cuiusdam candelae, quae ibidem accensa exstitit, duraturam. Tandem quum electores huiusmodi convenissent in praedictum abbatem sancti Benigni, et super hoc sociorum eius consilium requisissent, proponente uno ex illis, quod deliberato consilio responderent, et differentibus eis festinanter dare responsum, praefati electores, quum candela ipsa deficeret, non exspectato ipsorum consilio, dictum abbatem in Bisuntinensem archiepiscopum elegerunt.

When in the Old Law (And below:) Furthermore, long since we gave you in mandates that within forty days after the receipt of our letters, with the counsel of the abbots of Saint Benignus and Morismundus and of brother G., of the Order of Preachers, you should elect a suitable person canonically as pastor; otherwise the said counselors should provide you with an archbishop. However, on the day appointed for electing, you granted to six of you the power of electing, to last until the consumption of a certain candle which had been lit there. At length, when the electors of this kind had agreed upon the aforesaid abbot of Saint Benignus, and had sought on this the counsel of his associates—one of them proposing that they should respond with deliberated counsel, and they delaying to give an answer in haste—the aforesaid electors, as that candle was running out, without awaiting their counsel, elected the said abbot as Archbishop of Besançon.

(Et infra:) Relato ergo ad apostolicam sedem negotio, archiepiscopo Viennensi et abbati de Firmitate iniunximus, ut, si constaret ab eisdem electoribus de electione tractatum fuisse habitum, et in tractatu electionis praedictorum consilium requisitum, electionem ipsius abbatis, si persona esset idonea, confirmarent. Quod si in tractatu electionis non fuisset illorum consilium requisitum, licet postea requisitum fuerit non competenti tempore, nec etiam exspectatum responsum ipsorum, aut non esset idoneus idem abbas, quod de ipso factum erat tanquam invalidum irritarent. (Et infra:) Quum autem compertum non fuerit competenti tempore requisitum consilium de persona praedicti abbatis, et quando exstitit requisitum, non fuit exspectatum responsum nisi modico tempore, nec debeat aliis imputari, quod in tantum illi sibi tempus arctarant, electionem abbatis ipsius, non personae, sed electionis vitio duximus irritandam.

(And below:) Therefore, the matter having been reported to the apostolic see, we enjoined the archbishop of Vienne and the abbot of La Ferté that, if it were established that by those same electors a tractation concerning the election had been held, and in the tractation of the election the counsel of the aforesaid had been requested, they should confirm the election of that abbot, if the person were fit. But if in the tractation of the election their counsel had not been requested—although it was later requested at a non‑competent time—nor even was their response awaited, or if that same abbot were not fit, they should annul as invalid what had been done concerning him. (And below:) However, since it was not found that counsel about the person of the aforesaid abbot was requested at a competent time, and, when it was requested, their response was awaited only for a short time, nor ought it to be imputed to others that they had so tightened time for themselves, we judged the election of that abbot to be annulled, not by fault of the person, but by a vice of the election.

CAP. LIII.

CHAPTER 53.

Si maior pars capituli scienter eligit indignum, valet electio de digno a minori parte, etiam ex eodem scrutinio facta. Hoc dicit secundum veriorom intellectum et intrinsecum.

If the greater part of the chapter knowingly elects an unworthy man, the election of a worthy man by the lesser part is valid, even made from the same scrutiny. This he says according to the truer and intrinsic understanding.

Idem Episcopo Silvanectensi.

The same to the Bishop of Senlis.

Congregato Nivernensi capitulo ad electionem futuri pastoris, XIII. in decanum, et XVIII., computato pro curatore cuiusdam absentis, in cantorem ipsius ecclesiae convenerunt, qui, quum plures in eum, et pauciores in alium sua desideria direxissent, a parte sua electus exstitit in pastorem ecclesiae Nivernensis. Postmodum, credente parte decani, quod alii plurimum deliquissent eligendo personam scientiae literalis expertem, propter quod illis secundum statuta Lateranensis concilii ipso iure eligendi potestate privatis potestas eligendi ad eos exstitit devoluta, decanum ipsum, qui in eum sua vota direxerant, in suum episcopum elegerunt, ad sedem apostolicam appellantes.

The chapter of Nevers having been assembled for the election of the future pastor, 13. for the dean, and 18., the vote of the curator of a certain absentee being counted, converged upon the cantor of that church, who, since more had directed their desires toward him and fewer toward another, was on his side elected as pastor of the church of Nevers. Afterwards, the party of the dean, believing that the others had greatly transgressed by electing a person devoid of literal (literary) knowledge, on account of which, they, according to the statutes of the Lateran council, being by the law itself deprived of the power of electing, the power of electing had devolved to them, elected the dean himself, toward whom they had directed their votes, as their bishop, appealing to the Apostolic See.

(Et infra:) Reliquis petentibus, ut irritare decani electionem attentatam a paucioribus, et post aliam non cassatam, ac confirmare reliquam veluti canonice celebratam a pluribus de pesrsona idonea dignaremus. Nos igitur mandamus, quatenus, si dictus cantor defectum in literatura non patitur, et alias est idoneus ad regimen pastorale, ipsius electionem procures auctoritate nostra, infirmata reliqua, confirmare. Alioquin, ipsius cantoris electione irrita nunciata, praenominatum decanum, si nihil ei de canonicis obstiterit statutis, eadem auctoritate praeficias ecclesiae memoratae.

(And below:) The others requesting that we deign to annul the election of the dean attempted by the fewer, and, the other not cassated, to confirm the remaining one as canonically celebrated by the majority for a suitable person. We therefore command that, if the said cantor does not suffer a defect in letters, and is otherwise idoneous for pastoral regimen, you take care, by our authority, to confirm his election, infirming the other. Otherwise, the election of the said cantor having been declared null, you shall, if nothing in the canonical statutes stands in his way, appoint the aforesaid dean, by the same authority, over the aforesaid church.

CAP. LIV.

CHAPTER 54.

Habens plures dignitates vel plura beneficia curata, sine dispensatione Papae ineligibilis est. Hoc dic. quoad titulum.

One having several dignities or several benefices with cure, without the Pope’s dispensation, is ineligible. Say this with regard to the title.

Idem Silvanectensi Episcopo, et Ioanni de Monte mirabili Archidiacono et Succentori Parisiensi.

The same to the Bishop of Senlis, and to John of Montmirail, Archdeacon and Succentor of Paris.

Dudum ecclesia Rothomagensi pastoris solatio destituta, contra electionem, quae in eadem ecclesia fuerat celebrata, A. archidiaconus et quidam alii eiusdem ecclesiae canonici ad sedem apostolicam accesserunt. Dicto vero archidiacono pro se ac parte sua, et G. archidiacono procuratore illorum, qui electionem celebraverant, in nostra praesentia constitutis, inter alia, quae contra electum obiecta fuerant, archidiaconus proposuit memoratus, quod idem electus post generale concilium archidiaconatum Ambianensem adeptus, ipsum cum pluribus parochialibus ecclesiis, quas ante idem concilium obtinuerat, retinere praesumpsit, eoque dimisso retinuit ecclesias memoratas. § 1. Unde, quum in eodem concilio sit statutum, ut, quicunque receperit aliquod beneficium, curam animarum habens annexam, si prius tale beneficium obtinebat, eo sit ipso iure privatus, et si forte illud retinere contenderit, etiam alio spolietur, praedictus electus contra huiusmodi veniens statuta, transgressionis notam, nec non cupiditatis vitium, quod in aliis reprobare debuerat, ex pluralitate beneficiorum incurrit.

For some time the church of Rouen, destitute of the solace of a shepherd, against the election which had been celebrated in the same church, Archdeacon A. and certain other canons of the same church came to the Apostolic See. But when the said archdeacon, for himself and his party, and G., archdeacon, the procurator of those who had celebrated the election, had been set in our presence, among other things that had been objected against the elect, the aforesaid archdeacon alleged that the same elect, after the general council, having obtained the archdeaconry of Amiens, presumed to retain it together with several parochial churches which he had obtained before the same council, and, that being dismissed, he retained the aforesaid churches. § 1. Whence, since in the same council it has been decreed that whoever shall have received any benefice having the care of souls annexed, if he previously was holding such a benefice, is ipso iure deprived of it, and if perchance he shall strive to retain it, let him be despoiled even of the other, the aforesaid elect, coming against statutes of this kind, incurred from the plurality of benefices the mark of transgression, and also the vice of cupidity, which he ought to have reproved in others.

Et retinendo beneficia, quae non spectabant ad ipsum, quum post receptionem alterius priora beneficia vacaverint ipso iure, rem contrectavit per consequens alienam, et sic furtum commisit quodammodo vel rapinam. In suae quoque salutis et multarum animarum dispendium praedictas parochiales ecclesias retinebat, quum earum cura, qua iam privatus fuerat ipso iure, ad eum nullatenus pertineret, et sic per ipsum eadem animae damnabiliter sunt deceptae. § 2. Verum procurator eorum, qui elegerant ipsum, etsi pluralitatem beneficiorum huiusmodi coram nobis profiteretur in iure, per concessionem tamen Rothomagensis archiepiscopi nobis exhibitam eundem electum nisus est multipliciter excusare.

And by retaining benefices which did not pertain to himself, since after the reception of another the prior benefices had become vacant by the law itself, he consequently handled alien property, and thus in a certain manner committed theft or rapine. To the detriment also of his own salvation and of many souls he was retaining the aforesaid parochial churches, since their cure, of which he had already been deprived by the law itself, in no way pertained to him, and thus through him those same souls were damnably deceived. § 2. But the procurator of those who had elected him, although he professed before us in law such a plurality of benefices, nevertheless by a concession of the Archbishop of Rouen exhibited to us strove in many ways to excuse that same elect.

Nos igitur dictam excusationem, utpote frivolam, nullatenus admittentes, vobis dedimus in mandatis, ut, si constaret, quod idem post receptum archidiaconatum praedictum, curam animarum habentem, praefatas parochiales ecclesias electionis tempore retineret, nec ostenderet secum per sedem apostolicam super hoc dispensatum, electionem illius auctoritate apostolica cassaretis. (Et infra:) Partibus ergo propter hoc in vestra praesentia constitutis, praestito quoque iuramento de veritate dicenda, et factis positionibus et responsionibus hinc inde, tandem eodem decano praetextu quorundam gravaminum ad nostram audientiam appellante, vos electionem huiusmodi irritantes, eidem ecclesiae de Cenomanensi episcopo providistis, (Et infra:) § 3. Licet autem positiones et responsiones super pluribus articulis factae fuerint coram vobis, quia tamen contestationem litis non invenimus esse factam, quum non per positiones et responsiones ad eas factas, sed per petitionem in iure propositam et responsionem factam contestatio litis fiat, eundem processum de fratrum nostrorum consilio irritum duximus nunciandum. § 4. Tandem archidiaconus electionem ex praemissa causa petiit irritari, electo respondente praedicto, quod non erat eius electio irritanda.

We therefore, by no means admitting the said excuse, as frivolous, gave you mandates that, if it were established that the same, after receiving the aforesaid archdeaconry, having the cure of souls, was retaining the aforesaid parochial churches at the time of the election, and did not show that he had been dispensed in this matter by the apostolic see, you should annul his election by apostolic authority. (And below:) Therefore, the parties, for this reason, having appeared in your presence, an oath also having been given to tell the truth, and positions and responses having been made on both sides, at length, the same dean, under pretext of certain grievances, appealing to our hearing, you, annulling an election of this kind, provided for the same church with the bishop of Le Mans. (And below:) § 3. Although, moreover, positions and responses upon several articles had been made before you, yet because we do not find that a contestation of the suit was made—since it is not through positions and the responses made to them, but through a petition put forward in law and the response made, that a contestation of the suit is effected—we judged that the same process, by the counsel of our brothers, should be declared void. § 4. Finally, the archdeacon sought to have the election annulled for the aforesaid cause, the aforesaid elect responding that his election was not to be annulled.

Lite vero coram nobis legitime contestata, praestitoque de veritate dicenda a partibus iuramento, idem electus, etsi confiteretur, se dicta beneficia electionis tempore tenuisse, tamen excusare se super hoc nihilominus nitebatur, quia videlicet dictum archidiaconatum non credebat curam animarum habere. Sed quum in iure confessus fuerit quod archidiaconus Ambianensis de consuetudine suspendit, excommunicat et absolvit presbyteros et priores, et parochiales ecclesias interdicit, nec non archidiaconus visitat, et inquirit quae viderit inquirenda, et procurationes ratione visitationis recipit, evidenter apparet, quod curam habeat animarum annexam. Quam si etiam non haberet, negare non potest, quin personatus exsistat, quum idem de personatibus, quod et de beneficiis curam animarum habentibus, iudicium sit habendum.

But with the suit duly contested before us, and an oath to tell the truth given by the parties, the same elected man, although he confessed that he had held the said benefices at the time of the election, nevertheless strove to excuse himself on this point, namely because he did not believe that the said archdeaconry had the care of souls. But since in law he confessed that the Archdeacon of Amiens by custom suspends, excommunicates, and absolves presbyters and priors, and interdicts parochial churches, and likewise that the archdeacon visits and inquires into what he sees must be inquired, and receives procurations by reason of visitation, it plainly appears that he has the care of souls annexed. Which, even if he did not have it, he cannot deny that it is a personate, since the same judgment is to be had concerning personates as concerning benefices having the care of souls.

§ 5. Insuper indulgentiam, quam super hoc asserit se habere, invalidam reputavimus, quum in ea falsitatem suggesserit, et suppresserit veritatem, qua tacita vel expressa ipsam nullatenus habuisset. Suggessit enim, quod praedictas parochiales ecclesias, antequam fuisset in archidiaconum assumptus, canonice fuerat assecutus, quum nullus potuerit plures parochiales ecclesias obtinere, nisi una penderet ex altera, vel unam intitulatam, et alteram commendatam haberet. Unde, quum idem utramque illarum intitulatam haberet, ipsas nequivit canonice habuisse.

§ 5. Moreover, the indulgence which he asserts he has in this matter we have deemed invalid, since in it he suggested falsehood and suppressed truth, by the silence or expression of which he would in no way have had it. For he alleged that he had canonically acquired the aforesaid parochial churches before he was assumed into the archdiaconate, whereas no one could have obtained several parochial churches unless one depended upon the other, or he had one titled and the other commended (in commendam). Whence, since the same man held each of them as titled, he could not have held them canonically.

Item suggerens, quod reditus personatus sui erant tenues et exiles, suppressit, quod alios reditus in pluribus ecclesiis noscitur obtinere. Suppressit etiam, quod plures parochiales ecclesias cum pluribus aliis beneficiis in diversis ecclesiis obtineret, quum intentionis nostrae non fuerit, secum in tot beneficiis, praesertim habentibus curam animarum, dispensare, nec intentionis nostrae fuerit, aliquid de novo concedere, sed ut per indulgentiam posset habita licite retinere. (Et infra:) § 6. Tandem quum non restaret, nisi proferenda sententia, idem tam iuri, si quod ei competere videbatur, quam liti cessit spontanea voluntate; cuius cessionem duximus admittendam.

Likewise suggesting that the revenues of his personate were thin and exiguous, he suppressed that he is known to hold other revenues in several churches. He also suppressed that he was holding several parochial churches together with several other benefices in diverse churches, since it was not our intention to dispense with him in so many benefices, especially those having the cure of souls, nor was it our intention to grant anything anew, but that by indulgence he might be able to retain licitly the things already held. (And below:) § 6. At length, when nothing remained except that the sentence be pronounced, the same man, of his own spontaneous will, yielded both as to the right—if any seemed to belong to him—and as to the suit; whose cession we deemed to be admissible.

CAP. LV.

CHAPTER 55.

Irrita est electio, quam collatio non praecessit, vel quae facta non est a maiore parte capituli, vel quae non fuit communis.

An election is void which collation did not precede, or which was not made by the greater part of the chapter, or which was not common.

Idem.

The same.

In Genesi legitur (Et infra:) Quum in concilio caveatur, ut is collatione habita eligatur, in quem omnes, vel maior et sanior pars capituli consentit, et in G. maior pars totius capituli non consenserit, quanquam maiorem partem habuit partium comparatione minorum, nec plene numeri ad numerum, quia, utrum G. et H., de quibus adversarii referunt quaestionem, in electione vocem habuerint, tractatum non exstitit nec discussum, nec zeli ad zelum, nec meriti ad meritum collatio facta fuerit, nec etiam electio communiter celebrata, quoniam, licet in eundem G. singulariter singuli consensissent, non tamen debuit subsequi singularis electio, sed communis, ne vel idem repeti videretur, vel ex hoc sequeretur absurditas, ut tot essent electiones, quot essent numero eligentes, nec ex singularibus vel particularibus consensibus appareret universalis electio vel communis, licet quilibet singularis veritatem exprimat suae partis, quemadmodum ex singularibus propositionibus, licet veris, universalis propositio non apparet, nisi per signum universale forsitan exprimatur, nec praemissi duo canonici poterant sic excludi, quum primus exsisteret in canonicatus possessione vel quasi, habendo stallum in choro, locum in capitulo, legendo et cantando ut canonicus, et ad tractatus ac electiones dignitatum et personatuum, quae occurrerunt pro tempore faciendae, tanquam canonicus sit vocatus, quanquam hac vice fuerit cum protestatione admissus, secundus vero esset in tali loco, de quo fuerat ad electionem vocandus, quum de toto regno Franciae vocentur absentes de consuetudine ecclesiae Gallicanae: nos, his plenius intellectis, de consilio fratrum nostrorum praemissam electionem, utpote contra formam concilii attentatam, decernimus irritam et inanem.

In Genesis it is read (And below:) When in a council it is provided that he be chosen, collation having been had, in whom all, or the greater and sounder part of the chapter, consents, and in the case of G. the greater part of the whole chapter did not consent, although he had the greater part by comparison of the parties of the minors, nor fully number to number, because the question whether G. and H., about whom the adversaries report, had a voice in the election was neither handled nor discussed; nor was a collation made, zeal to zeal, nor merit to merit; nor even was the election celebrated in common, since, although individually each had consented to that same G., nevertheless there ought not to follow a singular election, but a common one, lest either the same should seem to be repeated, or from this an absurdity should follow, that there be as many elections as there are electors in number; nor from singular or particular consents would a universal or common election appear, although each singular expresses the truth of his own party, just as from singular propositions, although true, a universal proposition does not appear, unless perhaps it be expressed by a universal sign; nor could the aforesaid two canons be thus excluded, since the first existed in possession (or as it were) of a canonicate, having a stall in the choir, a place in the chapter, reading and singing as a canon, and to the dealings and elections of dignities and personates, which for the time occurred to be done, he was called as a canon, although on this occasion he was admitted with a protestation; but the second was in such a place, from which he ought to have been called to the election, since from the whole kingdom of France the absent are summoned by the custom of the Gallican church: we, these things more fully understood, by the counsel of our brothers, decree the aforesaid election, as having been attempted contrary to the form of the council, void and null.

CAP. LVI.

CHAPTER 56.

Non valet electio pontificis per laicos et canonicos faxcta, etiamsi hoc habeat consuetudo. Hoc dic. et quotidie solet allegari.

The election of a pontiff made by laymen and canons is not valid, even if custom has this. This is said, and it is wont to be alleged daily.

Idem Capitulo Massano.

The same to the Chapter of Massa.

Massana ecclesia pastore vacante (Et infra:) Edicto perpetuo prohibemus ne per laicos cum canonicis pontificis electio praesumatur. Quae si forte praesumpta fuerit, nullam obtineat firmitatem, non obstante contraria consuetudine, quae dici debet potius corruptela.

The Massana church, the pastor being vacant (And below:): By a perpetual edict we forbid that the election of a pontiff be presumed by laymen together with the canons. Which, if perchance it should have been presumed, let it obtain no firmness, notwithstanding contrary consuetude, which ought rather to be called a corruption.

CAP. LVII.

CHAPTER 57.

Non sufficit ad confirmationem electionis, quod sit facta a maiori parte capituli, nisi etiam illa pars sit sanior.

It does not suffice for the confirmation of the election that it has been made by the greater part of the chapter, unless that part also be the sounder.

Idem Capitulo Cathalanensi.

The Same to the Catalan Chapter.

Ecclesia vestra destituta pastore, convenientes in unum, absente G., qui tunc noluit interesse, ad celebrandam electionem terminum statuistis. Veniente vero termino, et dicto G., quum absens exsisteret, non vocato, praemisso iuxta formam concilii generalis scrutinio, XIV. magistrum G. presbyterum cardinalem, concanonicum vestrum, et XVII.

Your church, being deprived of a shepherd, assembling together as one, with G. absent, who then was unwilling to take part, you set a term to celebrate the election. When the term indeed came, and the said G., since he was absent, not having been summoned, the scrutiny having been conducted beforehand according to the form of the general council, 14 for Master G., presbyter-cardinal, your fellow canon, and 17.

R. Remensem canonicum elegerunt, praefato G. postmodum electioni eiusdem R. suum praebente consensum. Tandem procuratoribus utriusque partis in nostra praesentia constitutis, allegabatur pro electione dicti R., quod, quum in IV. excederet aliam, computato G. praedicto, maiorem capituli partem habebat, et per hoc debebat pars sua sanior reputari, quum, ubi maior numerus est, zelus melior praesumatur. Pars vero altera electionem eandem multipliciter impugnabat, proponens, praenominatum R. in aetate pati defectum, nec esse sufficientis scientiae ad ecclesiam supradictam, quum aetatis maturae et eminentis scientiae praefatus cardinalis exsistat, et, quum electores cardinalis alios meritis et auctoritate praecellerent, habito praesertim respectu ad personam electam, meliorem zelum eos habuisse constabat.

They elected R., a canon of Reims, the aforesaid G. afterward offering his consent to the election of the same R. At length, with the procurators of each party constituted in our presence, it was alleged on behalf of the election of the said R. that, since he exceeded the other by 4, the aforesaid G. being counted, he had the greater part of the chapter, and by this his party ought to be reputed the sounder, since, where the greater number is, a better zeal is presumed. The other party, however, was in many ways impugning the same election, proposing that the aforementioned R. suffers a defect in age, and is not of sufficient science for the aforesaid church, since the aforesaid cardinal is of mature age and of eminent science; and, since the electors of the cardinal excelled the others in merits and authority, regard especially being had to the person elected, it was evident that they had the better zeal.

Dicebatur praeterea, quod consensus dicti G., quem pars eiusdem R. confitebatur fuisse contemptum, asserente parte reliqua, capitulum potius contemptum ab ipso fuisse, quum non fuerit consensus praestitus in scrutinio, sed post electionem accesserit, adiicere nil valebat. (Et infra:) Denique statutum generalis concilii, quod electionem decernit invalidam, quum contra eiusdem concilii formam in electione peccatur, non debet ad contemptum et ad alia, quae non sunt de forma, referri. Unde quod ibi dicitur, quod aliter electio celebrata non valeat, ea respicit tantum, quae attentantur contra formam concilii memorati, non autem alia, quae ponuntur ibidem, sicut est istud, quod praesentibus omnibus, qui debent, volunt et possunt commode interesse, haberi debeat in electione processus, ne cetera, quae super hoc alibi statuta noscuntur, uno verbo videbantur everti.

It was said moreover that the consent of the said G.—which the party of that same R. confessed had been contemned, the remaining party asserting that rather the chapter had been contemned by him, since consent had not been rendered in the scrutiny but had come after the election—could add nothing. (And below:) Finally, the statute of the general council, which decrees the election invalid when, in the election, one sins against the form of that same council, ought not to be referred to contempt and to other things which are not of the form. Whence what is said there, that an election otherwise celebrated is not valid, regards only those things which are attempted against the form of the aforesaid council, and not the other things which are set down there, as is this: that, with all present who ought, wish, and are able conveniently to be present, the process ought to be had in the election, lest the rest, which are known to have been statuted elsewhere on this matter, should seem to be overturned by a single word.

Neque enim credendum est, Romanum Pontificem, qui iura tuetur, quod alias excogitatum est multis vigiliis et inventum, uno verbo subvertere voluisse. Nos ergo, quae hinc inde fuere proposita, plenius intellectis, quum ex Lateranensi concilio in ordinationibus ecclesiarum maior et sanior pars capituli exigatur, et statutum generalis concilii contineat inter cetera, ut is eligatur, in quem omnes, vel maior et sanior pars consentit, electionem dicti R. non personae, sed potius electionis vitio, quum maior et sanior pars non consenserit in eundem, de fratrum nostrorum consilio duximus sententialiter irritandam.

For it is not to be believed that the Roman Pontiff, who safeguards the rights, wished to overthrow with one word what has elsewhere been excogitated by many vigils and discovered. We therefore, having more fully understood the things that were proposed on both sides, since from the Lateran council in the ordinations of churches the greater and sounder part of the chapter is required, and the statute of the general council contains among other things that he be elected in whom all, or the greater and sounder part, consent, have deemed, by the counsel of our brothers, the election of the said R.—not on account of the person, but rather by the defect of the election, since the greater and sounder part did not consent to him—to be nullified by sentence.

CAP. LVIII.

CHAPTER 58.

Publicato scrutinio non possunt electores variare, sed compelli debent ad collationem et electionem.

With the scrutiny published, the electors cannot vary, but ought to be compelled to collation and election.

Idem.

The same.

Publicato scrutinio variare nequeunt electores, quum sit facienda collatio, et electio celebranda. Ad quod per superiorem, si oportuerit, compellantur.

Once the scrutiny has been published, the electors cannot vary, since the collation must be made and the election celebrated. To this they shall be compelled by a superior, if need be.

CAP. LIX.

CHAPTER 59.

Cassata electione propter simoniam, etiam sine culpa electi, non dispensat episcopus ea vice cum cassato; secus si electus libere resignavit. H. d. secundum intellectum glossae 2. in fin.

With the election quashed on account of simony, even without fault of the elected, the bishop does not dispense on that occasion with the one annulled; otherwise, if the elected freely resigned. This is said according to the understanding of gloss 2 at the end.

Idem.

The same.

Si alicuius electionem propter simoniam, eo ignorante ac ratum non habente commissam, contigerit reprobari, cum eo super praelatione, ad quam taliter fuerat electus, illa vice non potest episcopus dispensare, quamvis circa eum, qui ignoranter recipit simplex beneficium per simoniacam pravitatem, post liberam resignationem episcopi dispensatio toleretur.

If the election of someone, on account of simony, having been conducted with him unaware and not having it ratified, should happen to be reprobated, the bishop cannot on that occasion dispense with him concerning the prelacy to which he had been elected in such a manner; although, with respect to one who unknowingly receives a simple benefice through simoniacal depravity, after a free resignation the bishop’s dispensation is tolerated.

CAP. LX.

CHAPTER 60.

Electoribus impeditis currit tempus, si possunt impedimentum tollere.

Time runs for impeded electors, if they are able to remove the impediment.

Idem.

The same.

His, quibus interdicitur, ut absque superioris licentia eligere non praesumant, tempus statutum a canone currit, ex quo in mora fuerint licentiam huiusmodi postulandi.

For those to whom it is interdicted, so that they may not presume to elect without the superior’s license, the time established by the canon runs from the time when they have been in delay in petitioning for a license of this kind.

TITULUS VII. DE TRANSLATIONE EPISCOPI.

TITLE 7. ON THE TRANSLATION OF A BISHOP.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Patriarcha, qui confirmatum in archiepiscopum transfert ad sedem episcopalem, ab episcoporum confirmatione suspenditur. Ioan. Andr.

A patriarch who transfers one confirmed as archbishop to an episcopal see is suspended from the confirmation of bishops. John Andreae.

Innocentius III. Antiocheno Patriarchae.

Innocent 3. To the Patriarch of Antioch.

Quum ex illo generali privilegio, quod beato Petro et per eum ecclesiae Romanae Dominus noster indulsit, canonica postmodum manaverint instituta, continentia maiores ecclesiae causas esse ad sedem apostolicam perferendas, ac per hoc translationes episcoporum, sicut depositiones eorum, et sedium mutationes ad summum apostolicae sedis antistitem de iure pertineant, nec super his quicquam praeter eius assensum debeat immutari: miramur non modicum et movemur, quod [tu], praedecessoris tui exempla secutus, qui motu propriae voluntatis Mamistanum in Tarsensem dicitur transtulisse, L. quondam Apamensem electum in Tripolitanam ecclesiam transtulisti, nec tibi sufficit dictam praedecessoris tui praesumptionem solummodo imitari, immo etiam in iniuriam nostram ipsius transgressus excessum et, novo quodam mutationis genere parvificasti maiorem, et magnum quodammodo minorasti, episcopare archiepiscopum, immo potius dearchiepiscopare praesumens, quum dictus praedecessor tuus dictum archiepiscopum de Tharsensi ecclesia in ecclesiam transtulerit similis dignitatis. Licet enim dictus L. nondum fuisset in archiepiscopum consecratus, confirmationis tamen munus receperat, et archiepiscopalia, quantum ei licuit, ministrarat, sicut nobis ipsius relatione innotuit, qui se Valiensem episcopum quum in nostra esset praesentia constitutus, asseruit confirmasse. Ne igitur perpetrandi similia ceteris audacia tribuatur, si tantus excessus relictus fuerit impunitus te ab episcoporum confirmatione duximus suspendendum, quousque super hoc aliud statuamus, [sciturus etc.

Since from that general privilege which our Lord bestowed upon blessed Peter and through him upon the Roman church, canonical statutes have thereafter flowed forth, containing that the greater causes of the church are to be brought to the apostolic see, and through this that translations of bishops, just as their depositions, and changes of sees pertain by right to the supreme prelate of the apostolic see, nor ought anything concerning these to be altered beyond his assent: we marvel not a little and are moved that [you], following the examples of your predecessor, who is said by the motion of his own will to have translated the Mamistran to Tarsus, have translated L., once the elect of Apamea, into the church of Tripoli; nor is it enough for you only to imitate the said presumption of your predecessor, but indeed also, to our injury, having overstepped his excess, and by a certain new kind of change you have made the greater small, and have in a manner made the great lesser, presuming to bishop an archbishop, nay rather to de-archbishop him, since your said predecessor had transferred the said archbishop from the church of Tarsus to a church of like dignity. For although the said L. had not yet been consecrated as archbishop, nevertheless he had received the gift of confirmation, and had administered archiepiscopal matters, insofar as it was permitted to him, as it became known to us by his own report, who, when he was set in our presence, asserted that he had confirmed the Valian bishop. Therefore, lest boldness for perpetrating similar things be granted to others, if so great an excess should be left unpunished, we have deemed you to be suspended from the confirmation of bishops, until we shall determine otherwise concerning this, [to know etc.

Dat. Lateran. XVI.

Dated at the Lateran, 16.

Kal. Apr. 1198.]

Kalends of April 1198.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Electos in episcopos et confirmatos transferre potest solus Papa.

Only the Pope can transfer those elected as bishops and those confirmed.

Idem Decano et Capitulo Andegavensi.

The same to the Dean and Chapter of Angers.

Inter corporalia et spiritualia eam cognovimus esse differentiam, quod corporalia facilius destruuntur quam construantur, spiritualia vero facilius construuntur quam destruantur. Unde iuxta canonicas sanctiones episcopus solus honorem dare potest, solus autem auferre non potest. Episcopi quoque a metropolitanis suis munus consecrationis accipiunt, qui tamen non possunt nisi per Romanum Pontificem condemnari.

Between corporeal and spiritual things we have recognized this difference to be: that corporeal things are more easily destroyed than constructed, but spiritual things are more easily constructed than destroyed. Whence, according to the canonical sanctions, the bishop alone can give honor, but he alone cannot take it away. Bishops also receive from their own metropolitans the office of consecration, who nevertheless cannot be condemned except by the Roman Pontiff.

Quum ergo fortius sit spirituale vinculum quam carnale, dubitari non debet, quin omnipotens Deus spirituale coniugium, quod est inter episcopum et ecclesiam, suo tantum iudicio reservaverit dissolvendum, qui dissolutionem etiam carnalis coniugii, quod est inter virum et feminam, suo tantum iudicio reservavit, praecipiens, ut quos Deus coniunxit homo non separet. Non enim humana, sed potius divina potestate coniugium spirituale dissolvitur, quum per translationem, vel depositionem, aut etiam cessionem auctoritate Romani Pontificis, quem constat esse vicarium Iesu Christi, episcopus ab ecclesia removetur: et ideo tria haec, quae praemisimus, non tam constitutione canonica, quam institutione divina soli sunt Romano Pontifici reservata. Sicut enim episcopus consecratus sine licentia Romani Pontificis suam non debet ecclesiam derelinquere, sic et electus [et] confirmatus praeter eius assensum suam deserere nequit ecclesiam, cui est matrimonialiter alligatus, quum non debeat in dubium revocari, quin post electionem et confirmationem canonicam inter personas eligentium et electi coniugium sit spirituale contractum, cui profecto episcopalis dignitas nihil addit, quum quis episcopali praeditus dignitate nullius tamen ecclesiae possit esse episcopus, quemadmodum de illo contingit, qui oneri pontificali renunciat, non honori.

Since therefore the spiritual bond is stronger than the carnal, there ought to be no doubt that Almighty God has reserved to His judgment alone the dissolving of the spiritual marriage which is between the bishop and the church, who also reserved to His judgment alone the dissolution of the carnal marriage which is between a man and a woman, commanding that those whom God has joined man should not separate. For it is not by human, but rather by divine power that the spiritual marriage is dissolved, since by translation (transfer), or deposition, or even cession, by the authority of the Roman Pontiff, who is agreed to be the Vicar of Jesus Christ, the bishop is removed from the church: and therefore these three things, which we have set forth above, are reserved to the Roman Pontiff alone not so much by canonical constitution as by divine institution. For just as a consecrated bishop ought not to abandon his church without the license of the Roman Pontiff, so also one elected [and] confirmed cannot desert his church without his assent, to which he is matrimonially bound, since it ought not to be called into doubt that after canonical election and confirmation a spiritual marriage has been contracted between the persons of the electors and of the elected, to which indeed the episcopal dignity adds nothing, since a man endowed with episcopal dignity can nevertheless be the bishop of no church, just as happens in the case of one who renounces the pontifical burden, not the honor.

Unde, quum non sit maius vinculum episcopi ad ecclesiam, quam electi, maxime quum fuerit confirmatus, immo idem penitus, et non aliud, idem iuris obtinet in utroque. Sicut ergo episcoporum translatio, vel etiam depositio et cessio, sic et electorum post confirmationem spiritualis ratione coniugii soli est Romano Pontifici reservata. Licet usque ad tempora ista quod cautum fuerat de episcopis expressum non fuerat de electis, propter expressam tamen similitudinem, vel identitatem potius, nemini poterat videri dubium subtiliter intuenti, quum de similibus idem iudicium sit habendum.

Whence, since the bond of a bishop to the church is not greater than that of the elect, especially when he has been confirmed—nay, it is entirely the same, and not another—the same right obtains in both. Therefore, just as the translation of bishops, and even their deposition and cession, so too the translation, deposition, and cession of the elect after confirmation, by reason of the spiritual marriage, are reserved to the Roman Pontiff alone. Although down to these times what had been provided concerning bishops had not been expressed concerning the elect, yet on account of the expressed similarity, or rather identity, it could seem doubtful to no one who looks closely, since the same judgment is to be had concerning similars.

§ 1. Sed neque illud, quod in canone legitur de electo, ut, si ultra sex menses per suam negligentiam retinuerit ecclesiam viduatam, nec ibi, nec alibi donum consecrationis accipiat, immo metropolitani sui cedat iudicio, aliter intelligentibus poterat suffragari, quum non intelligatur ecclesia viduata, quasi sponsum non habeat, sed quia, quum sponsus eius nondum sit consecratus, adhuc quoad quaedam quasi viri maneat solatio destituta, sicut iuxta communem modum loquendi illa dicitur ecclesia viduata, quae, licet episcopum habeat, inutilem tamen perhibetur habere. Nec quod de cessione subsequitur, et statutum fuit ad poenam, trahi debet ad gratiam, ut, sicut metropolitani iudicio electus deiicitur, ita etiam ad aliam ecclesiam possit transferri, praesertim quum nec sine auctoritate Romani Pontificis fiat cessio vel deiectio memorata, qui, ut haec possent, ex illo canone metropolitanis indulsit. Unde, si circa translationem idem fieri voluisset, quod de cessione dixerat, et de translatione poterat expressisse, et quod non est sanctorum Patrum decreto sancitum superstitiosis non est adinventionibus praesumendum, praesertim quum nonnunquam intelligatur prohibitum quod non invenitur concessum.

§ 1. But neither could that which is read in the canon about the elect—namely, that if through his own negligence he has kept the church widowed beyond six months, he should receive the gift of consecration neither there nor elsewhere, but rather should submit to the judgment of his metropolitan—support those understanding it otherwise, since the church is not understood as “widowed” as though she had no bridegroom, but because, since her bridegroom has not yet been consecrated, she still remains, as regards certain matters, as though deprived of a husband’s solace, just as, according to the common manner of speaking, that church is called “widowed” which, although it has a bishop, is nevertheless held to have a useless one. Nor ought that which follows concerning cession, and was established as a penalty, to be drawn to favor, so that, just as by the judgment of the metropolitan the elect is cast down, so also he might be able to be transferred to another church, especially since neither the said cession nor dejection is done without the authority of the Roman Pontiff, who, in order that these things might be possible, granted to the metropolitans from that canon. Whence, if he had wished the same to be done concerning translation as he had said about cession, he could also have expressed it concerning translation; and what has not been sanctioned by the decree of the holy Fathers is not to be presumed by superstitious contrivances, especially since sometimes that is understood to be prohibited which is not found to be granted.

§ 2. Sane quoniam Turonensis archiepiscopus electum Abricensem, per metropolitanum suum postea confirmatum, in ecclesiam vestram praeter auctoritatem sedis apostolicae transferre praesumpsit et in episcopum consecrare, quem etiam venerabilis frater noster Rothomagensis archiepiscopus citra madatum nostrum absolvit, et ei licentiam tribuit transeundi: praedictos archiepiscopos, qui saltem apostolicam sedem super hoc, quod novum emerserat, praesertim quum iuxta canonicas sanctiones maiores ecclesiasticae causae ad sedem apostolicam sint referendae, consulere debuerunt, a consecratione pariter et confirmatione pontificum, episcopum vero ab exsecutione pontificalis officii Bituricensis archiepiscopus iuxta mandati nostri tenorem suspendit. Et quamvis iidem archiepiscopi Turonensis et Rothomagensis tanquam maiores plus excesserint in praemissis, praefatus vero episcopus minus, utpote illorum tanquam maiorum errorem secutus, nos tamen, intellecta per literas et per nuncios eorum archiepiscoporum confessione spontanea et supplicatione devota, veniam errori dedimus, quia non ex malignitate, sed ex simplicitate peccaverunt. Et quoniam praefatus episcopus, qui et minus peccaverat, et sicut ex praemissis apparet, severius fuerat castigatus, ad apostolicam sedem, licet spontanea voluntate, non tamen sine multis laboribus et expensis accessit, reatum suum recognoscens humiliter et devote, ac misericordiam postulans, et iudicium non requirens: nos super facto eius cum fratribus nostris communem tractatum habentes et subtiliter intuentes, quod, licet sibi munus consecrationis impensum, nec prioris ecclesiae ipsum pontificem fecerit, nec secundae, quum ad primam non fuerit consecratus, et ad secundam priori vinculo perdurante non potuerit canonice consecrari, adhuc coniugaliter alteri alligatus, illud tamen provide attendentes, quod et urgens necessitas, et evidens utilitas ecclesiae vestrae, quoniam non poteratis in aliam personam idoneam convenire, dispensationis gratiam requirebant, ei de plenitudine potestatis tam a vinculo prioris ecclesiae, quam a poena suspensionis penitus absoluto, de benignitate sedis apostolicae duximus concedendum, ut, priori consensu hactenus perdurante, sicut per literas personarum ecclesiae vestrae nobis est intimatum, Andegavensem ecclesiam tanquam proprius pontifex ad gloriam et laudem nominis Dei, ad honorem et exaltationem ipsius et ad salutem et utilitatem suam, et tam cleri quam populi sibi commissi, studeat gubernare, ut praeveniente divina gratia et sequente plus prodesse velit et valeat, quam praeesse [etc.

§ 2. Indeed, since the archbishop of Tours presumed, beyond the authority of the Apostolic See, to transfer the elect of Avranches, afterwards confirmed by his metropolitan, into your church and to consecrate him as bishop, whom also our venerable brother the archbishop of Rouen, without our mandate, absolved and granted license to pass over: the aforesaid archbishops—who at least ought to have consulted the Apostolic See about this new matter that had arisen, especially since, according to canonical sanctions, greater ecclesiastical causes are to be referred to the Apostolic See—the archbishop of Bourges, according to the tenor of our mandate, suspended alike from the consecration and confirmation of pontiffs, and he suspended the bishop from the execution of the pontifical office. And although those same archbishops of Tours and Rouen, as greater persons, exceeded more in the premises, and the aforesaid bishop less, inasmuch as he followed their error as that of his betters, yet we, once we understood through their letters and by their envoys the spontaneous confession and devout supplication of those archbishops, granted pardon for the error, because they sinned not from malice but from simplicity. And since the aforesaid bishop—who both had sinned less and, as appears from the foregoing, had been more severely chastised—came to the Apostolic See, albeit of spontaneous will, yet not without many labors and expenses, humbly and devoutly acknowledging his guilt and seeking mercy and not demanding judgment: we, holding common deliberation with our brothers about his case and looking closely, that, although the gift of consecration bestowed upon him had made him neither the pontiff of the first church nor of the second, since he had not been consecrated to the first, and to the second he could not canonically be consecrated while the prior bond endured, still conjoined as if by a conjugal tie to another; nevertheless, prudently attending to this, that both the pressing necessity and the evident utility of your church—since you were not able to agree upon another suitable person—required the grace of dispensation, from the plenitude of power we held it to be granted to him by the benignity of the Apostolic See, he being entirely absolved both from the bond of the prior church and from the penalty of suspension, that, the prior consent up to now enduring, as has been intimated to us by the letters of the persons of your church, he should strive to govern the church of Angers as its proper pontiff to the glory and praise of the name of God, to its honor and exaltation, and to his own salvation and utility, and of both the clergy and the people committed to him, so that, with divine grace going before and following, he may be willing and able to benefit more than to preside [etc.

Dat. Lat. XII.

Given at the Lateran, 12.

Kal. Febr. 1199.]

Kalends of February 1199.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Episcopus, qui propria auctoritate de sua ecclesia se transfert ad aliam, carebit utraque.

A bishop who, by his own authority, transfers himself from his own church to another shall be deprived of both.

Idem Episcopo et Petro Scholastico Maguntinensi.

The same to the Bishop and to Peter the Scholastic of Mainz.

Quanto personam venerabilis fratris nostri Hildesemensis quondam episcopi sinceriori diligebamus affectu, tanto securius sperabamus, quod nihil adversus matrem suam Romanam ecclesiam in praeiudicium sui ordinis et ecclesiasticae disciplinae dispendium attentaret. Ipse vero, sicut certa multorum assertione comperimus, et suarum didicimus nihilominus testimonio literarum, quibus ad nos directis Herbipolensem se pontificem nominabat, relicta Hildesemensi ecclesia, cui fuerat spirituali gratia coniugio copulatus, ad Herbipolensem ecclesiam sine auctoritate Romani Pontificis auctoritate propria se transtulit, non attendens, quod Veritas in evangelio protestatur: "Quos Deus coniunxit homo non separet." Potestatem [enim] transferendi pontifices ita sibi retinuit Dominus et magister, quod soli beato Petro vicario suo, et per ipsum successoribus suis, et nobis ipsis, qui locum eius licet indigni tenemus in terris, speciali privilegio tribuit et concessit, sicut testatur antiquitas, cui decreta Patrum sanxerunt reverentiam exhibendam, et evidenter asserunt sacrorum canonum sanctiones. Non enim homo, sed Deus separat, quos Romanus Pontifex, qui non puri hominis, sed veri Dei vicem gerit in terris, ecclesiarum necessitate vel utilitate pensata, non humana, sed divina potius auctoritate dissolvit.

The more we loved the person of our venerable brother, formerly bishop of Hildesheim, with a more sincere affection, the more securely we hoped that he would attempt nothing against his mother, the Roman church, to the prejudice of his order and to the detriment of ecclesiastical discipline. But he himself, as we have learned by the sure assertion of many, and likewise by the testimony of his own letters, in which, sent to us, he called himself bishop of Würzburg, having left the Hildesheim church, to which he had been joined by a conjugal bond of spiritual grace, transferred himself to the Würzburg church by his own authority, without the authority of the Roman Pontiff, not considering what Truth declares in the Gospel: “What God has joined, let man not separate.” For the Lord and Master so retained to himself the power of transferring pontiffs that he granted and conceded it by a special privilege to blessed Peter alone, his Vicar, and through him to his successors, and to us ourselves, who, though unworthy, hold his place on earth, as antiquity bears witness, to which the decrees of the Fathers have ordained that reverence be shown, and as the sanctions of the sacred canons plainly assert. For it is not man, but God, who separates those whom the Roman Pontiff—who bears on earth the stead not of a mere man, but of the true God—dissolves, the necessity or utility of the churches having been weighed, not by human but rather by divine authority.

(Et infra:) Ne autem facti perversitas transeat praesumptoribus in exemplum, quod quidem, si verum est, non potest non esse notorium, auctoritate omnipotentis Dei et beatorum Petri et Pauli Apostolorum, et nostra, de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio, in virtute sancti Spiritus districte sibi praecipimus, ut, visis literis nostris, omni contradictione et appellatione cessantibus administrationem ipsius Herbipolensis ecclesiae tam in spiritualibus quam temporalibus penitus derelinquat. Si vero, quod non credimus, hanc suspensionem nostram non curaverit humiliter observare, et inhibita sibi usurpare praesumpserit, excommunicationis vinculo ipsum decernimus innodatum. Omnibus etiam tam clericis quam laicis Herbipolensis dioecesis sub anathematis interminatione praecipimus, ut, non obstante iuramento fidelitatis, omnem ipsi obedientiam subtrahant, quam ipse sibi contra sacros canones usurpavit, non attendens, quod dicit Apostolus: "Nemo sibi assumat honorem, sed qui vocatur a Deo, tanquam Aaron." Ceterum quoniam Herbipolensis ecclesiae canonici vota sua in ipsum prorsus illicite contulerunt, volentes, sicut dignum est, ut in eo puniantur, in quo peccaverunt, eligendi eos hac vice suspendimus potestate, et si contra sedis apostolicae interdictum ad cuiusdam nominationem processerint, quod ab eis factum fuerit irritum decernimus et inane.

(And below:) Lest, however, the perversity of the deed pass over to the presumers as an example—a thing which, if true, cannot fail to be notorious—by the authority of almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and of our own, by the common counsel of our brothers, in the virtue of the Holy Spirit we strictly enjoin him that, upon seeing our letters, with all contradiction and appeal ceasing, he utterly abandon the administration of that Herbipolitan church both in spirituals and temporals. But if, what we do not believe, he should not care humbly to observe this our suspension, and should presume to usurp what has been forbidden to him, we decree him bound by the bond of excommunication. We also command all, both clerics and laity of the Herbipolitan diocese, under the threat of anathema, that, notwithstanding the oath of fealty, they withdraw from him all obedience which he has usurped to himself against the sacred canons, not attending to what the Apostle says: “Let no one take the honor to himself, but he who is called by God, as Aaron.” Moreover, since the canons of the Herbipolitan church have altogether unlawfully conferred their votes upon him, wishing, as is fitting, that they be punished in that wherein they sinned, we suspend them on this occasion from the power of electing,
and if, against the interdict of the Apostolic See, they shall proceed to the nomination of anyone, we decree that what shall have been done by them is null and void.

Quia vero iam dictam Hildesemensem ecclesiam, cui fuerat alligatus, unde secundum Apostolum solutionem quaerere non debeat, nimis improbe dereliquit, ne ad ipsam redeat ulterius, in virtute sancti Spiritus ei districtius prohibemus, quum secundum traditiones canonicas qui ad maiorem se plebem transtulerit a cathedra repelli debeat aliena, et carere propria, ut nec illis praesideat, quos per superbiam sprevit, nec illis, quos per avaritiam concupivit. [Nos quoque etc. Dat.

Because indeed he has most improperly abandoned the already-mentioned Hildesheim church, to which he had been bound, from which, according to the Apostle, he ought not to seek a dissolution, we, in the virtue of the Holy Spirit, more strictly forbid him to return to it any further, since according to canonical traditions he who has transferred himself to a greater people ought to be repelled from an alien cathedra and to be without his own, so that he may preside neither over those whom he spurned through pride nor over those whom he coveted through avarice. [We also etc. Given.

Spoleti, XII. Kal. Sept.

Spoleto, August 21.

1198.]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Solus Papa transfert episcopos; et indulgentia, per eum super tali translatione concessa, ad literam servanda est.

Only the Pope transfers bishops; and the indulgence, granted by him upon such a translation, must be observed to the letter.

Idem Branbur. Episcopo et Scholastico Maguntinensi.

The same, to the Bishop of Brandenburg and to the Scholasticus of Mainz.

Licet in tantum [apostolicae sedis attendatur auctoritas, ut nihil praeter eius auctoritatem in cunctis ecclesiarum negotiis rationabiliter disponatur, utpote quae canones, quibus forma ecclesiasticae constitutionis exprimitur, vel edidit, vel ab aliis editos approbavit, suum receptione ac approbatione faciens, quod adinventione vel editione videbatur forsitan alienum;] quaedam tamen sibi quodammodo specialiter et singulariter reservavit, ut praeter specialem auctoritatem ipsius nec iure agi debeant, nec attentari valeant cum effectu. In his autem specialiter translationes episcoporum non tam constitutio canonica, quam divina eius tantum potestati commisit, ut Sicut legitimi matrimonii vinculum, quod est inter virum et uxorem, homo dissolvere nequit, Domino dicente in evangelio: "Quos Deus coniunxit, homo non separet," sic et spirituale foedus coniugii, quod est inter episcopum et [eius] ecclesiam, quod in electione initiatum, ratum in confirmatione, et in consecratione intelligitur consummatum, sine illius auctoritate solvi non potest, qui successor est Petri et vicarius Iesu Christi. Hoc autem C. quondam Hildesemensis episcopus non attendens, licentia nostra nec postulata nec habita, contra canonicas sanctiones et in iniuriam apostolicae sedis, cuius super hoc fuerat et requirendus et obtinendus assensus, ad Herbipolensem ecclesiam ab Hildesemensi non auctoritate nostra, sed propria temeritate transivit, et administrationi eius se ingerens Herbipolensem se fecit episcopum nominari.

Although to such a degree [the authority of the apostolic see is attended to, that nothing apart from its authority is reasonably arranged in all the affairs of the churches, inasmuch as it either has issued the canons by which the form of ecclesiastical constitution is expressed, or has approved those issued by others, making its own by reception and approbation what by invention or issuance seemed perhaps another’s;] nevertheless it has in a certain manner reserved certain things to itself specially and singularly, such that, apart from its special authority, they ought neither to be transacted by right nor be able to be attempted with effect. Among these in particular, the translations (transfers) of bishops have been committed not so much by canonical constitution as by divine [law] to his power alone, so that, just as the bond of legitimate matrimony, which is between a husband and a wife, a man cannot dissolve, the Lord saying in the Gospel, “What God has joined, let man not separate,” so also the spiritual covenant of conjugal union, which is between a bishop and [his] church—which is initiated in election, made valid in confirmation, and is understood to be consummated in consecration—cannot be dissolved without the authority of him who is the successor of Peter and the vicar of Jesus Christ. But C., formerly bishop of Hildesheim, not attending to this, with our license neither asked nor obtained, against the canonical sanctions and to the injury of the apostolic see, whose assent on this point he ought both to have sought and to have obtained, passed over to the Herbipolensian church from Hildesheim not by our authority but by his own rashness, and, thrusting himself into its administration, caused himself to be named bishop of Herbipolis.

Nec illa felicis recordationis Coelestini Papae praedecessoris nostri indulgentia, quam impetrasse refertur, in hoc praesumptionem excusat ipsius, sed ambitionem accusat, utpote quae ipsum reddidit de ambitione notabilem, non auctoritatem contulit ad aliam episcopalem ecclesiam transeundi, quum in ea sit expressum, quod, si ad maiorem vocaretur forsitan dignitatem, eam sibi liceret assumere, dum tamen nihil ei de statutis canonicis obviaret. Unde, licet forsitan aliquibus videatur, ut indulgentiae occasione ipsius ad dignitatem possit transire maiorem, ad parem tamen ipsi transire non licuit, quum in maiori dignitate propter maiorem utilitatem facilius soleat dispensari. Praeterea quum postulatio, sicut et electio, examinari soleat diligenter, et tenor illius indulgentiae non solum videatur postulationis examinationem, sed personae etiam reservare, subiungens: "dummodo nihil appareat, quod tibi de canonicis obviet institutis," antequam per eum postulatio examinata fuisset, cui fuerat facienda, nulla ratione debuerat transisse.

Nor does that indulgence of Pope Celestine of happy memory, our predecessor, which he is reported to have obtained, excuse his presumption in this, but rather accuses ambition, inasmuch as it made him notable for ambition; it did not confer authority for transiting to another episcopal church, since it is expressed therein that, if perchance he were called to a greater dignity, it would be permitted him to assume it, provided nevertheless that nothing should oppose him from the canonical statutes. Whence, although perhaps it may seem to some that on the occasion of that indulgence he might be able to pass to a greater dignity, yet to an equal he was not permitted to pass, since in a greater dignity, on account of greater utility, dispensation is more readily accustomed to be made. Moreover, since a postulation, just as also an election, is wont to be examined diligently, and the tenor of that indulgence seems to reserve not only the examination of the postulation but also of the person, subjoining: “provided that nothing appears which opposes you from the canonical institutes,” before the postulation had been examined by him by whom it had to be done, by no reasoning ought he to have transited.

[Licet autem etc. Dat. Lat.

[Although, moreover, etc. Given at the Lateran.

VII. Kal. Febr.

7th day before the Kalends of February.

1200.]

TITULUS VIII. DE AUCTORITATE ET USU PALLII.

TITLE 8. ON THE AUTHORITY AND USE OF THE PALLIUM.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Intra quamlibet ecclesiam provinciae suae archiepiscopus pallio uti potest sed extra, non potest.

Within any church of his own province the archbishop may use the pallium, but outside, he cannot.

Clemens III.

Clement III.

Quum super aliqua re (Et infra: [cf. c. 8. de reb. eccl. al. III.

When concerning some matter (And below: [cf. ch. 8. on alienated ecclesiastical goods 3.

13.]) Quaesivisti etiam, quomodo intelligatur, quod in forma traditionis pallii continetur, videlicet: "tradimus tibi pallium, ut eo infra ecclesiam tuam utaris." Quod ita intelligitur, infra ecclesiam tuam, videlicet infra quamlibet ecclesiam provinciae tibi commissae. Si vero te sacris indutum vestibus ecclesiam processionaliter vel alio modo exire contigerit, tunc pallio minime uti debes. [Dat.

13.]) You also asked how that is to be understood which is contained in the form of the tradition of the pallium, namely: "we hand over to you the pallium, that you may use it within your church." This is thus understood: within your church, that is, within any church of the province committed to you. But if it should happen that, clothed in sacred vestments, you go forth from the church in procession or in some other way, then you must by no means use the pallium. [Dated.

Lat. Ao. III. 1193.]

Lateran, year 3, 1193.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Archiepiscopus alteri archiepiscopo pallium suum commodare non potest.

An archbishop cannot lend his pallium to another archbishop.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

Ad hoc, quia quaesitum est a nobis ex parte tua, utrum liceat tibi pallium tuum metropolitano alii commodare, si contigerit, ipsum sine pallio suo ad ecclesiam tibi commissam in aliqua praecipua solennitate venire, et in eadem ecclesia missarum solennia celebrare, licet exinde nos non recolamus expressum canonem invenisse, super hoc tamen Inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod non videtur esse conveniens, ut pallium tuum alicui commodes, quum pallium personam non transeat, sed quisque cum eo debeat, sicut tua novit discretio, sepeliri.

To this, because it has been asked of us on your part whether it is permitted to you to lend your pallium to another metropolitan, if it should happen that he, without his own pallium, come to the church committed to you on some principal solemnity, and in the same church celebrate the solemnities of the Mass, although we do not recall that we have found an express canon on this, nevertheless concerning this we thus answer to your inquiry, that it does not seem fitting that you lend your pallium to anyone, since the pallium does not pass from person to person, but each one ought, as your discretion knows, to be buried with it.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Per pallium confertur plenitudo pontificalis officii et nomen archiepiscopale.

Through the pallium the plenitude of the pontifical office and the archiepiscopal name is conferred.

Innocentius III. C. Presbytero cardinali, apostolicae sedis Legato.

Innocent III. To C., Presbyter Cardinal, Legate of the Apostolic See.

Nisi specialis dilectio illa (Et infra: [cf. c. 8. de off. leg. I. 30.]) Sane, si postulatio venerabilis fratris nostri Troiani episcopi regni Siciliae cancellarii ad Panormitanam ecclesiam fuisset per nos etiam approbata, non tamen deberet se archiepiscopum appellare prius, quam a nobis pallium suscepisset, in quo pontificalis officii plenitudo cum archiepiscopalis nominis appellatione confertur.

Unless that special affection (And below: [cf. ch. 8. on the office of the legate, 1. 30.]) Indeed, if the petition of our venerable brother Troianus, bishop, chancellor of the kingdom of Sicily, to the Panormitan church had even been approved by us, nonetheless he ought not to call himself archbishop before he had received the pallium from us, in which the plenitude of the pontifical office is conferred together with the appellation of the archiepiscopal name.

Tu ergo, sicut vir providus et discretus quod factum est sic studeas palliare, ut id in confusionem tuam, et sedis apostolicae opprobrium non redundet, quoniam, si oporteat, ut vel nos vel tu ex hoc negotio confundamur, eligemus potius te confundi, quam laedamus sedis apostolicae dignitatem.

Therefore, you, as a provident and discreet man, should so strive to palliate what has been done, that it not redound to your confusion and to the opprobrium of the Apostolic See; for, if it should be needful that either we or you be confounded by this business, we shall choose rather that you be confounded than that we harm the dignity of the Apostolic See.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Romanus Pontifex semper et ubique utitur pallio; alii in ecclesiis suis et certis diebus tantum.

The Roman Pontiff uses the pallium always and everywhere; others only in their own churches and on certain days.

Idem.

The same.

Ad honorem Dei [omnipotentis et B. Mariae Virginis et beatorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli et domini Papae Innocentii et Romanae ecclesiae, nec non ecclesiae tibi commissae, tradimus tibi pallium de corpore B. Petri sumptum, insigne videlicet plenitudinis pontificalis officii, quo ad missarum solennia infra ecclesias tibi subiectas utaris in Nativitate Domini, festivitate protomartyris Stephani, Circumcisione Domini, Epiphania, Hypapanti dominica in ramis palmarum, Coena Domini, sabbato sancto, Pascha, feria secunda post Pascha, Ascensione Domini, Pentecoste, tribus festivitatibus S. Mariae, Natali B. Ioannis Baptistae, solennitatibus omnium Apostolorum, Commemoratione omnium sanctorum, dedicationibus ecclesiarum, ordinationibus clericorum, ecclesiae tuae principalibus festivitatibus et anniversario consecrationis tuae.] Sane solus Romanus Pontifex in missarum solenniis pallio semper utitur et ubique, quoniam assumptus est in plenitudinem ecclesiasticae potestatis, quae per pallium significatur; alii autem eo nec semper, nec ubique, sed in ecclesia sua, in qua iurisdictionem ecclesiasticam acceperunt, certis debent uti diebus, quoniam vocati sunt in partem sollicitudinis, non in plenitudinem potestatis.

To the honor of God [the Omnipotent, and of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and of Lord Pope Innocent and of the Roman Church, and likewise of the church committed to you, we hand over to you the pallium taken from the body of Blessed Peter, namely the insignia of the plenitude of the pontifical office, which you are to use at the solemnities of masses within the churches subject to you on the Nativity of the Lord, the feast of the protomartyr Stephen, the Circumcision of the Lord, the Epiphany, the Hypapante, Palm Sunday, the Lord’s Supper, Holy Saturday, Easter, the Monday after Easter, the Ascension of the Lord, Pentecost, the three feasts of St. Mary, the Nativity of Blessed John the Baptist, the solemnities of all the Apostles, the Commemoration of all the Saints, the dedications of churches, the ordinations of clerics, the principal festivals of your church, and the anniversary of your consecration.] Indeed the Roman Pontiff alone uses the pallium at the solemnities of masses always and everywhere, since he has been assumed into the plenitude of ecclesiastical power, which is signified by the pallium; but others neither always nor everywhere, but in their own church in which they have received ecclesiastical jurisdiction, ought to use it on certain days, since they have been called into a share of solicitude, not into the plenitude of power.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Archiepiscopus extra suam provinciam pallio uti non potest, etiamsi hoc habeat consuetudo.

An archbishop cannot use the pallium outside his own province, even if custom has this.

Idem Compostellano Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Compostela.

Ex tuarum tenore literarum accepimus, quod, quum fuerit in concessione pallii tibi dictum, ut ipso infra ecclesiam tuam utaris, et tibi tam de mandato regio, quam etiam pro ecclesiae tuae negotiis procurandis frequenter extra tuam provinciam commoranti verecundum sit absque pallio ministrare, quum consuetudo sit, sicut asseris, in Hispania generalis, quod archiepiscopi extra suas provincias pallio indifferenter utantur, ut extra tuam provinciam uti pallio valeas, indulgeri tibi a sede apostolica postulasti. Licet autem usus huiusmodi sit abusus, et talis consuetudo dicenda sit potius corruptela, et ii graviter offendere dignoscantur, qui utuntur palliis extra suas provincias absque licentia sedis apostolicae speciali, nos tamen de speciali gratia indulgemus tibi, ut, si quando necessitate aliqua praepeditus ad ecclesiam tibi subiectam accedere forte nequiveris pro consecrandis suffraganeis tuis vel clericis ordinandis, et ad ecclesiam alienam propter hoc te contigerit declinare, dummodo is, ad quem ecclesia pertinet, id permittat, utendi pallio in iam dictis casibus liberam habeas facultatem. [Dat.

From the tenor of your letters we have received that, when in the concession of the pallium it was said to you that you should use it within your church, and that for you, both by royal mandate and also for procuring the affairs of your church, as you frequently remain outside your province, it is shamefaced to minister without the pallium, since the custom, as you assert, is general in Spain that archbishops use the pallium indiscriminately outside their provinces, you have petitioned to be indulged by the apostolic see, that you may be able to use the pallium outside your province. Although, however, such a use is an abuse, and such a custom ought rather to be called a corruption, and those are recognized to offend gravely who use palli(a) outside their provinces without the special license of the apostolic see, nevertheless we, out of special grace, indulge to you that, if at any time, hindered by some necessity, you should perchance be unable to reach a church subject to you for consecrating your suffragans or for ordaining clerics, and on this account it should befall you to turn aside to another’s church, provided that he to whom the church pertains permits it, you may have free faculty of using the pallium in the already stated cases. [Given.

Later. IV. Non. Apr.

Lateran. 4th day before the Nones of Apr.

Ao. 1209.]

In the year 1209.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

In qualibet ecclesia suae provinciae permissis diebus archiepiscopus missam celebrans, uti potest pallio.

In any church of his province, on permitted days, the archbishop, celebrating mass, can make use of the pallium.

Idem.

The same.

Quum sis in partibus remotissimis, gratum gerimus et acceptum, quod in actibus tuis, quotiescunque dubitationis scrupulus emergit etc. (Et infra:) Noveris igitur, quod, nbi exposcit necessitas, et plura in una ecclesia altaria, et plures episcopos simul poteris consecrare, et Ubicunque fueris in missarum celebrationibus constitutus, diebus solennibus usum pallii, per quod plenitudo pontificii designatur, poteris liberius exercere.

Since you are in the most remote parts, we hold it pleasing and acceptable that, in your acts, whenever a scruple of doubt emerges, etc. (And below:) Know therefore that, where necessity demands, you can consecrate more altars in one church, and several bishops at the same time; and Wherever you shall be placed in the celebrations of masses, on solemn days you can more freely exercise the use of the pallium, through which the plenitude of the pontificate is designated.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Sine pallio et sandaliis potest archiepiscopus celebrare.

An archbishop can celebrate without the pallium and sandals.

Honorius III. Archiepiscopo Tri.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishop of Tri.

Quia nos, (Et infra: [cf. c. ult. de apost. V. 9.] Inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod tam in tua quam in aliena dioecesi potes sine pallio et sandaliis celebrare, qui utique in tua dioecesi non debes semper celebrare cum pallio, sed diebus illis duntaxat, qui in ecclesiae tuae privilegiis sunt expressi.

Because we, (And below: [cf. c. ult. de apost. 5. 9.] we thus respond to your inquiry, that both in your own and in another’s diocese you can celebrate without the pallium and sandals, you who indeed in your own diocese ought not always to celebrate with the pallium, but only on those days which are expressed in the privileges of your church.

Sicque soluta est quarta quaestio, qua quaesivisti, an tibi sit licitum pro defunctis cum pallio celebrare. [Dat. Reate III.

And so the fourth question is resolved, in which you asked whether it is licit for you to celebrate with the pallium for the deceased. [Given at Rieti 3.

Id. Aug. 1225.]

The Ides of August, 1225.]

TITULUS IX. DE RENUNCIATIONE.

TITLE 9. ON RENUNCIATION.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Non datur licentia cedendi episcopo, qui propter senectutem vult cedere, si necessarius vel utilis sit ecclesiae suae.

License to cede is not given to a bishop who, on account of senectitude, wishes to cede, if he is necessary or useful to his church.

Alexander III. Londonensi Episcopo.

Alexander 3. To the Bishop of London.

Literas tuas, nuper accepimus, devotione plenas et dolore non vacuas, quandoquidem et tuam, nobis insinuaverunt affectuosissimam caritatem, et tui archiepiscopalis officii, quod fideliter gessisse, et adhuc te gerere gaudemus, contrariam exigebant ecclesiae utilitatibus cessionem. Nosti enim, sicut vir providus et prudens, quod tanta est diei malitia, et contra ecclesiam Dei tam gravis, tam diuturna persecutionis instantia, ut nequaquam ei cedat ad commodum, si tuam sedem contigerit subire defectum. Quod Si tuam aut senectutem aut insufficientiam forte considerans, te tanquam emeritum postulas relaxari: scito, nos credere et pro certo tenere, quod tutius sit hoc tempore, si commissa tibi ecclesia sub umbra tui nominis gubernetur, quam si alteri novae incognitaeque personae gubernanda in tanto discrimine committatur, maxime quia in te vigor devotionis et fidei etiam corpore senescente non deficit, sed vergente deorsum conditione corporea fervor spiritus in sublimiora conscendit.

We have recently received your letter, full of devotion and not void of grief, since it both conveyed to us your most affectionate charity and demanded a resignation of your archiepiscopal office—which we rejoice that you have carried faithfully and that you still carry—contrary to the utilities of the church. For you know, as a provident and prudent man, that such is the malice of the day, and so heavy and so long-lasting is the pressure of persecution against the church of God, that by no means would it yield to her advantage if your see should happen to undergo a defect. But if, perhaps considering either your old age or insufficiency, you ask to be released as though an emeritus, know that we believe and hold for certain that it is safer at this time if the church committed to you be governed under the shadow of your name, than if it be entrusted to another new and unknown person to be governed in so great a crisis, especially because in you the vigor of devotion and of faith does not fail even as the body grows old, but as the bodily condition turns downward, the fervor of the spirit climbs to higher things.

Ne igitur huius doloris aculeus vividam circa te nostri pectoris vulneret caritatem, Monemus te igitur, ut super hoc diebus istis nulla te facias importunitate molestum, quia incedens omnino probatur, prius solvere militiae cingulum, quam cedat victori adversitas proeliorum. Insta igitur sicut bonus miles Christi, et in tuae sollicitudinis officio persevera; ne dum tuae quietis desideria quaeris, tu aliquid talenti tibi crediti detrimentum patiaris. Illud quoque te oportet attendere, quod si pennas habeas, quibus in solitudinem volare satagis, ut quiescas: ligatae sunt tamen nexibus praeceptorum, quae ita ut nosti, ex sacrorum canonum institutione te vinciunt, ut liberum non habeas absque nostra permissione volatum.

Lest, therefore, the sting of this grief wound the vivid charity of our heart toward you, we warn you, therefore, that on this matter in these days you make yourself troublesome by no importunity, for it is altogether deemed unseemly to loosen the belt of soldiery before the adversities of battles yield to the victor. Press on, therefore, like a good soldier of Christ, and persevere in the office of your solicitude; lest, while you seek the desires of your quiet, you suffer some loss of the talent credited to you. You ought also to attend to this: that if you have wings with which you are eager to fly into solitude, that you may rest, yet they are tied by the bonds of precepts, which, as you know, by the institution of the sacred canons bind you, so that you do not have free flight without our permission.

Ceterum ne, frater, te intolerabiliter nos gravare causeris, qui melius tui potes tam animi debilitatem nosse, quam corporis: hoc tandem tibi, si iudicio conscientiae tuae res id prorsus exigit, indulgemus, ut suscepta oportunitate, tam per te quam per principem terrae, vel etiam per literas tuas, et idoneos nuntios, si corporalem ibi vel non potueris vel nolueris exhibere praesentiam, aliosque regni illius religiosos, et industrios de substituenda sis persona sollicitus, et talem invenire satagas successorem, qui non a fidei claritate degeneret, neque a tramite rectitudinis et honestatis aberret. De his quoque quae tuis duxeris necessitatibus reservanda, cum eisdem personas tractare et deliberare te convenit: ut quum nobis haec omnia tam tua quam illorum fuerint assertione comperta, ita provide ac secure possimus in facto procedere, quod neque nos, neque te ipsum oporteat huius operis in posterum poenitere.

Ceterum, lest, brother, you should allege that we burden you intolerably, you who can better know your own debility both of mind and of body: this at length we indulge to you, if by the judgment of your conscience the matter utterly requires it, that, an opportune occasion having been taken, both through yourself and through the prince of the land, or even through your letters and suitable messengers, if you either cannot or will not exhibit corporal presence there, and together with other religious and industrious men of that realm you be solicitous about having a person substituted, and strive to find such a successor as will not degenerate from the clarity of the faith nor stray from the path of rectitude and honesty. Concerning those things also which you shall have judged to be reserved for your necessities, it is fitting that you treat and deliberate with the same persons: so that when all these things shall have been ascertained to us by the assertion both of you and of them, we may be able to proceed in the matter so providently and securely that it will not be needful for either us or for you yourself to repent hereafter of this work.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Qui abiurat beneficium, licite potest illud, si denuo eligatur, obtinere.

He who abjures a benefice can licitly obtain it, if he is elected anew.

Idem Abbati Dolensi et Priori de Artigia.

The same to the Abbot of Dol and the Prior of Artigia.

Quum inter P. Gaufridi et quosdam alios canonicos sancti I. super spirituali beneficio, scilicet stallo in choro et loco in capitulo, in praesentia nostra quaestio fuisset diutius agitata, quia tamen altera pars sufficienter instructa non venerat, negotium non potuit terminari, Ideoque causam ipsam vestro examini committentes vobis per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus partes ante vestram praesentiam convocetis, et rei veritate plenius inquisita, si praefatum P. Gau. inveneritis de consensu maioris et sanioris partis capituli fuisse de praedicto beneficio auctoritate apostolica investitum, eum faciatis appellatione remota beneficium ipsum pacifice possidere. Non enim videtur nobis impedimentum afferre iuramentum, quod de eodem non petendo ulterius proponitur praestitisse, si consensus maioris et sanioris partis canonicorum ecclesiae intercessit.

When between P. Gaufrid and certain other canons of Saint I., concerning a spiritual benefice, namely a stall in the choir and a place in the chapter, the question had been for a long time debated in our presence, because, however, the other party had not come sufficiently instructed, the business could not be terminated. And therefore, committing the cause itself to your examination, we mandate to you through apostolic writings, that you summon the parties before your presence, and, the truth of the matter more fully inquired, if you shall find that the aforesaid P. Gau. was, by the consent of the greater and sounder part of the chapter, invested with the aforesaid benefice by apostolic authority, you shall cause him, appeal removed, to possess the benefice itself peacefully. For it does not seem to us that the oath, which he is alleged to have taken about not petitioning for the same further, brings an impediment, if the consent of the greater and sounder part of the canons of the church intervened.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Qui renunciavit beneficio suo, illud repetere non potest.

He who has renounced his benefit cannot reclaim it.

Idem Episcopo Verulano.

The same, to the Bishop of Verulam.

Ex transmissa relatione abbatis sancti Nicolai de Ceparano nostris est auribus intimatum, quod P. Rubeus clericus, dum olim infirmitate laboraret, apud monasterium sancti Salvatoris de Telesia, sibi petiit habitum monasticum indulgeri, qui, recuperata postmodum sanitate, ad monasterium illud gratia complendi suum votum accessit, et ibidem moram aliquantulam faciens, ea, quae praedictae ecclesiae sancti N. contulerat, sibi fecit restitui. Nunc autem, mutato animo, per te, et per amicos tuos laborat, ut restituatur in ecclesia supradicta. Verum quoniam iam dicta ecclesia ab eo soluta dignoscitur, ex quo illi ea, quae sibi contulerat, ad voluntatem et petitionem suam resignavit eidem, fraternitatem tuam monemus atque mandamus, quatenus, si res ita se habet, praedictum abbatem et socios eius ad receptionem praefati P. nulla ratione compellas invitos, nec a populo Ceparano compelli permittas.

From the transmitted report of the abbot of Saint Nicholas of Ceparano it has been intimated to our ears that P. Rubeus, a cleric, while once laboring under infirmity, at the monastery of Saint Savior of Telesia, asked that the monastic habit be indulged to him; who, his health afterwards recovered, went to that monastery for the sake of fulfilling his vow, and, making a small stay there, had restored to himself the things which he had conferred upon the aforesaid church of Saint N. Now, however, with his mind changed, through you and through your friends he strives that he be restored in the above-said church. But since the already-mentioned church is recognized as released by him, from the time when it, at his will and petition, resigned back to him those things which he had conferred upon it, we admonish and command your fraternity that, if the matter stands thus, you by no means compel the aforesaid abbot and his associates, against their will, to the reception of the aforesaid P., nor allow [him] to be compelled by the people of Ceparano.

Hortari tamen eos et monere poteris, si tanti tibi fuerit, ut illum non tanquam unum de ecclesia, sed, quasi de novo deberet intrare, recipiant in socium et in fratrem.

Yet you will be able to exhort and admonish them, if it shall be worth so much to you, that they receive him not as one of the church, but as if he ought to enter anew, as a companion and as a brother.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Beneficiatus sine licentia praelati sui beneficio renunciare non potest.

A beneficed cleric cannot renounce his benefice without the license of his prelate.

Idem Episcopo Tornacensi.

The same to the Bishop of Tournai.

Admonet nos cura suscepti regiminis et auctoritas pontificalis inducit, ut pro statu ecclesiarum simus solliciti, et earum profectibus et incrementis integro studio intendamus, quapropter fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus auctoritate nostra et tua statuas et ordines, ut ecclesiasticae personae tui episcopatus de his, quae sibi de bonis ecclesiarum proveniunt, aut ratione ipsarum accesserint, nullum audeant condere testamentum, sed bona ipsa ecclesiis ipsis, prout iustnm est et canonicum cedant. Si autem aliquae de personis ipsis intestatae decesserint, bona, quae ipsis pro ecclesiis aut ratione ipsarum accesserunt, nihilominus ecclesiis eisdem cedere decernas. Sane de bonis illis, quae iure patrimonii aut aliunde favore personae acquisita sunt, testandi liberam habeant facultatem.

Admonishes
us the care of the governance undertaken, and pontifical authority induces [us], that we be solicitous for the state of the churches and direct with undivided zeal to their advancements and increments; wherefore we command, by apostolic writings, to your fraternity by way of precept, that, by our authority and yours, you establish and ordain that ecclesiastical persons of your episcopate, concerning those things which come to them from the goods of the churches or have accrued to them by reason of the same, dare to set up no testament, but that the goods themselves cede to the churches themselves, as is just and canonical. But if any of those persons should die intestate, you should decree that the goods which came to them for the churches or by reason of the same nonetheless cede to the same churches. But as for those goods which have been acquired by right of patrimony or otherwise from elsewhere by favor toward the person, let them have free faculty of making a will.

Nihilominus etiam ex parte nostra et tua Universis personis tui episcopatus ecclesiasticis sub districtione prohibeas, ne ecclesias tuae dioecesis ad ordinationem tuam pertinentes absque assensu tuo intrare audeant aut detinere, aut te dimittere inconsulto. Quodsi quis contra prohibitionem tuam venire praesumpserit, in eum auctoritate nostra et tua fretus canonicam exerceas ultionem.

Nevertheless, on our part and on yours as well, you shall, under strict censure, forbid all ecclesiastical persons of your bishopric to dare to enter or to detain the churches of your diocese that pertain to your ordination without your assent, or to effect any dismissal without your being consulted. But if anyone shall presume to go against your prohibition, relying on our authority and yours, you shall exercise canonical retribution upon him.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Contra petentem beneficium admittitur spontaneae abiurationis exceptio, etiam causa renunciationis non adiecta; contra quam actor replicare poterit, quod non sponte renunciavit, et qui melius probaverit obtinebit.

Against one seeking a benefice, the exception of spontaneous abjuration is admitted, even with the cause of renunciation not added; against which the plaintiff may reply that he did not renounce of his own accord, and whoever shall have proved the better will prevail.

Clemens III.

Clement 3.

Super hoc, quod sciscitaris, utrum ecclesiastica beneficia reposcentibus obiecta spontaneae abiurationis exceptio sine causae cognitione sit admittenda, et an actoris, quod sponte non renunciavit, an rei de spontanea renunciatione debeant probationes admitti, sic tuae experientiae respondemus, quod nulla ratio hoc verisimile reddit, ut quisquam beneficium multis forte expensis et laboribus acquisitum, et quo sustentari debet, facile sine magna causa temere sua sponte resignet, ideoque supervacuum esse non credimus, causam renunciationis vel resignationis diligenter inquiri, quam si forte probabilem, id est, non vi, nec metu, nec oppressione, nec interventu pecuniae, nec promissione extortam iudex ordinarius seu delegatus invenerit, et maxime si non intervenerit iuramentum, quod vix fieri de voluntate propria creditur, quod fere semper a malo est, nisi replicatio canonica fuerit opposita, admittere non postponat. Porro licet negantis factum per rerum naturam nulla sit probatio, eius tamen, qui spontaneam renunciationem negat, quum implicite et quodammodo replicando inficietur super assertione sua, habito ad dignitatem et opinionem respectu probationes credimus admittendas.

Concerning this, which you inquire: whether, against those reclaiming ecclesiastical benefices, the exception of spontaneous abjuration, put forward without cognition of the cause, is to be admitted; and whether the proofs of the plaintiff—that he did not renounce of his own accord—or of the defendant—about a spontaneous renunciation—ought to be admitted, thus we answer to your experience, that no reason renders it plausible that anyone would lightly, without great cause, of his own motion resign a benefice perhaps acquired by many expenses and labors, and by which he ought to be sustained; and therefore we do not believe it superfluous that the cause of the renunciation or resignation be diligently inquired into; which, if by chance the ordinary judge or the delegated judge shall have found to be probable, that is, not extorted by force, nor by fear, nor by oppression, nor by the intervention of money, nor by promise, and especially if no oath has intervened—which is scarcely believed to be made of one’s own free will, since it is almost always from an evil source—unless a canonical replication has been opposed, he should not postpone to admit. Moreover, although by the nature of things there is no proof of the fact of one who denies, nevertheless, for him who denies a spontaneous renunciation—since implicitly and in a certain manner by replicating he is impugned upon his assertion—having regard to dignity and reputation, we believe proofs ought to be admitted.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Qui sponte renunciavit electioni de se factae, super ipsa ulterius audiri non debet.

He who of his own accord has renounced the election made concerning himself ought not to be heard further upon it.

Idem.

The same.

In praesentia nostra [constitutus dilectus filius R. quondam abbas Torneae proposuit coram nobis, quod quum olim ad eius monasterium accessisses, quod ipse in C. marcharum reditum ampliaverat, et ingressus capitulum monachorum inquisitionem coepisses facere contra eum, ipse gravari se timens ad sedem apostolicam appellavit; tu vero, appellationi non deferens, eum ab administrationis officio suspendisti, et in eius absentia inquisitione post facta, ipsum usque ad monasterium de Ramessia licet invitum turpiter post te tractum super crucem fecisti iurare, quod te usque Londoniam sequeretur. Ipse igitur Londoniam veniens appellationem, quam prius interposuerat, solenniter innovavit, et ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum Wintoniensem episcopum et coniudices eius commissionis obtinuit literas destinari, quas deferendas cuidam tradidit mercatori. Tu vero ipsum in Angliam redeuntem capi fecisti Londoniis et in Eliensi monasterio carceri mancipari.

In our presence [the beloved son R., formerly abbot of Thorney, having appeared, set forth before us that when once you had come to his monastery, which he had enlarged in revenue by 100 marks, and, having entered the chapter of the monks, had begun to make an inquisition against him, he, fearing that he was being burdened, appealed to the apostolic see; but you, not deferring to the appeal, suspended him from the office of administration, and, after the inquisition had been made in his absence, although unwilling and disgracefully dragged after you as far as the monastery of Ramsey, you made him swear upon the cross that he would follow you as far as London. He therefore, coming to London, solemnly renewed the appeal which he had previously interposed, and obtained that letters be sent to our venerable brother, the Bishop of Winchester, and his co-judges of that commission, which he entrusted to a certain merchant to be carried. But you had him, returning to England, seized in London and consigned to prison in the monastery of Ely.

Propter quod mercator, qui literas deferebat, venire in Angliam non praesumpsit, tandem vero a carcere liberatus ad sedem apostolicam appellavit. Tu vero eius appellationi non deferens, sicut prius, in ipsam depositionis sententiam protulisti, et depositum in carcerem fecisti retrudi. Ceterum, quum fuisset a vinculis absolutus, ad praesentiam nostram venit, et ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum Dunelmensem episcopum, et dilectum filium magistrum Io. de Londoniis literas impetravit, ut super propositis diligenter inquirerent veritatem, et causam ipsam, si partes vellent, concorditer fine debito terminarent; alioquin causam sufficienter instructam ad nos remittere non differrent.

On account of which the merchant who was carrying the letters did not presume to come into England; but at length, released from prison, he appealed to the apostolic see. But you, not deferring to his appeal, as before, brought forth against him the very sentence of deposition, and caused the deposed man to be thrust back into prison. Moreover, when he had been loosed from bonds, he came into our presence, and obtained letters to our venerable brother the Bishop of Durham, and to our beloved son Master John of London, that they should diligently inquire the truth concerning the matters set forth, and should bring the case itself, if the parties were willing, to a concordant termination with due end; otherwise, that they should not delay to remit the sufficiently instructed cause to us.

Proponebat igitur idem abbas, quod praedicta omnia sufficienter fuerant coram eisdem iudicibus comprobata. Verum dilectus filius magister Honorius, archidiaconus Richemundiae, nuncius tuus, proposuit ex adverso, quod, quum olim legationis officio fungereris, ad monasterium de Tornea, ut ei visitationis impenderes gratiam, accessisti, quumque de vita ipsius R. diligentius inquisiisses, de dilapidatione, incontinentia et turpi eius conversatione per testimonia tibi constitit monachorum. Unde communicato prudentum virorum consilio eum ab administrationis officio suspendisti, quum iuxta canonicas sanctiones de dilapidatione suspectus debeat ab administratione suspendi.

Accordingly the same abbot was putting forward that all the aforesaid things had been sufficiently proved before the same judges. But the beloved son Master Honorius, archdeacon of Richmond, your nuncio, proposed on the contrary that, when once you were discharging the office of legation, you approached the monastery of Tornea, in order to bestow upon it the favor of visitation; and when you had inquired more diligently concerning the life of that R., it was established for you by the testimonies of the monks concerning his dilapidation, incontinence, and disgraceful conduct. Whence, having taken counsel with prudent men, you suspended him from the office of administration, since, according to the canonical sanctions, one suspected of dilapidation ought to be suspended from administration.

Nec appellaverat tunc temporis idem abbas, nec etiam, si appellasset, tibi eum innotuerat appellasse, quum, sicut asserunt testes eius, egressus capitulum in secreto collocutorio duxerit appellandum. Verum, quum postmodum apud Londonias appellasset, non solum appellationem interpositam recepisti, sed ministrasti etiam ad prosecutionem ipsius sufficienter expensas. Deinde quum enormitates ipsius bonae memoriae Coelestino praedecessori nostro per tuas literas intimasses, ipse tuam fraternitatem monuit, ut eum ab officio deponeres abbatiae, ac carceri mancipatum tamdiu detineres, donec ad te mandatum eius denuo perveniret.

Nor at that time had that same abbot appealed, nor even, if he had appealed, had it become known to you that he had appealed, since, as his witnesses assert, on leaving the chapter he judged in a private parlatory that an appeal was to be made. But when afterwards he had appealed at London, you not only received the interposed appeal, but you also furnished sufficient expenses for its prosecution. Then, when you had intimated his enormities to Celestine of good memory, our predecessor, through your letters, he admonished your fraternity that you should depose him from the office of the abbacy, and, consigned to prison, detain him until his mandate should again come to you.

Ipse igitur depositionis sententiam expavescens, in praesentia multorum episcoporum et aliorum religiosorum virorum renunciavit spontanee abbatiae, sed post paululum poenitens se renunciasse penitus denegavit. Tu igitur, quum metropolitanus exsisteres eius, et legationis officio fungereris, et ad hoc esses specialiter delegatus, mandati apostolici formam sequens, propter criminum evidentiam super abbatia ei perpetuum imponere silentium curavisti. Tandem vero, quum praedicto Dunelmensi et coniudici eius sub forma praedicta sententiae tuae foret cognitio delegata, coram eis quod idem abbas renunciaverit abbatiae, quod incontinentiae vitio laborabat, quod vasa quaedam monasterii praeter consensum monachorum alienaverat, quod tu eius appellationi detuleras et expensas ministraveras appellanti, quod auctoritate literarum praedicti praedecessoris nostri propter criminum evidentiam et spontaneam cessionem processeras ad depositionem ipsius, et de speciali mandato eiusdem praedecessoris nostri eum in monasterio Glocestrensi, ubi prius monachus fuerat, carceri mancipaveras, per testes legitimos comprobasti.

He therefore, dreading the sentence of deposition, in the presence of many bishops and other religious men renounced the abbacy spontaneously; but after a little, repenting that he had renounced, he utterly denied it. You, then, since you were his metropolitan and were discharging the office of legation, and were specially delegated to this, following the form of the apostolic mandate, on account of the evidence of the crimes took care to impose upon him perpetual silence concerning the abbacy. Finally, when to the aforesaid Bishop of Durham and his co-judge, under the aforesaid form, the cognizance of your sentence had been delegated, you proved before them by lawful witnesses that the same abbot had renounced the abbacy, that he was laboring under the vice of incontinence, that he had alienated certain vessels of the monastery without the consent of the monks, that you had deferred to his appeal and had furnished expenses to the appellant, that by authority of the letters of our aforesaid predecessor you had proceeded to his deposition on account of the evidence of the crimes and the spontaneous cession, and that by the special mandate of the same predecessor you had consigned him to prison in the monastery of Gloucester, where he had previously been a monk.

Deinde autem, quum iudices ipsi gesta omnia redegissent in scriptis et terminum partibus assignassent, idem R. in manibus tuis et liti cessit, et renunciavit spontaneus abbatiae, tuque renunciationem eius ad multam quorundam religiosorum virorum instantiam recepisti. Ceterum, licet saepedictus R. se renunciasse abbatiae ab initio denegasset, tandem tamen id in nostra praesentia confessus est, adiiciens, quod, quia renunciaverat spoliatus, eius renunciatio non tenebat. Praeterea, quum tu ei congrue promiseris providere, nec volueris adimplere promissum, nec ipse ratum habere quod fecerat tenebatur.

Then, however, when the judges themselves had reduced all the acts into writings and had assigned a term to the parties, that same R., in your hands, both yielded in the litigation and spontaneously renounced the abbacy, and you received his renunciation at the urgent importunity of certain religious men. Yet, although the oft‑said R. had from the beginning denied that he had renounced the abbacy, at length he confessed this in our presence, adding that, because he had renounced while despoiled, his renunciation did not hold. Moreover, since you had suitably promised to provide for him and were unwilling to fulfill the promise, he was not bound to hold as ratified what he had done.

Insuper metu fuerat ad renunciationem inductus, quum tu ei fueris comminatus, quod, si ad nos cum iudicum relatione veniret, obtineres a nobis, quod eum in caveam poneremus. Contra hoc autem dictus archidiaconus replicavit, quod eidem R. prodesse non poterat nec debebat, quod renunciaverat spoliatus, utpote quem non adversarius, sed iudex potius spoliaverat. Metus autem, quem allegaverat pars adversa, eum non poterat excusare, quum cadere non debuerit in constantem.

Moreover, he had been induced to renunciation by fear, when you had threatened him that, if he came to us with the judges’ report, you would obtain from us that we would put him into the cage. But against this the said archdeacon replied that it could not and ought not to profit the same R. that he had renounced despoiled, inasmuch as he had been despoiled not by an adversary but rather by a judge. Moreover, the fear which the opposing party had alleged could not excuse him, since it ought not to fall upon one who is constant.

Quis etenim constans praesumeret, quod nos ad votum tuum aliquem retruderemus in carcerem, et tyrannidem exerceremus in eos, qui causas suas apud sedem apostolicam prosequuntur? Non ergo dictus R. debuit qualibet occasione praesumere, quod nos huiusmodi vellemus saevitiam exercere. Quod autem praesumptio eius frivola fuerit, apparuit ex postfacto.] Licet igitur iudex non semper ad unam speciem probationis applicet mentem suam, sed ex confessionibus, depositionibus, allegationibus et aliis, quae in eius praesentia proponuntur, formet animi sui motum, et tanta sit iudicialis auctoritas, ut semper pro ipso praesumi debeat, donec contra ipsum aliquid legitime comprobetur, quare, si tu contra praedictum R. coram Dulmensi episcopo et eius coniudicibus nihil penitus probavisses, standum tamen sententiae fuerat, nisi adversarius eam ostenderet irritandam, quia tamen praeter ista constitit de ipsius renunciatione spontanea per quasdam episcoporum literas et confessionem ipsius, nos de consilio fratrum nostrorum ei super eadem abbatia silentium duximus imponendum.

For who indeed, being steadfast, would presume that we, to your wish, would thrust someone back into prison, and would exercise tyranny upon those who prosecute their causes before the apostolic see? Therefore the said R. ought not on any occasion to presume that we would wish to exercise such savagery. And that his presumption was frivolous appeared ex post facto.] Although, therefore, a judge does not always apply his mind to one kind of proof, but from confessions, depositions, allegations, and other things which are proposed in his presence, he forms the movement of his mind, and judicial authority is so great that it ought always to be presumed in his favor until something is lawfully verified against him, wherefore, even if you had proved nothing at all against the aforesaid R. before the Bishop of Dulmen and his co-judges, the sentence nevertheless had to be stood by, unless the adversary should show it to be annulled; because, however, besides these things it was established concerning his spontaneous renunciation through certain letters of bishops and by his own confession, we, by the counsel of our brethren, judged that silence ought to be imposed upon him concerning the same abbacy.

[Volumus autem, ut eidem divinae pietatis intuitu de reditibus monasterii de Tornea in aliquo loco religioso congrue facias provideri. Nulli ergo etc. Dat.

[We wish, moreover, that, in consideration of the same divine piety, you suitably cause provision to be made for him from the revenues of the monastery of Tornea, in some religious place. Therefore let no one etc. Given.

Later. II. Non. Iun.

Lateran. The 2nd day before the Nones of June (June 4).

1202.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Qui renunciavit literis beneficialibus, non ideo institutioni iam factae renunciare videtur.

He who has renounced the benefice letters does not for that reason seem to renounce the institution already effected.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

Sane dilecto filio nostro I. tituli S. Prudentianae presbytero cardinali, tunc apostolicae sedis legato, nos viva voce meminimus ac literis iniunxisse, ut dilectum filium nostrum H. subdiaconum, qui ecclesiae vestrae a primo pueritiae flore servivit, contradictione et appellatione remotis canonicum in Pictaviensi ecclesia instituere procuraret, qui mandatis nostris obtemperans ibidem instituit in canonicum subdiaconum memoratum. Vos autem nec nobis nec ipsi cardinali reverentiam exhibentes, quod in literis suis de iam dicto Hug. idem cardinalis vobis iniunxit, adimplere non curavistis, nec etiam ipsius suspensionem in aliquo observare.

Truly, to our beloved son I., presbyter cardinal of the title of St. Prudentiana, then legate of the Apostolic See, we remember to have enjoined by word of mouth and by letters, that he should see to it that, with contradiction and appeal removed, our beloved son H., a subdeacon, who has served your church from the first bloom of boyhood, be instituted as a canon in the church of Poitiers; and he, obeying our mandates, there instituted as a canon the aforesaid subdeacon. But you, showing reverence neither to us nor to the cardinal himself, did not care to fulfill what in his letters concerning the already-said Hug. the same cardinal enjoined upon you, nor even to observe his suspension in any respect.

Sed Postmodum idem H. quorundam vestrum ductus consilio literas suas vobis reddens, vestrae misericordiae se subiecit. Quia vero unde misericordiam debuit impetrare, inde cogitur dispendium sustinere, mandamus, quatenus, hoc non obstante quod cum literis suis vestrae misericordiae se subiecit, infra XX. dies post susceptionem praesentium, dilatione, contradictione et appellatione remotis, iuxta ecclesiae consuetudinem ipsum in fratrem et canonicum integre ac plenarie admittatis, et eidem in choro stallum et in capitulo locum assignantes, ipsum curetis de cetero fraterna caritate tractare. Alioquin noveritis, nos venerabili fratri nostro Archiepiscopo et dilectis filiis decano Burdegalensi et Sanctonensi decano districtius mandavisse, ut auctoritate nostra freti, dilatione et contradictione et appellatione cessantibus, id plenarie exsequantur, contradictores districtione ecclesiastica percellentes et ad sedem ap. ab officio et beneficio suspensos de inobedientia responsuros et suspensione praedicta nullatenus observata transmittere non postponant, ut ibi poena docente addiscant, quam periculosum sit et indignum, mandatis apostolicis obviare, nullis literis obstantibus harum tenore tacito a sede ap. impetratis.

But afterward the same H., led by the counsel of certain of you, returning his letters to you, subjected himself to your mercy. Because, in truth, from that source whence he ought to have obtained mercy, from there he is compelled to endure loss, we command that, notwithstanding this—that with his letters he subjected himself to your mercy—within 20 days after the receipt of the present, delays, contradiction, and appeal removed, according to the custom of the church you admit him integrally and plenarily as a brother and canon, and, assigning to the same a stall in the choir and a place in the chapter, you take care henceforth to treat him with fraternal charity. Otherwise, know that we have more strictly commanded our venerable brother the Archbishop and our beloved sons the dean of Bordeaux and the dean of Saintes, that, relying on our authority, delays and contradiction and appeal ceasing, they fully carry that out, striking down the contradictors by ecclesiastical distriction, and that they do not postpone to transmit to the Apostolic See those suspended from office and benefice to answer for disobedience and for the aforesaid suspension by no means observed, so that there, punishment teaching, they may learn how dangerous and unworthy it is to oppose apostolic mandates, no letters standing in the way obtained from the Apostolic See with the tenor of these kept silent.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Renunciatio beneficii facta in manibus laici non tenet; renuncians tamen est beneficio spoliandus.

Renunciation of a benefice made into the hands of a layman does not hold; nevertheless the renouncer is to be despoiled of the benefice.

Innocentius III. Nidrosiensi Archiepiscopo.

Innocent 3. To the Archbishop of Nidaros.

Quod in dubiis (Et infra: [cf. c. 30. de sent. exc. V. 39.] Hi praeterea, qui beneficium ecclesiasticum sibi collatum sponte in manum laicam resignantes, illud denuo a laico susceperunt, eodem sunt beneficio spoliandi, licet resignatio talium facta laico nullam obtineat firmitatem.

That in doubtful matters (And below: [cf. c. 30. de sent. exc. 5. 39.] Moreover, those who, resigning of their own accord into the lay hand an ecclesiastical benefice that has been conferred upon themselves, have received it anew from a layman, are to be despoiled of the same benefice, although the resignation of such persons made to a layman obtains no validity.

[Altare vero etc. (cf. c. 3. de cons. eccl.

[The altar, however, etc. (cf. ch. 3 on the consecration of a church

III. 30.) Dat. ap. civ.

3. 30.) Given at the city.

Castellanam VI. Id. Oct. 1198.]

Castellana, the 6th day before the Ides of October, 1198.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Papa concedit licentiam cedendi episcopo, qui sine mortis periculo in ecclesia sua morari non potest.

The Pope grants a license of cession to a bishop, who cannot remain in his own church without peril of death.

Idem Eboracensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of York.

Ad supplicationem instantem venerabilis fratris nostri Ragusiensis archiepiscopi, eum a cura et sollicitudine, qua tenebatur ecclesiae Ragusiensi, duximus absolvendum, eo videlicet, quod ibi non poterat secure morari, et, si accessum haberet ad illam, mortis sibi periculum imminebat. (Et infra:) Ne vero idem archiepiscopus in vituperium ministerii nostri defectum in rebus temporalibus patiatur, fraternitatem tuam monemus attente, ac per apostolica [tibi] scripta mandamus, quatenus beneficium, quod de liberalitate regia ac concessione tua in episcopatu Carleoli et ecclesia de Malebron est illi collatum, ad sustentationem conserves ipsius. Cui concessimus, ut in ipso episcopatu absque usu pallii officium episcopale valeat exercere, tibi tanquam metropolitano reverentiam et obedientiam impensurus.

At the urgent supplication of our venerable brother, the archbishop of Ragusa, we have deemed him to be absolved from the care and solicitude by which he was held to the church of Ragusa, namely because he could not securely remain there, and, if he should have access to it, danger of death was impending for him. (And below:) Lest indeed the same archbishop suffer, to the discredit of our ministry, a deficiency in temporal matters, we admonish your fraternity attentively, and by apostolic writings [to you] we command, that you preserve for his sustentation the benefice which, by royal liberality and your concession, has been conferred upon him in the bishopric of Carlisle and the church of Malebron. To whom we have granted that, in that same bishopric, without the use of the pallium, he may be able to exercise the episcopal office, being about to render to you, as metropolitan, reverence and obedience.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Debilis, ignarus, male conscius, irregularis, Quem mala plebs odit, dans scandala cedere possit.

Weak, ignorant, of guilty conscience, irregular,
whom the wicked plebs hates, giving scandals, he might cede.

Idem Episcopo Calaritano.

The same to the Bishop of Cagliari.

Nisi, quum pridem in officio pastorali ad divinum servitium accessisti, praeparasse te ad tentationem animum crederemus, ac praevidisse prudenter, nequaquam in humana fragilitate consistere, varios angustiarum languores, quos te in ipso sciebas officio perpessurum, posse absque magno Dei adiutorio sustinere: formidaremus utique, ne parvulos tuos postmodum ad petram allidere neglexisses, eosque tantum in te permiseris invalescere, ut ipsorum, suggerentium tibi suscepti ministerii cessionem, instantiae vix iam valeas repugnare. Verum quoniam, sicut credimus, quum te scires contra spirituales nequitias pugnaturum, armaturam Dei, qua posses stare contra insidias tentatoris, ab Apostolo monitus induisti, et inexpertus non ignorasti sollicitudinis pastoralis angustias, quas forsitan expertus abhorres, nescimus cur tam instanter susceptum velis regimen inutiliter derelinquere, quod suscipiendum utiliter non deberes usquequaque vitare. Si enim in huiusmodi cessione frugem tibi melioris vitae promittis, scire te debes non esse sanctificato in utero sanctiorem, et ideo non oportet te praedicationis iam susceptae deserere ministerium, quum ille, cuius [ante] fieri baiulus recusabat, tandem praedicandum receperit verbum Dei.

Unless, when long ago in the pastoral office you approached the divine service, we were to believe that you had prepared your mind for temptation, and had prudently foreseen that, human fragility by no means sufficing, the various languors of straits—which you knew you would endure in that very office—could not be sustained without the great help of God: we would truly fear lest you had neglected thereafter to dash your little ones against the rock, and had allowed them to grow so strong in you that you can scarcely now prevail to resist their urgings, which suggest to you the cession of the ministry undertaken. But since, as we believe, when you knew you would fight against spiritual wickednesses, you, being admonished by the Apostle, put on the armor of God by which you might stand against the snares of the tempter, and, while unexperienced, did not ignore the straits of pastoral solicitude—which, now perhaps experienced, you abhor—we do not know why you so urgently wish uselessly to abandon the governance undertaken, which, if it is to be usefully undertaken, you ought not utterly to avoid. For if in a cession of this kind you promise yourself the fruit of a better life, you must know that you will not be holier than one sanctified in the womb; and therefore you ought not to desert the ministry of preaching already undertaken, since he who formerly refused to become its bearer at length received the word of God to be preached.

§ 1. Quod si forsan humilitatis causa de culmine quaeris pontificali descendere, ac contra superni nutus arbitrium datum tibi per illud niteris deserere praesulatum, eo ipso humilitatis videris erigere male verticem, quod te nimis in resignandi proposito exhibes pertinacem, quia tunc in te veram humilitatem custodies, quum et per eam locum sublimen fugies, et per obedientiam non dimittes. Intueri te itaque, venerabilis frater noster in Christo, volumus, quod haec sunt illa, per quae cedendi episcopus officio pastorali licentiam potest postulare: conscientia criminis, debilitas corporis, defectus scientiae, malitia plebis, grave scandalum, irregularitasque personae. Sed in his omnibus est adhibenda discretio et observanda cautela.

§ 1. But if perchance for the sake of humility you seek to descend from the pontifical summit, and, contrary to the decision of the supernal nod, you strive under its pretext to desert the prelateship given to you by it, by that very “humility” you seem to raise your head amiss, in that you show yourself too obstinate in the purpose of resigning; for then you will keep true humility in yourself, when both by it you flee a lofty place, and by obedience you do not abandon it. We therefore wish you to consider, our venerable brother in Christ, that these are the things by reason of which a bishop can ask leave to withdraw from the pastoral office: conscience of crime, weakness of body, defect of knowledge, malice of the people, grave scandal, and irregularity of the person. But in all these things discretion must be applied and caution observed.

§ 2. Propter conscientiam enim criminis cedendi pastorali officio potest licentia postulari, et forsitan non cuiuslibet, sed duntaxat illius, propter quod ipsius officii exsecutio post peractam etiam poenitentiam impeditur; quum enim quacunque hora peccator conversus fuerit omnium iniquitatum suarum non recordari se Dominus fateatur, et neminem esse sine peccato sacra scriptura testatur, apparet, quod non per cuiuslibet criminis conscientiam quemquam cedere oporteat officio pastorali, quum si omnes, quos arguit conscientia cuiuslibet culpae, cederent, pauci vel nulli forsitan in illo ministerio remanerent. In multis enim offendimus omnes, et si dixerimus, quia peccatum non habemus, nos ipsos seducimus et veritas in nobis non est, quia misericorditer illum excusat, qui miserabiliter se accusat. § 3. Alia vero causa est debilitas corporis, propter quam aliquis potest petere ab onere sollicitudinis pastoralis absolvi, quae videlicet vel ex infirmitate, vel ex senectute procedit; nec tamen omnis, sed illa solummodo, per quam impotens redditur ad exsequendum officium pastorale.

§ 2. For on account of the conscience of a crime, a license to cede the pastoral office can be requested, and perhaps not for just any crime, but only for that by reason of which the execution of the office itself is impeded even after penance has been performed; for since, at whatever hour the sinner shall have been converted, the Lord avers that he does not remember all his iniquities, and Sacred Scripture testifies that no one is without sin, it is clear that it ought not to be by reason of the conscience of just any crime that anyone should withdraw from the pastoral office, since, if all those whom the conscience convicts of any fault were to withdraw, few or perhaps none would remain in that ministry. For in many things we all offend, and if we shall say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us, because he mercifully excuses him who miserably accuses himself. § 3. Another cause, truly, is debility of the body, on account of which someone can seek to be absolved from the burden of pastoral solicitude, which namely proceeds either from infirmity or from old age; yet not every debility, but only that by which one is rendered impotent for carrying out the pastoral office.

Nam si pro qualibet corporali debilitate susceptae servitutis officium posset deseri, frustra se fateretur Apostolus in suis infirmitatibus gloriari, et senectute gravatus quispiam a cura se non debet omnino pastoralis regiminis excusare, quum interdum non plus hortetur senilis debilitas aliquem cedere, quam moralis maturitas, quae in senibus esse solet, ipsum in suo suadet officio permanere. Pro talibus enim de se dicit Apostolus: "Quum infirmor, tunc fortior sum," quia nonnunquam corporis infirmitas fortitudinem cordis augmentat. § 4. Pro defectu quoque scientiae plerumque potest quis pastoralis officii petere cessionem, quia, quum ipsa circa spiritualium administrationem sit potissimum necessaria, et circa curam temporalium opportuna, praesul, qui commissam sibi debet ecclesiam regere in utrisque, salubriter ei renunciat, si scientiam, in qua ipsam regat, ignorat, quoniam, quum subiectos docere habeat, quid facere debeant, quid cavere, nec bene docebit eos, quod nescierit ipse fugere, nec illud, quod ignoraverit, exercere.

For if on account of any bodily debility the office of the service undertaken could be deserted, the Apostle would confess in vain that he glories in his infirmities; and one burdened by old age ought not at all to excuse himself from the care of pastoral regimen, since sometimes senile debility does not more exhort someone to cede than the moral maturity, which is wont to be in the elderly, urges him to remain in his office. For on behalf of such the Apostle says of himself: "When I am weak, then I am stronger," because sometimes the infirmity of the body augments the fortitude of the heart. § 4. On account of a defect of knowledge, too, one can for the most part seek a cession of the pastoral office, because, since that knowledge is most of all necessary for the administration of spiritual things and suitable for the care of temporal things, the prelate, who ought to rule the church committed to him in both, healthfully renounces it if he is ignorant of the knowledge by which he might rule it, since he has to teach his subjects what they ought to do, what to beware; nor will he teach them well to flee that which he himself has not known how to flee, nor to practice that which he has been ignorant of.

"Tu enim," inquit Dominus, "scientiam repulisti, et ego repellam te, ne sacerdotio fungaris mihi." Quanquam, etsi desideranda sit eminens scientia in pastore, in eo tamen sit competens toleranda, quia secundum Apostolum "scientia inflat, caritas autem aedificat," et ideo imperfectum scientiae potest supplere perfectio caritatis. § 5. Propter malitiam autem plebis cogitur interdum praelatus ab ipsius regimine declinare, [et] quando plebs adeo durae cervicis exsistit, et in rebellione sua ita pertinax invenitur, ut proficere nequeat apud ipsam, sed propter eius duritiam, quo magis [proficere] satagit, eo magis iusto iudicio deficere permittatur, dicente Domino per Prophetam: "Linguam tuam adhaerere faciam palato tuo, quia domus exasperans est," et Apostoli leguntur dixisse Iudaeis: "Ecce convertimur ad gentes, quia verbi Dei vos indignos fecistis." Non tamen pro qualibet culpa pastor debet gregem deserere suum, ne forte mercenario comparetur, qui videt lupum venientem, et dimittit oves, et fugit, sed de superioris licentia tunc demum potest non tam timide fugere, quam provide declinare, quum oves convertuntur in lupos, et qui debuerant humiliter obedire iam irrevocabiliter contradicunt; quum, etsi tales sint graviter pro crimine puniendi, sunt tamen pro tempore utiliter tolerandi, quia sanguinem elicit qui nimis emungit. § 6. Pro gravi quoque scandalo evitando, quum aliter sedari non potest, licet episcopo petere cessionem, ne plus temporalem honorem quam aeternam videatur affectare salutem, memor illius, quod dicit Apostolus: "Si esca scandalizaverit fratrem meum, non manducabo carnem in aeternum," ne fratrem meum scandalizem.

"For you," says the Lord, "have repelled knowledge, and I will repel you, so that you may not discharge the priesthood for me." Although, even if eminent knowledge is to be desired in a pastor, yet a competent degree is to be tolerated in him, because according to the Apostle "knowledge inflates, but charity builds up," and therefore the perfection of charity can supply for the imperfection of knowledge. § 5. Moreover, on account of the malice of the plebs, the prelate is sometimes compelled to decline from its governance, [and] when the people proves so stiff-necked, and in its rebellion is found thus pertinacious, that he cannot make progress with them, but on account of their hardness, the more he strives to [make progress], the more by just judgment he is permitted to fail, with the Lord saying through the Prophet: "I will make your tongue to adhere to your palate, because it is an exasperating house," and the Apostles are read to have said to the Jews: "Behold, we turn to the nations, because you have made yourselves unworthy of the word of God." Nevertheless, for just any fault the shepherd ought not to desert his flock, lest perchance he be compared to the hireling, who sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep, and flees, but with the superior’s license then at last he can not so much timidly flee as providently decline, when the sheep are turned into wolves, and those who ought to have obeyed humbly now irrevocably contradict; since, even if such are to be punished gravely for their crime, nevertheless for a time they are usefully to be tolerated, because he who milks too much draws blood. § 6. For the avoiding also of grave scandal, when it cannot otherwise be settled, it is permitted for a bishop to seek cession, lest he seem to be aiming more at temporal honor than at eternal salvation, mindful of that which the Apostle says: "If food will scandalize my brother, I will not eat flesh unto eternity," lest I scandalize my brother.

Sed inter scandalum et scandalum est subtiliter distinguendum, sicut Dominus ipse distinxit, cui quum dixissent Apostoli: "Scis, quia pharisaei audito hoc verbo scandalizantur?" respondit: "Sinite illos, caeci sunt, et duces caecorum." Alibi vero dixit: "Qui scandalizaverit unum de pusillis istis, qui in me credunt, expedit ei, ut suspendatur mola asinaria m collo eius, et demergatur in profundum maris." Nam etsi necesse sit, ut scandala veniant, vae tamen illi, per quem scandalum venit. Personae vero irregularitas, ut, si forte sit bigamus vel viduae maritus, est causa, propter quam petere potest licentiam aliquis resignandi pontificii dignitatem, attestante Apostolo, qui dicit: "Oportet episcopum esse unius uxoris virum." Non tamen propter quamlibet irregularitatem personae debet ei, qui regulariter ministravit, cedendi licentia indulgeri, utpote si de legitimo matrimonio non sit natus, quia, licet irregularitatem huiusmodi non potuerit subticere, si tamen et culpa latet et causa, cum eo, qui laudabiliter suum implevit officium, iniuncta sibi poenitentia competenti, potest non minus utiliter, quam misericorditer dispensari. "Ego sum," inquit, "Deus zelotes, vindicans peccata patrum in filios usque in tertiam et quartam generationem in his, qui oderunt me," id est, in illis, qui contra me paternum odium imitantur.

But between scandal and scandal a subtle distinction must be made, just as the Lord himself made a distinction: when the Apostles had said to him, "You know that the Pharisees, on hearing this word, are scandalized?" he replied, "Let them alone; they are blind, and guides of the blind." Elsewhere indeed he said: "Whoever shall scandalize one of these little ones who believe in me, it is expedient for him that an ass-millstone be hung about his neck, and he be drowned in the depth of the sea." For even if it is necessary that scandals come, yet woe to that one through whom the scandal comes. But the irregularity of the person—such as, if perchance he be a bigamist or the husband of a widow—is a cause on account of which someone can ask leave to resign the pontifical dignity, the Apostle attesting, who says: "It is necessary that a bishop be the husband of one wife." Yet not for just any irregularity of person ought a license of ceding be granted to one who has ministered regularly, as for instance if he was not born of a legitimate marriage; because, although he could not have escaped an irregularity of this kind, nevertheless, if both the fault and the cause lie hidden, with fitting penance enjoined upon him, a dispensation may be made with him who has laudably fulfilled his office, no less usefully than mercifully. "I am," he says, "a jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation in those who hate me," that is, in those who imitate against me the paternal hatred.

Unde patet, quod illis, qui paterna vitia non sequuntur, propriae possunt in talibus suffragari virtutes; illo discretionis adhibito moderamine, ut inter nothos et manzeres, naturales et spurios distinguatur. Quum autem plerumque vitia se virtutes esse menti minus providae mentiantur, subtiliter advertere te oportet, utrum resignandi propositum, quod tam ferventer gestare videris in pectore, dignum sit Dei odio vel amore. Si enim propter causam aliquam praemissarum cedere postulares, tam super causa, quam super eius effectu pariter doleremus.

Whence it is evident that, for those who do not follow paternal vices, their own virtues can in such matters avail as suffrages; with that moderation of discretion applied, so that a distinction be made between nothi and manzeres, naturals and spurious. But since very often vices pretend themselves to be virtues to a mind less provident, you ought to consider subtly whether the resolve of resigning, which you seem to carry so fervently in your breast, be worthy of God’s hatred or of His love. For if you were to request to resign on account of any cause among the aforesaid, we would grieve equally both over the cause and over its effect.

Sed ne sub improvidae pietatis amictu ad resignandum detestabilis impietas te impellat, considerare te volumus, et alias esse causas, propter quas male quis petit et peius appetit officium huiusmodi resignare. Si enim ex pusillanimitate, fortassis ut laborem deponat, vel persecutionem effugiat, aut ex vanitate, quod absit, ut plenius vacet otiis, seu liberius indulgeat voluptatibus, curam vult aliquis deserere pastoralem, ab ea non meretur absolvi, quamvis propter huiusmodi vanitatem, tanquam qui mortaliter peccat, ea reddat se indignum, sed satagere debet, ut vanitate deposita satisfaciat de peccato. Aliam vero cedendi causam omnino credimus detestandam.

But lest, under the mantle of improvident piety, a detestable impiety drive you to resign, we wish you to consider that there are also other causes, on account of which one asks ill and still worse desires to resign an office of this sort. For if out of pusillanimity—perhaps to lay down the toil, or to escape persecution—or out of vanity (far be it!), that he may be more fully free for leisures, or more freely indulge in pleasures, someone wishes to desert the pastoral care, he does not deserve to be absolved from it; although on account of vanity of this kind, as one who sins mortally, he renders himself unworthy of it, yet he ought to strive, with the vanity laid aside, to make satisfaction for the sin. But another cause for yielding we altogether deem detestable.

Si quis videlicet a pontificali velit discedere dignitate, ut gloriam captet humanam, tanquam eligat abiectus esse in domo Domini magis, quam habitare in tabernaculis peccatorum, vel ut mundanum non amittat honorem, quem per hypocrisin acquisivit, sive quod eius simulatio revelari iam incipit, sive quod fervor ipsius ex qualibet causa tepescit, nec vult videri, quod malus fuerit, aut quod fiat, et ideo sub religionis praetextu suam vult contegere pravitatem, ut quasi deserens Martham amplexetur Mariam, et Liae fastidiens lippitudinem Rachelis pulchritudinem concupiscat: quid autem, si propterea velit cedere, quod tempore prosperitatis, arridente fortuna, visus est laudabiliter ministrare, quoniam omnia sibi prospere succedebant, sed adversitatis tempore imminente veretur, ne, si quolibet casu sinistra contingant, ipsius negligentiae imputetur? Plane si propter hoc petit cedere, nautae se potest improvido comparare, qui, quum mari sub tranquillitate iacente sine multo labore navis exercuerit gubernaculum, ipsam tempestate surgente deserit, et devenire patitur in profundum. Illam quoque cedendi causam penitus detestamur, si forte cedere velit episcopus, ut vel alter sibi succedat, vel obtentu pretii vel affectu carnali, vel ut quum peior sibi successerit, ipse velut optimus extollatur.

If indeed someone should wish to depart from pontifical dignity, in order to seize human glory, as though he were choosing rather to be abject in the house of the Lord than to dwell in the tabernacles of sinners, or lest he lose the worldly honor which he acquired through hypocrisy, whether because his simulation is already beginning to be revealed, or because his fervor for whatever cause grows tepid, and he does not wish to be seen either to have been evil or to become so, and therefore under a pretext of religion he wishes to cover his depravity—so that, as if deserting Martha he may embrace Mary, and, loathing Leah’s bleary-eyedness, he may desire Rachel’s beauty—what then, if for this reason he wishes to cede, namely that in a time of prosperity, with fortune smiling, he seemed to minister laudably, since all things were succeeding prosperously for him, but with a time of adversity impending he fears lest, if by any chance sinister things occur, it be imputed to his negligence? Clearly, if for this he asks to cede, he can compare himself to an improvident sailor who, when the sea lay in tranquility, exercised the helm of the ship without much labor, but when a storm rises, deserts it and allows it to go down into the deep. We utterly detest also that cause of ceding, if perchance a bishop should wish to cede, either so that another may succeed to him under the pretext of a price or by carnal affection, or so that, when a worse person has succeeded him, he himself may be exalted as the best.

Illud autem quasi nefas respuimus et damnamus, quod episcopus propter occupationes mundanas et sollicitudines saeculares non valeat sine crimine pontificale officium exercere, quum multos sanctos ecclesia veneretur, qui spiritualia simul et temporalia ministrarunt. Verum tamen laeva debet esse sub capite, et dextra in amplexu. Sed et, illud te volumus advertere diligenter, ne forte per hoc tuae dispositionis propositum effici velis ex illis, de quibus dicitur per Prophetam: "Filii Effrem intendentes arcum et mittentes sagittas conversi sunt in die belli," quum potius pro domo Israel murum debeas te opponere ascendentibus ex adverso, quia iuxta sententiam veritatis non qui inceperit, sed qui perseveraverit salvus erit; cavens attentius, ne maculam in gloria tua ponas, non solum apud homines, sed etiam apud Deum, quoniam sub hoc pallio te non poteris occultare, nedum apud Deum, qui renes rimatur et corda, sed nec etiam apud homines, qui ex verisimilibus coniecturis talia suspicantur.

But we spurn and condemn as almost a nefas the notion that a bishop, on account of worldly occupations and secular solicitudes, cannot exercise the pontifical office without blame, since the Church venerates many saints who ministered spiritual and temporal matters together. Yet indeed the left ought to be under the head, and the right in the embrace. And we wish you to observe this carefully as well, lest perchance by this you should will the plan of your disposition to become of those about whom it is said through the Prophet: "The sons of Ephraim, bending the bow and shooting arrows, turned back on the day of battle," when rather you ought to set yourself as a wall for the house of Israel against those ascending from the opposite side, because, according to the sentence of Truth, not he who has begun, but he who has persevered will be saved; taking more vigilant care lest you set a stain upon your glory, not only before men but also before God, since under this cloak you will not be able to hide yourself—still less before God, who searches the reins and the hearts—nay, not even before men, who from very plausible conjectures suspect such things.

Illudque prudenter attendas, quod iuxta sententiam sapientis spiritus disciplinae effugiet fictum, et auferet se a cogitationibus, quae sine intellectu consistunt. Si vero pro tuenda ecclesiae libertate difficultatis onus incurrere pertimescis, non ideo deserere debes praesulatus honorem, considerans diligenter, ne forte iusto iudicio tenteris ab illo, qui malorum est intentator, ut probetur, utrum satisfacere velis in eo, in quo forsan deliquisti. Qui vero contemnit aut negligit satisfacere pro delicto, thesaurizat sibi iram in die irae, quum revelabit Deus abscondita tenebrarum.

And prudently attend to this: that, according to the sentence of the wise man, the spirit of discipline will flee the feigned, and will withdraw itself from cogitations that subsist without intellect. But if, for the safeguarding of the Church’s liberty, you are afraid to incur the burden of difficulty, you ought not on that account to desert the honor of the prelacy, considering diligently lest perhaps by just judgment you be tempted by Him who is the tempter of evils, so that it may be proved whether you are willing to make satisfaction in that wherein perhaps you have transgressed. But he who despises or neglects to make satisfaction for the delict treasures up for himself wrath in the day of wrath, when God will reveal the hidden things of darkness.

Ecce quidem admovimus tibi speculum, ut te ipsum contempleris in ipso, tuamque, conscientiam perscrutatus agnoscas, ex qua causa cedendi licentiam postules importune. Nos enim, novit altissimus, ignoramus, quare in cedendi proposito perseveres, quoniam nec infirmitas corporis, nec longaevitas temporis, nec defectus scientiae, nec malitia plebis, nec irregularitas personae te reddit ineptum, nec conscientiam saevi criminis te fateris habere. § 7. Verum si propter alias causas cessionem affectes, non est in hoc tibi postulanti favendum, quum huiusmodi postulatio videatur non esse discreta, quoniam, ut id tanquam notissimum omittamus, quod otiositas et voluptas arma sunt hostis antiqui ad miseras animas captivandas, propter laboris angustias, aut persecutionis incursus non debes deserere sponsam tuam, cui defigendo manum apud extraneum te fide media copulasti, sciens quod, "beati sunt illi, qui persecutionem patiuntur propter iustitiam," quoniam, quum probati fuerint, accipient coronam vitae, quam repromisit Deus diligentibus se. § 8. Sed dices, quod "spiritus, ubi vult, spirat, et nescis, unde veniat, aut quo vadat," et ideo non est, qui possit vias illius spiritus perscrutari; qui vero spiritu Dei aguntur, non sunt sub lege, quoniam ubi Spiritus Dei, ibi libertas.

Behold indeed we have brought near to you a mirror, that you may contemplate yourself in it, and, having searched your conscience, you may recognize for what cause you importunately request licence of ceding. For we—knows the Most High—are ignorant why you persist in the purpose of ceding, since neither infirmity of body, nor long age of time, nor defect of knowledge, nor malice of the plebs, nor irregularity of person renders you unfit, nor do you confess yourself to have the conscience of a savage crime. § 7. But if for other causes you are aiming at cession, there is not to be favor shown to you petitioning in this, since a petition of this sort seems not to be discreet, inasmuch as—to omit as most well‑known this, that idleness and pleasure are the arms of the ancient enemy for capturing wretched souls—you ought not, on account of the straits of labor or the inrushes of persecution, to desert your bride, to whom, by pledging your hand before a third party, you have coupled yourself by a mediating pledge, knowing that, “blessed are they who suffer persecution for righteousness’s sake,” since, when they shall have been proved, they will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those loving Himself. § 8. But you will say that “the Spirit breathes where He wills, and you do not know whence He comes or whither He goes,” and therefore there is no one who can search out the ways of that Spirit; but they who are led by the Spirit of God are not under the law, since where the Spirit of God is, there is liberty.

Quare si cedendi tibi licentia data ab homine non fuerit, nihilominus tamen cedes, quia data est tibi libertas cedendi a Deo. Certe desipis, si sic sapis. Nam quomodo spiritu Dei agitur qui contra spiritum Dei agit?

Wherefore, if leave to cede be not given to you by man, nonetheless you will cede, because liberty to cede has been given to you by God. Surely you are foolish, if thus you are wise. For how is he acted by the Spirit of God who acts against the Spirit of God?

Si enim vera sunt quae praemisimus, immo quia indubitanter sunt vera, procul dubio contra spiritum Dei agit, qui aliquid horum contra veritatem attentat, quoniam ipse est spiritus veritatis. § 9. Porro si dicas, quod forsitan alia est causa latens, propter quam cedendi voluntas tibi coelitus inspiratur, et nos siquidem respondemus: tu quomodo scis, quod talis inspiratio sit coelestis? Nonne recolis, quod ille gloriosus pontifex dixerit, quum coepisset viribus corporis repente destitui: "Domine," inquit, "si adhuc populo tuo sum necessarius, non recuso laborem, fiat voluntas tua!" Illius exemplum secutus, qui dixit: "Cupio dissolvi, et esse cum Christo, manere autem in carne necessarium est propter vos." Quia igitur diversas tibi causas super hac causa distinximus, et propter quam earum cedere desideres ignoramus, te ipsum tibi duximus committendum, ut, de propriae mentis tribunali te iudicans, videas, si sic possis resignandi desiderio satisfacere, ut gregis tibi commisi curam sine culpa valeas declinare.

If the things which we have premised are true—nay, since they are undoubtedly true—without doubt he acts against the Spirit of God who attempts any of these things against the truth, since he himself is the Spirit of truth. § 9. Moreover, if you say that perhaps there is another hidden cause on account of which the will of ceding (resigning) is inspired to you from heaven, we for our part reply: how do you know that such an inspiration is celestial? Do you not recall that that glorious pontiff said, when he had begun suddenly to be deprived of the strength of his body: "Lord," he said, "if I am still necessary to your people, I do not refuse the labor; thy will be done!" Following the example of him who said: "I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ; but to remain in the flesh is necessary for your sake." Therefore, since we have distinguished for you diverse causes on this matter, and we do not know for which of them you desire to cede, we have judged that you must be committed to your own self, that, judging yourself from the tribunal of your own mind, you may see whether you can thus satisfy the desire of resigning, so that you may be able, without fault, to decline the care of the flock committed to you.

Si enim cedendo proficere appetis tibi soli, profectui tuo sine dubio tantum subtrahis, quantum quod impendere poteras aliis non impendis, quia tunc maiora animae tuae lucra conquireres, quum sine tua salute salutem plurium procurares. Potioris enim est meriti secum Deo quemquam plurimos lucrifacere, quam salutem propriam quaerere sine illis, quorum salus ad eius curam noscitur pertinere. § 10. Quippe si quantocunque virtutum flore refulgeas, et in te non habeas caritatem, nihil te comprobaris habere, sub quo virtutis praetextu deponere quaeris onus sollicitudinis pastoralis, quod vix potest absque iactura deseri caritatis?

For if by ceding you desire to make progress for yourself alone, you without doubt subtract from your own progress by as much as you do not expend upon others what you could expend, because then you would acquire greater gains of your soul, when, without regard to your own salvation, you would procure the salvation of many. For it is of weightier merit with God for someone to make many a gain, rather than to seek his own salvation apart from those whose salvation is known to pertain to his care. § 10. Indeed, if by whatever flower of virtues you should shine, and you do not have charity in yourself, you are proved to have nothing—under what pretext of virtue do you seek to lay down the burden of pastoral solicitude, which can scarcely be deserted without loss of charity?

"Nulla siquidem maior poterit esse caritas, quam ut animam suam ponat quis pro amicis suis." Quum autem propter hanc te deceat animam tuam pro subditis tuis ponere, nulla occasione, dummodo proficere illis possis, etsi non omnibus, tamen multis, ab eorum regimine te convenit excusare; quoniam, si laboris causam praetendis, exemplum te Apostoli sublevabit, qui suadet tibi laborem huiusmodi non refugere, dum se asserit pro communi salute plus ceteris laborasse, quia, licet non semper sequatur laborem effectus, nihilominus tamen ipse labor est meritorius apud Deum, iuxta quod legitur: "Reddet Deus mercedem laborum sanctorum suorum." Sed esto, quod multum hactenus laboraveris, et bonum certamen certaveris, cum eodem Apostolo possis dicere, tamen ut corona tibi iustitiae de reliquo reponatur, cursum te decet perfecti operis consummare. Quantumlibet enim in angustiarum laboribus, qui comitantur officium pastorale, noctes tibi laboriosas enumeras, et tanquam fatigatus cervus umbram quietis affectes, quantumlibet inter viae squalores angustians patriae dilectione traharis, et velut emeritus mercenarius operis tui finem anxius praestoleris, expedit tibi tamen virtutem in infirmitate perficere, et pugnam tuam perseverantia coronare, sciensque, quod apud extraneum defixeris manum tuam, quum animas tibi commissi gregis in tuam animam suscepisti, non sic debes portum tibi quietis appetere, ut navigantes hactenus tecum filios sine remigis adiutorio patiaris in hoc mari magno et spatioso cum timore naufragii fluctuare. § 11. Nec putes, quod ideo Martha malam partem elegerit, quae circa plurima satagebat, quia Maria optimam partem elegit, quae non auferetur ab ea; quoniam, licet illa sit magis secura, ista tamen est magis fructifera, et licet illa sit magis suavis, haec tamen magis est utilis, quum in foecunditate sobolis lippitudo Liae Rachelis pulchritudini sit praelata; quamvis simul in unum et contemplativus esse valeas et activus legislatoris exemplo, qui nunc ascendebat in montem, ut ibi gloriam Domini cum maiori cerneret libertate, nunc vero descendebat in castra, ut cum utilitate maiori necessitatibus populi provideret.

"For indeed no greater charity can there be than that someone lay down his life for his friends." But since on account of this it befits you to lay down your life for your subjects, on no pretext—provided that you can profit them, if not all, yet many—does it suit you to excuse yourself from their governance; for if you allege the cause of toil, the example of the Apostle will uplift you, who urges you not to flee such labor, while he asserts that he labored more than the rest for the common salvation, because, although effect does not always follow labor, nevertheless the labor itself is meritorious with God, according as it is read: "God will render the reward of the labors of His saints." But grant that you have labored much hitherto, and have fought the good fight, as you can say with the same Apostle; nevertheless, that the crown of justice may be laid up for you for what remains, it befits you to finish the course of perfect work. For however much, in the labors of straits that accompany the pastoral office, you count for yourself laborious nights, and, like a wearied stag, long for the shadow of rest; however much, amid the squalors of the road, straitened, you are drawn by love of fatherland, and, like a veteran hireling, anxiously await the end of your work, it is expedient for you nevertheless to perfect virtue in weakness, and to crown your fight with perseverance; and knowing that you have struck your hand as surety with a stranger, since you took into your own soul the souls of the flock committed to you, you ought not so to seek for yourself the harbor of rest as to allow the sons who have hitherto sailed with you to toss upon this great and spacious sea, with fear of shipwreck, without the help of an oarsman. § 11. Nor think that therefore Martha chose the evil part, who was busy about many things, because Mary chose the best part, which shall not be taken away from her; for although that one is more secure, this one is nevertheless more fruitful, and although that one is sweeter, this one is nevertheless more useful, since in the fecundity of offspring Leah’s bleary-eyedness was preferred to Rachel’s beauty; although at once together you are able to be both contemplative and active, after the example of the legislator, who now would ascend the mountain, that there he might behold the glory of the Lord with greater freedom, and now would descend to the camp, that with greater utility he might provide for the needs of the people.

Quapropter facilius indulgetur, ut ascendat monachus ad praesulatum, quam praesul ad monachatum descendat. § 12. Monemus itaque, ut illam vocem Davidicae imprecationis abhorrens, tibique formidans eam per effectum operis adaptari, quae dies impii paucos fieri, ut episcopatum eius accipiat alter, imprecatur, laborem pastoralis regiminis non recuses, iactansque tuum in Domino cogitatum, nihil contra voluntatem altissimi statuas de te ipso, qui, quum te suo viderit esse populo necessarium, forte grave ferret, quum ipsum a te contingeret esse neglectum, ne fortassis ad pedes suos cum Maria sperneret te recipere, qui sibi apud te divertenti sprevisses cum Martha sollicita ministrare. Illud quoque te debet fortius in ministrandi proposito stabilire, quia, quum hactenus in ecclesia tibi commissa laudabiliter ministraris, si quod absit, alius te cedente minus utilis assumeretur ad ipsam, profecto non parum in ipsa quiete, quam appetis, turbareris, quum, ubi bene tuum exercueras ministerium, non absque dolore cerneres inutilis ministri defectum, fieretque, ut tantum in contemplationis arce tibi deperisse cognosceres, quantum ecclesiae, cui praesides, non sine tua confusione per te subtractum esse videres.

Wherefore it is more easily permitted that a monk ascend to the prelacy, than that a prelate descend to the monachate. § 12. We admonish, therefore, that, abhorring that utterance of Davidic imprecation, and fearing for yourself lest it be fitted to you by the effect of deed—that which imprecates that the days of the impious be few, that another may receive his episcopate—you do not refuse the labor of pastoral governance; and, casting your thought upon the Lord, you determine nothing about yourself against the will of the Most High, who, when he shall have seen you to be necessary to his people, perhaps would take it grievously when it should befall that he be neglected by you; lest perchance he should spurn to receive you at his feet with Mary, you who, while he was lodging with you, would have scorned to minister with solicitous Martha. This also ought more strongly to stabilize you in the purpose of ministering, because, since thus far you have ministered laudably in the church committed to you, if—far be it—with you yielding, another less useful should be assumed for it, surely not a little, even in that very quiet which you seek, would you be disturbed, since, where you had exercised your ministry well, you would behold, not without pain, the deficiency of an unprofitable minister; and it would come to pass that you would recognize yourself to have lost as much upon the citadel of contemplation as you would see to have been subtracted by you, not without your confusion, from the church over which you preside.

Quia vero tam per te, quam per nuncios et literas tuas apud nos iam nimis in postulando cedendi licentiam institisti, ecce tibi te duximus relinquendum, ut distinctis tibi causis, propter quas cedere oporteat, vel non cedere si propter aliquam causam utilem et honestam in huiusmodi proposito perseveres, de licentia nostra cedas, quod tamen grave nobis plurimum esse noveris et molestum. Alioquin cedendi licentiam auctoritate apostolica tibi scias esse penitus interdictam, quoniam, etsi pennas habeas, quibus satagas in solitudinem advolare, ita tamen adstrictae sunt nexibus praeceptorum, ut liberum non habeas absque nostra permissione volatum. Quodsi denique tua voluntas te impulerit ad volandum, volumus et mandamus, ut nostras literas in audientia tui capituli facias recitari.

Since indeed both by yourself and by your nuncios and letters you have now pressed us too much in petitioning for license to cede, behold, we have resolved to leave you to yourself, so that, the causes being distinguished for you—on account of which it would be fitting to cede, or not to cede if for some useful and honorable cause you persevere in such a purpose—you may cede by our license; though you should know that this is very grievous and burdensome to us. Otherwise, know that the license of ceding is utterly interdicted to you by apostolic authority; since, even if you have wings with which you strive to fly away into solitude, yet they are so bound by the bonds of precepts that you do not have a free flight without our permission. But if finally your will should impel you to fly, we will and we command that you have our letters recited in the hearing of your chapter.

[etc. Dat. Rom.

[etc. Dated at Rome.

ap. S. Petr. Kal. Mart.

at St. Peter’s, on the Kalends of March.

Pont. nostr. Ao. IX. 1206.]

Of our Pontificate, in the year 9, 1206.]

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Episcopus, qui propter crimen renunciavit episcopatui, et ad religionem transivit, ad episcopatum reassumi non potest; secus, si renunciavit propter persecutionem, infirmitatem, defectum scientiae, simoniam ipso ignorante commissam, vel aliam similem causam.

The bishop who, on account of a crime, renounced the episcopate and passed over to the religious life cannot be re-assumed to the episcopate; otherwise, if he renounced on account of persecution, infirmity, defect of knowledge, simony committed without his knowledge, or another similar cause.

Idem Episcopo Faventino in Archiepiscopum Ravennatem electo.

The same to the Bishop of Faenza, elected as Archbishop of Ravenna.

Post translationem tuam ad ecclesiam Ravennatensem quum dilecti filii praepositus et canonici, abbates et primicerii Faventini, totusque civitatis clerus, sicut per literas eorundem accepimus, in dilectum filium I. presbyterum eorum concanonicum liberam eligendi auctoritatem unanimiter contulissent, ipse sancti Spiritus gratia invocata dilectum filium I. sancti Fridiani Lucanensis canonicum, olim episcopum Sarnatensem, in Faventinum episcopum postulandum elegit, per cuius sollicitudinem circumspectam, qui primo canonicus, et postea praepositus in Faventina ecclesia fuit laudabiliter conversatus, multipliciter sperantur eidem ecclesiae commoda proventura. Porro a dilecto filio sancti Fridiani priore super hoc requisito et obtento consensu, praepositus et alii supra dicti postulationem eandem approbari a nobis humiliter petierunt. Verum postulationi huiusmodi videbatur concilii Constantinopolitani capitulum prima facie obviare, in quo statutum est, ut quicunque de pontificali dignitate ad monachorum vitam et poenitentiae locum descenderit, nequaquam ulterius ad pontificatum resurgat.

After your translation to the Church of Ravenna, when the beloved sons—the provost and canons, the abbots and primicerii of Faenza, and the whole clergy of the city, as we have learned through their letters—had unanimously conferred the free authority of choosing upon the beloved son I., a priest, their co-canon, he, with the grace of the Holy Spirit invoked, chose the beloved son I., a canon of Saint Fridianus of Lucca, formerly bishop of Sarnatensis, to be petitioned as bishop of Faenza; through whose circumspect solicitude—who first was a canon, and afterwards provost, in the church of Faenza, where he conducted himself laudably—many advantages are hoped to be forthcoming for the same church. Moreover, the consent having been sought from and obtained of the beloved son, the prior of Saint Fridianus, concerning this, the provost and the aforesaid others humbly asked that the same postulation be approved by us. But a chapter of the Council of Constantinople seemed at first sight to stand in the way of a postulation of this kind, in which it is decreed that whoever has descended from pontifical dignity to the life of monks and the place of penance shall by no means thereafter rise again to the pontificate.

Unde contra dictum concilium, quum sit unum ex quatuor principalibus, quae sicut quatuor evangelia ecclesia catholica veneratur, nullatenus videbatur eorum postulatio admittenda. § 1. Ceterum speciales quidam casus inveniuntur, in quibus, praedicto concilio non obstante, is, qui vitam monachalem elegit, rursum licite potest ad episcopatum assumi. Si enim quisquam persecutionis rabie saeviente, vel praepediente invalitudine corporis, quum proficere nequeat in regimine pastorali, de superioris auctoritate ad monasticam vitam descendat, persecutionis vel aegritudinis impedimento cessante ad episcopalem poterit resurgere dignitatem.

Whence, against the said council, since it is one of the four principal ones which, like the four Gospels, the Catholic Church venerates, by no means did their postulation seem to be admissible. § 1. Moreover, certain special cases are found, in which, the aforesaid council notwithstanding, he who has chosen the monastic life can lawfully be assumed again to the episcopate. For if anyone, while the rabid fury of persecution is raging, or with the hindering infirmity of the body, when he cannot make progress in pastoral regimen, descends by the authority of his superior to monastic life, when the impediment of persecution or sickness has ceased, he can rise again to the episcopal dignity.

§ 2. Item si quis propter literaturae defectum, ne tanquam caecus caeco ducatum praebeat, locum regiminis auctoritate apostolica deserendo ad otium se contulerit monachale, ac per exercitium lectionis scientiae repererit margaritam, proculdubio poterit denuo vocatus a Domino cathedram reascendere pastoralem. § 3. Rursus, si quis per cupiditatem parentum, eo tamen penitus ignorante, fuerit episcopatum adeptus, et hoc comperto episcopatum ipsum de licentia superioris dimittens, observantiam elegerit regularem, etsi ad episcopatum eundem redire postmodum nequeat iuxta canonicas sanctiones, ad alium tamen poterit licite reassumi. § 4. Quanquam autem in his et consimilibus casibus is, qui episcopatu dimisso monasticam vitam elegit, resurgere valeat ad officium pastorale, nihil tamen in his contra praescriptum intelligitur concilium attentari, quod in eo loquitur casu, quum propter aliquod crimen episcopatum quis deserens ad vitam monasticam poenitentiae causa descendit.

§ 2. Likewise, if anyone, on account of a defect of literature, lest like a blind man he offer guidance to a blind man, by deserting the place of governance by apostolic authority has betaken himself to monastic leisure, and through the exercise of reading has found the pearl of science, without doubt he will be able, when called anew by the Lord, to reascend the pastoral cathedra. § 3. Again, if anyone, through the cupidity of his parents, he himself, however, wholly unaware, has attained the episcopate, and, this being discovered, with the permission of his superior dismissing that episcopate, has chosen the regular observance, although afterwards he may not be able to return to the same episcopate according to canonical sanctions, yet he can lawfully be reassumed to another. § 4. Although, however, in these and similar cases he who, the episcopate having been laid aside, has chosen the monastic life may be able to rise again to the pastoral office, nevertheless in these it is understood that nothing is attempted against the prescribed council, which speaks in that case when, on account of some crime, someone, abandoning the episcopate, descends to the monastic life for the sake of penitence.

Unde quidam in eo casu loqui dixerunt capitulum supra dictum, quum quis pro crimine, de quo convictus fuerat vel confessus, ab episcopali dignitate depositus, in monasterio exstitit ad poenitentiam agendam inclusus, vel quum aliquis propter grave crimen, pro quo episcopatum retinens poenitentiam digne agere non valebat, cedendi obtenta licentia vitam monachalem elegit. Aliis asserentibus, sic intelligendum esse capitulum antedictum, ut per se resurgere nequeat, id est, repetere quasi debitum quod tali modo dimisit, quanquam eligi possit, praesertim, si locum tantum, et non ordinem resignavit. § 5. Quum ergo nobis plene constare nequiverit, ob quam causam praedictus I. episcopatui olim cesserit, quum in nostris literis, super hoc transmissis, eidem hoc solummodo exprimatur, quod nos, literis super sua resignatione receptis, eius propositum in Domino commendantes, quod temporali honori salutem animae praeponebat, eundem absolvimus ab onere sollicitudinis pastoralis: quanquam per quendam S. Fridiani canonicum nobis nuperrime sit suggestum, quod idcirco dictus Ioachim cedendi licentiam postulabat, quod ad notitiam eius pervenerat, quod quidam parentes ipsius, ut eligeretur in episcopum, quaedam dederant, licet pauca, fraternitati tuae praesentium auctoritate mandamus, quatenus, inquisita super eis diligentissime veritate, si tibi constiterit, quod propter aliquam ex praemissis causis seu consimilibus idem I. episcopatui cesserit memorato, tu auctoritate nostra, sublato cuiuslibet contradictionis et appellationis obstaculo, dummodo necessitas vel utilitas id exposcat, licentiam ei tribuas ascendendi ad regimen ecclesiae Faventinensis, maxime si veritate subnititur, quod tam praefati praepositus et canonici Faventini, quam prior et capitulum sancti Fridiani nobis suis literis expresserunt, quod videlicet dictus I. loco tantummodo cesserit memorato, et non ordini, vel etiam dignitati.

Whence some said that the above-mentioned chapter speaks in that case, when someone, for a crime of which he had been convicted or had confessed, having been deposed from episcopal dignity, was enclosed in a monastery to do penitence; or when someone, on account of a grave crime, for which, while retaining the episcopate, he was not able to do worthy penitence, having obtained leave to resign, chose the monastic life. Others asserting that the aforesaid chapter is to be understood thus: that he cannot rise again by himself, that is, to reclaim as if a debt what he relinquished in such a way, although he can be elected, especially if he resigned only the place and not the order. § 5. Since therefore it could not be fully clear to us for what cause the aforesaid I. once yielded the episcopate, since in our letters sent on this matter this only is expressed to him: that we, letters having been received concerning his resignation, commending in the Lord his purpose, that he preferred the salvation of the soul to temporal honor, absolved him from the burden of pastoral solicitude: although it has been most recently suggested to us by a certain canon of Saint Fridianus that on that account the said Joachim was requesting leave to resign, because it had come to his knowledge that certain of his relatives, in order that he be elected as bishop, had given certain things, albeit few, we command to your fraternity by the authority of these presents that, the truth having been most diligently inquired into concerning these things, if it is established for you that on account of any of the aforesaid causes or the like the same I. yielded the aforesaid episcopate, you, by our authority, with the obstacle of any contradiction and appeal removed, provided necessity or utility calls for it, grant him license to ascend to the regimen of the Faventine church, especially if it is supported by the truth, which both the aforesaid provost and the Faventine canons, and the prior and chapter of Saint Fridianus have expressed to us by their letters, namely, that the said I. resigned only the aforesaid place, and not the order, or even the dignity.

Tunc enim esset vehementissime praesumendum, quod non propter crimen aliquod ab ipso commissum, sed causa poenitentiae peragendae ad vitam migraverit regularem, praesertim quum apostolica sedes post cessionem multo minus quam antea permisisset eidem tali crimine irretito in pontificali ordine ministrare; alioquin, quum durum nimis exstiterit, contra tam solenne concilium huiusmodi postulationem admittere, praeposito et canonicis memoratis iniungas, ut aliam personam sibi idoneam eligant in pastorem. [Dat. Lat.

Then indeed it would be to be most vehemently presumed, that not on account of some crime committed by him, but for the cause of penance to be performed he migrated to the regular life, especially since the apostolic see after the cession would have permitted much less than before that one entangled in such a crime minister in the pontifical order; otherwise, since it would be too hard to admit such a petition against so solemn a council, you shall enjoin the aforesaid provost and canons to choose for themselves another person suitable as a shepherd. [Dat. Lat.

IV. Id. Febr. Pont. nostr.

4. Ides of February. Our pontificate.

Ao. XI. 1208.]

Year 11. 1208.]

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Qui petiit cedendi licentiam, ex quo illam obtinuit, cedere compellitur.

He who sought a license of ceding, from the moment he obtained it, is compelled to cede.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the general council.

Quidam cedendi licentiam cum instantia postulantes, ea obtenta cedere praetermittunt. Sed quum in postulatione cessionis huiusmodi aut ecclesiarum commoda, quibus praesunt, aut salutem videantur propriam attendisse, quorum neutrum suasionibus aliquorum, quaerentium quae sua sunt, seu etiam levitate qualibet nolumus impediri, eos ad cedendum decernimus compellendos.

Certain persons, urgently requesting licence to cede, after obtaining it omit to cede. But since, in the petition of such a cession, they seem to have attended either to the interests of the churches over which they preside or to their own safety, neither of which we are willing to be impeded by the persuasions of some who seek the things that are theirs, or even by any manner of levity, we decree that they are to be compelled to cede.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Non renunciat iuri suo, qui gratiae adversarii se submittit.

He does not renounce his own right, who submits himself to the favor of his adversary.

Honorius III. maioris ecclesiae Decano, et Magistro R. Cantori sancti Dionysii Leodiensis.

Honorius 3. to the Dean of the greater church, and to Master R., Cantor of Saint Dionysius of Liège.

Veniens ad sedem apostolicam I. pauper subdiaconus in nostra proposuit praesentia constitutus, quod, quum bonae memoriae I. Papa praedecessor noster dilecto filio abbati de Emenco Treverensis dioecesis, et maioris ecclesiae ac sancti Pauli cantoribus Treverensibus suis dederit literis in mandatis, ut eidem I., si nihil canonicum obviaret, praebendam in ecclesia sancti Florentini in Confluentia, quam Iacobus decanus ipsius ecclesiae in eius manibus per suas literas resignavit, sublato appellationis obstaculo assignarent eidem, eodem Ioanne literas ipsas praedicto decano et aliis ostendente, idem decanus de resignatione forte poenitens occultavit literas supradictas; demum eidem Ioanni praefatis literis restitutis, eas nominatis iudicibus, ut exsequerentur mandatum apostolicum praesentavit. Quumque iidem iudices apostolicum vellent adimplere mandatum, quidam se opposuerunt canonici ecclesiae memoratae, dicentes, subdiaconum antedictum renunciasse iuri suo, quod sibi ex ipsis literis competebat. Dicto igitur subdiacono hoc negante, iam dicti canonici ad hoc probandum testes aliquos produxerunt.

Coming to the apostolic see, I., a poor subdeacon, standing in our presence, set forth that, when of good memory Pope I., our predecessor, had given by his letters in mandate to our beloved son the abbot of Emenco of the Trier diocese, and to the cantors of the greater church and of Saint Paul at Trier, that to that same I., if nothing canonical should obstruct, they should assign to him, with the obstacle of appeal removed, the prebend in the church of Saint Florentinus in Confluence, which James, the dean of that church, had resigned into his hands by his letters, the same John, showing those letters to the aforesaid dean and others, the same dean, perhaps repenting of the resignation, concealed the abovesaid letters; at length, those aforesaid letters having been restored to the said John, he presented them to the judges named, that they might execute the apostolic mandate. And when the same judges wished to fulfill the apostolic mandate, certain canons of the aforesaid church set themselves in opposition, saying that the aforementioned subdeacon had renounced his right which accrued to him from those very letters. Therefore, the said subdeacon denying this, the already-mentioned canons produced some witnesses to prove it.

Per quos quum videretur probatum, ipsum se gratiae capituli commisisse, duo iudices praedictorum, cantores videlicet Treverenses, sententialiter decreverunt, eundem Ioannem non posse uti de cetero literis supradictis, pro eo, quod idem I. sic adversarii se gratiae commisisset, per quod visus est renunciasse iuri, sibi ex ipsis literis competenti. A qua sententia idem I. appellans, licet etiam antea appellasset, in vigiliam Epiphaniae proximo praeteritam terminum suae appellationis praefixit. Ad quem quum idem I. venisset, et nobis, prout superius est expressum, facti seriem enarraret, dilectum filium Petrum de Colle medio, capellanum nostrum, super hoc sibi concessimus auditorem.

Through whom, when it seemed proven that he had committed himself to the favor of the chapter, two of the aforesaid judges, namely the Trier cantors, by sentence decreed that the same John could not henceforth make use of the above‑said letters, on the ground that the same I., having thus committed himself to the favor of his adversary, thereby seemed to have renounced the right competent to him from those letters. From which sentence the same I., appealing—although he had even appealed before—prefixed the term of his appeal on the vigil of Epiphany last past. To which when the same I. had come, and related to us, as is expressed above, the series of the case, we granted to him as auditor in this matter our beloved son Peter of Collemedio, our chaplain.

Sed quum eius adversarius non accesserit, per duos menses et amplius exspectatus, nec ullus compareret pro eo sufficiens responsalis, tandem quidam literas habens ad contradicendum et impetrandum coram eodem comparuit auditore. Qui quum de iure ad tractandum causam minus sufficiens crederetur, auditori praedicto, nobis haec omnia referenti, dedimus in mandatis, ut super hoc aliquos de fratribus consuleret, et in causa procederet iuxta consilium eorundem: idem auditor habito consilio dilecti filii nostri T. tituli Sabinae presbyteri cardinalis ac etiam aliorum, sententiam praedictorum iudicum sententialiter iustitia exigente cassavit. Nos igitur ratam et firmam habemus capellani sententiam memorati, vobis per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus revocantes in irritum, quicquid inveneritis post appellationem ad nos interpositam attentatum, sententia iudicum Treverensium non obstante, praedictam praebendam eidem subdiacono, nisi aliud canonicum obiectum fuerit et probatum, quare id non debeat adimpleri, auctoritate apostolica sublato appellationis obstaculo conferatis.

But when his adversary had not appeared, having been awaited for two months and more, and no sufficiently competent respondent presented himself for him, at last a certain man, having letters to contradict and to obtain, appeared before the same auditor. And since he was believed less sufficient in law to handle the case, we gave a mandate to the aforesaid auditor, who reported all these things to us, that he should consult some of the brethren on this matter, and proceed in the case according to their counsel: the same auditor, having taken counsel with our beloved son T., cardinal presbyter of the title of Sabina, and also with others, annulled by sentence, justice requiring it, the sentence of the aforesaid judges. We therefore hold as ratified and firm the sentence of the aforesaid chaplain, and by apostolic writings we command you that, revoking into nullity whatever you shall find to have been attempted after the appeal to us was interposed, notwithstanding the sentence of the Trier judges, you confer by apostolic authority, the obstacle of the appeal being removed, the aforesaid prebend upon the same subdeacon, unless another canonical objection shall have been raised and proved why that ought not to be fulfilled.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Si praelatus ab obedientia subditos absolvit, non propter hoc praelaturae renunciat.

If a prelate absolves his subjects from obedience, he does not on that account renounce his prelature.

Idem Archiepiscopo Treverensi.

The same to the Archbishop of Trier.

Lectae coram nobis fraternitatis tuae literae continebant, quod abbas sancti Petri Tullensis, quem de conversationis et vitae honestate commendas, tibi humiliter est confessus, quod, quum adeo gravi aegritudine laboraret, quod de vita desperaretur ipsius, ad cuiusdam aemuli sui consilium, de quo ipse, quum non crederet eum aemulum, confidebat, in quorundam monachorum suorum praesentia, excommunicationis sententia, si quam in eorum aliquem protulerat, revocata, monachos suos ab obedientia, in qua sibi tenebantur, absolvit, vocato dioecesano episcopo, ut abbatiam in eius manibus resignaret; quod tamen usus consilio saniori non fecit, et licet eidem abbati postmodum restituto sanitati, universi et singuli de conventu obedientiam et reverentiam requisiti ab eo in capitulo promiserunt. Idem tamen super eo, quod sic fecerat, dubitans, a te, ut super hoc saluti suae consuleres, postulavit, propter quod tu, quum habito super hoc iuris peritorum consilio diversi diversa sentirent, nostrum consilium, an idem abbas ex hoc resignaverit, requisisti. Nos autem ex tali facto duntaxat eundem abbatem suo resignasse regimini non videmus.

The letters of your fraternity, read before us, contained that the abbot of Saint Peter of Toul, whom you commend for the honesty of conversation and of life, humbly confessed to you that, when he was laboring with so grave a sickness that his life was despaired of, at the counsel of a certain rival of his, in whom he trusted, since he did not believe him to be a rival, in the presence of certain of his monks, with the sentence of excommunication—if he had pronounced any against any of them—revoked, he absolved his monks from the obedience in which they were held to him, the diocesan bishop having been summoned, in order that he might resign the abbacy into his hands; which, however, making use of sounder counsel, he did not do; and although afterward, when the same abbot had been restored to health, all and each of the convent, when required by him in chapter, promised obedience and reverence. Nevertheless, the same man, doubting concerning that which he had thus done, asked of you that you would in this matter provide for his salvation; wherefore you, since upon this, when counsel of jurists had been had, different men felt different things, asked our counsel whether that same abbot had resigned on account of this. But we, from such a deed only, do not see that that abbot has resigned his governance.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Abbas exemptus sine licentia Papae renunciare non potest.

An exempt abbot cannot resign without the Pope’s license.

Gregorius IX. Agathensi et Uticensi Episcopis.

Gregory 9. To the Bishops of Agde and Utica.

Dilecti filii conventus monasterii sancti G. de Desertis immediate ad Romanam pertinentis ecclesiam, suis nobis literis intimaverunt, quod abbas eorum, sentiens se insufficientem oneri regiminis abbatiae, cessit in manibus eorundem; ipsi quoque dilectum filium G. monachum sancti Victoris Massiliensis elegerunt canonice in abbatem, supplicantes, ut eorum parcentes laboribus et expensis, electionem ipsorum faceremus in illis partibus confirmari. Quum igitur dictus abbas cedere sine licentia nostra nequiverit, nos tam electionem quam cessionem praedictas decernentes irritas et inanes, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus abbatem ipsum loco suo restitui faciatis, quo integre restituto vice nostra recipiatis cessionem ipsius.

The beloved sons of the convent of the monastery of Saint G. of the Deserts, immediately pertaining to the Roman Church, have intimated to us by their letters that their abbot, feeling himself unequal to the burden of the governance of the abbacy, resigned into the hands of the same; they likewise canonically elected the beloved son G., a monk of Saint Victor of Massilia (Marseilles), as abbot, supplicating that, sparing their labors and expenses, we would cause their election to be confirmed in those parts. Since therefore the said abbot could not resign without our license, we, declaring both the aforesaid election and resignation null and void, command to your discretion by apostolic writings that you cause the abbot himself to be restituted to his place, and, he having been fully restored, in our stead you are to receive his resignation.

TITULUS X. DE SUPPLENDA NEGLIGENTIA PRAELATORUM.

TITLE 10. ON SUPPLYING THE NEGLIGENCE OF PRELATES.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Si dioecesanus requisitus benedicere nolit Cisterciensem abbatem, ipse monachos suos benedicere poterit.

If the diocesan, when requested, is unwilling to bless a Cistercian abbot, he himself will be able to bless his own monks.

Alexander III. Cisterciensibus.

Alexander 3. To the Cistercians.

Statuimus praeterea, ut, si episcopus tertio cum humilitate ac devotione, sicut convenit, requisitus substitutos abbates vestros benedicere forte renuerit, eisdem abbatibus liceat proprios monachos benedicere, et alia, quae ad officium huiusmodi pertinent, exercere, donec ipsi episcopi suam duritiam recogitent, et abbates [benedicendos] benedicere non recusent. [Sane etc. Dat.

We furthermore decree that, if the bishop, when asked for the third time with humility and devotion, as is fitting, to bless your substituted abbots, should perhaps refuse, it shall be permitted to those same abbots to bless their own monks, and to exercise the other things which pertain to an office of this kind, until the bishops themselves reconsider their hardness, and do not refuse to bless the abbots [to be blessed]. [Indeed etc. Dated.

Beneventi IV. Non. Iul. Ind.

At Benevento, 4. Nones of July, Indiction.

II. 1169.]

2. 1169.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Regulares in suos usus convertere non possunt ecclesias, in quibus ius obtinent patronatus, et, si infra tempus Lateranensis concilii, quando vacant, non praesentent rectores ad eas, superior orbinabit easdem.

Regulars cannot convert to their own uses the churches in which they hold the right of patronage; and, if within the time-limit of the Lateran Council, when they fall vacant, they do not present rectors to them, the superior will provide for the same.

Clemens III.

Clement 3.

Sicut nobis tua fraternitas intimavit, monachi quidam et canonici regulares, ecclesias, quae ad praesentationem eorum pertinent, in tuo episcopatu habentes, propriis usibus deputare nituntur, nec ibi volunt ad eas, quum vacaverint, vocare personas [idoneas]; quin potius, occasione concessionis quorundam episcoporum, vicarios in eis pro sua instituunt et destituunt voluntate, admissos ita pensionibus onerantes, quod nec ecclesiis competenter possunt in paupertate nimia deservire, nec episcopo in episcopalibus respondere, neque hospitalitatem, sicut convenit, transeuntibus impertiri. Nolentes autem, ut status ecclesiae debitus et antiquus per insolertiam alicuius subvertatur, mandamus, quatenus, nisi a iurisdictione tua exemptae sint ecclesiae supradictae, praedictos excessus studeas rationabiliter emendare, et, nisi praedictae personae infra tempus in Lateranensi concilio constitutum ad vacantes ecclesias tibi personas idoneas praesentaverint, ex tunc tibi liceat appellatione remota in eisdem ordinare rectores, qui eis et praeesse noverint et prodesse, ita tamen, quod ex hoc nullum patronis praeiudicium in posterum generetur. [Dat.

Just as your brotherhood has intimated to us, certain monks and canons regular, holding in your bishopric churches which pertain to their presentation, strive to assign them to their own uses, nor are they willing to call to them, when they have become vacant, [suitable] persons; nay rather, taking occasion from the concession of certain bishops, they appoint and remove vicars in them at their will, burdening those admitted with pensions in such wise that they can neither duly serve the churches in excessive poverty, nor answer the bishop in episcopal matters, nor impart hospitality, as is fitting, to those passing through. Not wishing, moreover, that the due and ancient status of the Church be overthrown through anyone’s unskillfulness, we command that, unless the aforesaid churches are exempt from your jurisdiction, you strive reasonably to amend the aforesaid excesses; and, unless the aforesaid persons within the time established in the Lateran council shall have presented to you suitable persons for the vacant churches, from that point it shall be permitted to you, appeal set aside, to ordain rectors in the same, who will know both to preside over them and to benefit them—provided, however, that from this no prejudice be generated to the patrons in the future. [Given.

Lat. VI. Kal. Mart.

Lateran, 24 February.

Pont. nostr. Ao. II. 1199].

of our pontificate, year 2, 1199].

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Supplet superior inferioris negligentiam in beneficiis conferendis, si tempus Lateranensis concilii lapsum sit, et collatio per inferiorem postea facta non valet.

The superior supplies for the negligence of the inferior in conferring benefices, if the time prescribed by the Lateran Council has elapsed, and a collation thereafter made by the inferior is not valid.

Innocentius III.

Innocent III.

Licet dilecti filii magister H. archidiaconus de H. et R. procurator R. de sancto Cadimundo super archidiaconatu Richemundiae diutius litigaverint coram nobis, tamen postmodum nostris est auribus intimatum, quod neutri eorum de iure competeret, utpote qui neutri fuerat concessus infra tempus in Lateranensi concilio definitum. Ne igitur ius nostrum negligere videamur, qui alios in sua iustitia confovemus, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus convocatis eisdem, ut proponant, si quid contra duxerint proponendum, inquiratis diligentius veritatem, et si vobis constiterit, archidiaconatum Richemundiae vacasse per annum, tempore tamen semestri, quo vel ad archiepiscopum, vel ad capitulum donatio pertinebat, non a vocatione, sed a notitia computato, quum pro eo, quod Eboracensis archiepiscopus alium superiorem non habet, extunc fuerat ad nos donatio devoluta, utrique super eo sublato appellationis obstaculo silentium imponatis, archidiaconatum ad nostram spectare donationem publice denunciantes, decernentes irritum et inane, si quid in eo postmodum quisquam praesumserit ordinare.

Although our beloved sons, Master H., archdeacon of H., and R., proctor of R. of Saint Cadimund, have long litigated before us concerning the archdeaconry of Richmond, nevertheless it was afterward intimated to our ears that it belonged by right to neither of them, inasmuch as it had been granted to neither within the time defined in the Lateran Council. Therefore, lest we seem to neglect our right, we who foster others in their justice, we mandate to your discretion by apostolic writings that, having convoked the same parties, so that they may propose whatever they shall deem to be proposed against this, you inquire more diligently into the truth; and if it is established for you that the archdeaconry of Richmond stood vacant for a year—the six-month period (semester), however, during which the donation pertained either to the archbishop or to the chapter, being computed not from convocation but from notice—since, because the archbishop of York has no other superior, the donation had from then devolved to us, you are to impose silence on both concerning this, the obstacle of appeal being removed, publicly announcing that the archdeaconry pertains to our donation, decreeing null and void whatever anyone may thereafter presume to ordain in it.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Si is, ad quem spectat beneficii collatio, lapso tempore Lateranensis concilii consecrat; non valet collatio: nisi de misericordia toleretur.

If he, to whom the collation of the benefice pertains, consecrates after the time of the Lateran Council has lapsed; the collation is not valid: unless it be tolerated out of mercy.

Idem Magistro P. de Castro novo, et R. monacho Fontis frigidi, apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same, to Master P. of Castrum Novum, and to R., a monk of Fons Frigidus, Legate of the Apostolic See.

Literas vestrae discretionis accepimus [quibus responsum apostolicum imploratis super his, quae ambigua vobis exsistunt, videlicet], quod, quum in quibusdam ecclesiis, legationi vestrae subiectis, quaedam beneficia et dignitates tanto tempore vacavissent, quod tam praelati quam capitula secundum tenorem Lateranensis concilii essent iure instituendi privati, postquam adventus vester [illis] innotuit, in beneficiis illis personas minus idoneas instituere praesumpserunt. Unde, quum receperitis consilium a viris peritis, ut tales institutiones ab his, quorum non intererat, et qui propria culpa iure instituendi se privaverant, factas, auctoritate apostolica cassaretis, in hoc nostrum prius decrevistis consilium habere. Proposuistis praeterea etc.

We have received the letters of your discretion [in which you implore an apostolic response concerning those things which are ambiguous to you, namely], that, since in certain churches subject to your legation certain benefices and dignities had remained vacant for so long a time that both prelates and chapters, according to the tenor of the Lateran Council, were by right deprived of instituting, after your arrival [to them] became known, they presumed to institute less suitable persons into those benefices. Whence, since you have received counsel from skilled men, that such institutions, made by those to whom it did not pertain and who by their own fault had deprived themselves of the right of instituting, you should annul by apostolic authority, in this you resolved first to have our counsel. You further proposed, etc.

Nos igitur inquisitioni vestrae breviter respondentes Discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si beneficia vel dignitates ipsas noveritis personis idoneis assignatas, eas de patientia permittatis ab ipsis pacifice possideri: alioquin personas ipsas amoventes prorsus ab ipsis, eas de personis idoneis auctoritate nostra suffulti, [nullius contradictionis vel appellationis obstaculo] non differatis quantocius ordinare, [contradictores etc. Dat. Rom.

We therefore, briefly responding to your inquiry, command Your Discretion by apostolic writings, that, if you shall know the benefices or the dignities themselves to have been assigned to suitable persons, you allow them by sufferance to be peacefully possessed by them: otherwise, removing those persons entirely from the same, supported by our authority, [with no obstacle of any contradiction or appeal] do not defer as quickly as possible to ordain them from suitable persons, [the contradictors etc. Given at Rome.

ap. S. Petr. VIII. Id. Dec.

at St. Peter’s December 6.

Ao. VII. 1204.]

Year 7. 1204.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Is, ad quem primo loco spectabat collatio beneficii, lapso tempore Lateranensis concilii conferre non poterit.

He, to whom in the first place the collation of the benefice pertained, with the time appointed by the Lateran Council having lapsed, will not be able to confer it.

Idem Episcopo Samo.

The same to Bishop Samo.

Dilecto filio nostro P. tituli sancti Marcellini presbytero cardinali S. et R. procuratoribus P. et G. apud sedem apostolicam constitutis auditore concesso, idem thesaurarius proposuit coram eo, quod, quum in Salamantina ecclesia, in qua cantoris electio ad episcopum et capitulum communiter pertinet, cantoria vacante, dictum capitulum saepius episcopum monuisset, ut ad celebrandam cantoris electionem cum eo pariter conveniret, eodem episcopo infra semestre tempus id facere negligente, capitulum uti cupiens iure suo, in ecclesiae memoratae capitulo, sicut est moris, supradictum Paschasium eiusdem loci canonicum in cantorem elegit, ne quid in eiusdem electionis praeiudicium fieret appellando, quam supradictus thesaurarius auctoritate apostolica petiit confirmari, ac electionem, quam venerabilis frater noster Compostellanus archiepiscopus post appellationem huiusmodi de G. clerico multis criminibus irretito ac tunc temporis vinculo excommunicationis adstricto fecerat, tamquam minus canonice celebratam cassari. Dictus vero Dominicus proposuit ex adverso, quod, emenso VI. mensium spatio, infra quod ad episcopum et capitulum cantoris electio pertinebat, decanus et quidam canonici Salamantini, episcopo, archidiacono et nonnullis canonicis qui praesentes in civitate aderant, inconsultis, non consueta hora, vel in capitulo iuxta morem, sed in ecclesia potius, quibusdam laicis advocatis stulte et inordinate nimis eligere praesumpserunt. Et quum iam dicti archiepiscopi, qui eos propter hoc evocaverat, adire praesentiam noluissent, ipse intelligens eligendi auctoritatem ad se iuxta Lateranensis concilii statutum devolutam, supradictum G. in cantorem elegit, et eundem fecit de cantoria corporaliter investiri.

To our beloved son P., presbyter-cardinal of the title of Saint Marcellinus, to S. and R., procurators of P. and G., appointed at the Apostolic See, an auditor having been granted, the same treasurer put forward before him that, when in the church of Salamanca, in which the election of the cantor pertains in common to the bishop and the chapter, the cantory being vacant, the said chapter had often warned the bishop that he should likewise come together with it to celebrate the election of a cantor, the same bishop, neglecting to do this within a half-year’s time, the chapter, wishing to use its right, in the chapter of the aforesaid church, as is the custom, elected the above-named Paschasius, a canon of the same place, as cantor, making an appeal lest anything be done to the prejudice of the same election; which the aforesaid treasurer sought to have confirmed by apostolic authority, and that the election which our venerable brother the archbishop of Compostela had made, after such an appeal, of G., a cleric entangled in many crimes and at that time bound by the bond of excommunication, be quashed as less canonically celebrated. But the said Dominic put forward on the contrary that, the space of 6. months having elapsed, within which the election of a cantor belonged to the bishop and the chapter, the dean and certain Salamancan canons, without consulting the bishop, the archdeacon, and some canons who were present in the city, not at the customary hour nor in the chapter according to the usage, but rather in the church, having summoned certain laymen, presumed to elect foolishly and most inordinately. And when they were unwilling to appear before the aforesaid archbishop, who had summoned them for this reason, he, understanding that the authority of electing had devolved to him according to the statute of the Lateran council, elected the aforesaid G. as cantor, and caused that same man to be corporally invested with the cantory.

Postmodum autem decanus et sui complices nobis, de his mentione non habita, suggerendo, quod episcopus, qui monitus saepius infra sex menses eligere noluerat in ecclesiae detrimentum, cantore, qui ab eodem decano cum maiore parte capituli institutus fuerat, spoliato, alium instituerat in cantorem, ad decanum, archidiaconum et archipresbyterum Abulenses nostras literas impetrarunt. Quarum auctoritate, quum supradictus G. ab eisdem fuisset iudicibus evocatus, eisdem inhibuit, ne per dictas literas procederent contra eum, quum in eis de sua electione facta per archiepiscopum nulla mentio haberetur, et cum propter hoc, tum [etiam], quia prima citatione ad loca remota peremptorie citatus exstiterat, tum etiam, quia iudices quosdam ex electoribus dicti Paschasii consanguinitatis linea contingebant, ad sedem apostolicam appellavit. Sed iudices nihilominus ad Salamantinam ecclesiam accedentes, saepedictum P. in cantoriae possessionem causa rei servandae contra iustitiam induxerunt.

Afterwards, however, the dean and his accomplices, making no mention of these things to us, by suggesting that the bishop—who, though often warned within six months, had been unwilling to elect, to the detriment of the church—after the cantor, who had been instituted by the same dean with the greater part of the chapter, had been despoiled, had instituted another as cantor, obtained our letters to the dean, archdeacon, and archpriest of Ávila. By the authority of these, when the aforesaid G. had been summoned by the same judges, he inhibited those same men from proceeding against him by the said letters, since in them no mention was had of his election made by the archbishop; and both for this reason, [also] because at the first citation he had been peremptorily cited to remote places, and also because certain of the judges were connected by a line of consanguinity with some of the electors of the said Paschasius, he appealed to the apostolic see. But the judges, nevertheless, going to the Salamantine church, brought the oft-said P. into possession of the cantorate, against justice, under the pretext of preserving the matter (causa rei servandae).

Quum igitur super his et aliis coram eodem cardinali procuratores ipsi aliquamdiu litigassent, et ipse nobis fideliter retulisset, quae proposita fuerant coram eo, Quia nobis constitit a Salamantino decano et eius sequacibus, post elapsum sex mensium spatium, infra quod episcopus et capitulum, prout communiter spectabat ad eos, procedere ad electionem cantoris neglexerant, electionem supradicti P. minus canonice celebratam, eandem decernimus irritam et inanem, et appellationem a decano et suis fautoribus interpositam factum archiepiscopi, ad quem iam erat eligendi auctoritas devoluta, nequivisse aliquatenus impedire. Quia vero contra personam ipsius G. quaedam obiecta fuerunt de quibus nobis non potuit fieri plena fides, [discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta] Mandamus, quatenus, nisi iam dicto G. aliquod canonicum obviet, electionem de ipso factam sublato appellationis obstaculo confirmetis, facientes ipsum eiusdem cantoriae pacifica possessione gaudere; contradictores etc. [Dat.

Since, therefore, concerning these and other matters before the same cardinal the procurators had litigated for some time, and he had faithfully reported to us what had been proposed before him, since it was established for us that by the Salamantine dean and his followers—after the lapse of the space of six months, within which the bishop and the chapter, as it commonly pertained to them, had neglected to proceed to the election of a cantor—the election of the aforesaid P. had been celebrated less canonically, we decree the same to be void and null, and that the appeal interposed by the dean and his favorers could in no wise impede the act of the archbishop, to whom the authority of electing had already devolved. But because certain things were objected against the person of that G., concerning which full proof could not be made to us, [to your discretion by apostolic writings] we command that, unless some canonical impediment opposes the already-mentioned G., you confirm the election made of him, the obstacle of the appeal being removed, causing him to enjoy the peaceful possession of the same cantorate; the contradictors, etc. [Given.

Lat. V. Kal. Nov.

Lateran, October 28.

Ao. XIII. 1210.]

In the year 13. 1210.]

TITULUS XI. DE TEMPORIBUS ORDINATIONUM ET QUALITATE ORDINANDORUM.

TITLE 11. ON THE TIMES OF ORDINATIONS AND THE QUALITY OF THOSE TO BE ORDAINED.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Diebus dominicis vel sabbato Pentecostes sacri ordines ab alio, quam a Papa, conferri non debent.

On Sundays or on the Saturday of Pentecost, sacred orders ought not to be conferred by anyone other than the Pope.

Alexander III. Batoniensi Episcopo.

Alexander 3. To the Bishop of Bath.

Subdiaconos autem nulli, nisi Romano Pontifici, liceat in diebus dominicis ordinare, quamvis consecrandi Deo dicatas virgines, et minores ordines his diebus habeant licentiam celebrandi. Sabbato quidem Pentecostes non liceat alicui sacros ordines celebrare, quum in sequenti septimana recepta Spiritus sancti gratia celebrentur.

But let it be permitted to no one, except the Roman Pontiff, to ordain subdeacons on the Lord’s days, although on these days there is license to celebrate the consecration of virgins dedicated to God and the minor orders. Indeed, on the Saturday of Pentecost let it be permitted to no one to celebrate sacred orders, since in the subsequent week, the grace of the Holy Spirit having been received, they are celebrated.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Non valet consuetudo, quod extra statuta tempora sacri ordines conferantur.

Custom is not valid, whereby sacred orders are conferred outside the statuted times.

Idem Episcopo Herfordensi.

The same to the Bishop of Herford.

Sane super eo, quod moris esse dixisti in ecclesiis quibusdam Scotiae et Valliae in dedicationibus ecclesiarum vel altarium extra ieiunia quatuor temporum clericos ad sacros ordines promovere, prudentiae tuae significamus, quod consuetudo illa, utpote institutioni ecclesiasticae inimica, et detestabilis est et penitus improbanda, et, nisi multitudo et antiqua consuetudo terrae esset [in causa] taliter ordinati non deberent permitti in susceptis ordinibus ministrare. Nam apud nos sic ordinati deponerentur, et ordinantes privarentur auctoritate ordinandi. [De eo autem etc.

Indeed, concerning that which you said is the custom in certain churches of Scotland and Wales, at the dedications of churches or altars, to promote clerics to sacred orders outside the fasts of the four seasons, we signify to your prudence that that custom, as being inimical to ecclesiastical institution, is both detestable and utterly to be disapproved, and, unless the multitude and the ancient custom of the land were [as the cause], those ordained in such a manner ought not to be permitted to minister in the orders they have received. For with us those so ordained would be deposed, and the ordainers would be deprived of the authority of ordaining. [But concerning this, etc.

cf. cap. seq.]

compare the following chapter.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Minores ordines conferri possunt diebus festis, sacri vero conferri debent in quatuor temporibus, vel sabbato sancto, vel sabbato de passione.

The minor orders can be conferred on feast days, but the sacred [orders] ought to be conferred in the four Ember seasons, or on Holy Saturday, or on the Saturday of the Passion.

Idem eidem.

The same to the same.

De eo autem, quod quaesivisti, an liceat extra ieiunia quatuor temporum aliquos in ostiarios, lectores, exorcistas, vel acolythos promovere, aut etiam subdiaconos promovere, prudentiae tuae taliter respondemus, quod licitum est episcopis, dominicis et aliis festivis diebus unum aut duos ad minores ordines promovere; sed ad subdiaconatum, nisi in quatuor temporibus, aut in sabbato sancto, vel in sabbato ante dominicam de passione, nulli episcoporum, praeterquam Romano Pontifici, licet aliquos ordinare.

Concerning that, moreover, which you have asked—whether it is permitted, outside the fasts of the four seasons, to promote some to ostiaries, lectors, exorcists, or acolytes, or even to promote subdeacons—we thus respond to your prudence: that it is permitted to bishops, on Sundays and other festal days, to promote one or two to the minor orders; but to the subdiaconate, except in the four seasons, or on Holy Saturday, or on the Saturday before the Sunday of the Passion, it is permitted to none of the bishops, except the Roman Pontiff, to ordain any.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Criminosus occultus moneri potest, ne promoveatur ad ordines, sed prohiberi non debet.

A hidden criminal may be admonished, lest he be promoted to orders, but he ought not to be prohibited.

Idem.

The same.

Ex tenore tuarum literarum accepimus, quod N. clericus adeo deliquit, quod, si peccatum eius esset publicum, de gradaretur ab ordine, quem suscepit, et amplius non posset ad superiores ordines promoveri. Verum quoniam peccatum ipsius fore occultum et privatum dixisti, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus poenitentiam ei condignam imponas, et ei suadeas, ut parte poenitentiae peracta ordine suscepto utatur, quo contentus exsistens ad superiores ordines amplius non ascendat. Verum tamen, quia peccatum occultum est, si promoveri voluerit, eum non potes, nec debes aliqua ratione prohibere.

From the tenor of your letters we have gathered that N., a cleric, has so offended that, if his sin were public, he would be de-graded from the order he has undertaken, and could no longer be promoted to superior orders. But since you have said his sin will be occult and private, we command your fraternity by apostolic writings to impose on him a condign penance, and to advise him that, with part of the penance completed, he should make use of the order assumed, and, being content with that, should no further ascend to superior orders. Nevertheless, because the sin is occult, if he wishes to be promoted, you cannot, nor ought you by any rationale, forbid him.

[Datum Beneventi IV. Kal. Maii.]

[Given at Benevento on the 4th day before the Kalends of May.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Religiosus contra prohibitionem praelati sui ordinari non debet.

A religious ought not to be ordained against the prohibition of his prelate.

Lucius III. Archiepiscopo Turonensi.

Lucius 3. To the Archbishop of Tours.

Ad aures nostras te significante pervenit, quod religiosi quidam zelum Dei habentes ad superiores desiderant ordines promoveri, putantes, maius praemium cumulandum, quo in maiore gradu positi sublimius officium fuerint, exsecuti; sed praelati eorum desideriis contradicunt. Ideoque tua duxit fraternitas requirendum, an in inferioribus ordinibus constituti iuxta beneplacitum suorum praelatorum, quibus promotio displicet, a superioribus debeant abstinere, an valeant praelatis suis renitentibus promoveri. Tuae igitur quaestioni taliter respondemus, quod honestius et tutius est subiectis debitam praepositis obedientiam impendendo in inferiori ministerio deservire, quam cum praepositorum scandalo graduum appetere dignitatem.

It has come to our ears, you signifying it, that certain religious, having zeal of God, desire to be promoted to higher orders, thinking that a greater premium is to be heaped up, inasmuch as, being set in a higher grade, they will have executed a more sublime office; but their prelates contradict their desires. Wherefore your fraternity has thought it to be inquired whether those constituted in inferior orders ought, according to the good pleasure of their prelates, to whom promotion is displeasing, to abstain from higher orders, or whether they may be promoted with their prelates resisting. To your question, therefore, we thus respond: that it is more honest and safer to serve in an inferior ministry by expending due obedience to superiors set over them, than to appetite the dignity of grades with scandal to their superiors.

Nec est in hac parte subiectorum desiderium confovendum, quoniam esse potest, quod praelati eorum commissa secreta noverint, ex quibus constat eis, quod salva conscientia nequeunt sublimari, quia non in sublimitate graduum, sed in amplitudine caritatis acquiritur regnum Dei.

Nor in this matter is the desire of subjects to be fostered, since it may be that their prelates know entrusted secrets, from which it is clear to them that, with conscience safe, they cannot be raised on high; because the kingdom of God is acquired not in the sublimity of grades, but in the amplitude of charity.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Metropolitanus ab omnibus suffraganeis consecratur; suffraganeus vero a tribus, metropolitano iubente.

The Metropolitan is consecrated by all the suffragans; but a suffragan by three, at the metropolitan’s command.

Idem.

The same.

Si archiepiscopus [diem] obierit, et alter fuerit ordinandus archiepiscopus [electus], omnes episcopi eiusdem provinciae ad sedem metropolitanam conveniant, ut ab omnibus ipse eligatur et ordinetur. Oportet autem, ut ipse, qui illis omnibus praeesse debet, ab omnibus illis eligatur et ordinetur. Reliqui vero comprovinciales episcopi, si necesse fuerit, ceteris consentientibus, a tribus iussu archiepiscopi poterunt ordinari; sed melius est, si ipse cum omnibus eum, qui dignus est, elegerit, et cuncti pariter pontificem consecraverint.

If the archbishop has died [his day], and another archbishop [elect] is to be ordained, let all the bishops of the same province convene at the metropolitan seat, so that by all he may be chosen and ordained. Moreover, it is fitting that he who ought to preside over them all be chosen and ordained by them all. But the remaining fellow‑provincial bishops, if it is necessary, with the others consenting, can be ordained by three at the order of the archbishop; but it is better if he, together with all, has chosen the one who is worthy, and all together have consecrated the pontiff.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Dicit idem, quod in praecedenti.

It says the same as in the preceding.

Ex concilio Arelatensi.

From the council of Arles.

Ne episcopi sine metropolitani permissu, nec episcopus metropolitanus sine tribus vel duobus episcopis comprovincialibus praesumat episcopum ordinare, ita, ut alii episcopi comprovinciales admoneantur epistolis, ut se suo responso significent consensisse. Quod si inter partes aliqua [nata] dubitatio fuerit, maiori numero metropolitanus in electione consentiat.

Let not bishops presume to ordain a bishop without the permission of the metropolitan, nor the metropolitan bishop without three or two co-provincial bishops, in such wise that the other co-provincial bishops be admonished by letters, so that by their own reply they indicate that they have consented. But if some [arisen] doubt should be between the parties, let the metropolitan in the election agree with the greater number.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Ordinatus extra tempora suspenditur, donec dispensetur cum eo, et ordinans punitur.

One ordained outside the appointed times is suspended, until a dispensation is granted to him, and the ordainer is punished.

Urbanus III. Archiepiscopo Pisano.

Urban III. To the Archbishop of Pisa.

Quum quidam episcopi Sardi, sicut nobis est ex tua parte propositum, quibusdam pecuniam, sicut iuramento tenebantur adstricti, non solverint, et quidam episcopus ipsius terrae in die dedicationis ecclesiae ordines, quum dies ille ad hoc institutus non fuerit, celebraverit, quidam etiam iuraverint aliquando, quod fratri vel sorori, patri vel matri loqui non debeant, aut quodlibet eis subsidium ministrare, a nobis, quid de huiusmodi faciendum sit, tua fraternitas requisivit. Nos itaque denegare nolentes quod a nobis caritate suggerente postulare videris, discretioni tuae praesentibus literis respondemus, quod in episcopos illos, qui suum transgressi sunt iuramentum, est tanto gravius vindicandum, quanto maiori praeeminent dignitate, et eorum exemplo facilius alii poterunt ad similia provocari. Episcopum autem, qui die, quo non debuit, ordines celebravit, canonica disciplina corrigere, et ordinatos a susceptis ordinibus tamdiu reddere debes expertes, donec apud nos vel successores nostros restitutionis gratiam consequantur.

When certain bishops of Sardinia, as it has been set forth to us on your part, did not pay certain money, as they were held bound by oath to do, and a certain bishop of that land on the day of a church’s dedication celebrated orders, although that day had not been instituted for this, and some have even at some time sworn that they ought not to speak to a brother or sister, father or mother, or to furnish them any aid whatsoever, your fraternity has asked of us what ought to be done in such cases. We therefore, unwilling to deny what you seem to ask of us with charity suggesting, respond to your discretion by these present letters, that upon those bishops who have transgressed their oath, so much the more grievously must vindication be taken, the more they pre‑eminent in dignity, and by their example others can more easily be provoked to like things. But the bishop who celebrated orders on a day on which he ought not, you must correct by canonical discipline, and you must render those ordained deprived of the orders they have received, until they obtain from us or our successors the grace of restitution.

Illi vero qui iurant non loqui patri, vel matri, vel sorori, vel fratri, aut eis humanitatis subsidium exhibere, absolvendi sunt ab illius observantia iuramenti, quum illicitum sit, et omni contrarium rationi, iniuncta tamen eis de hoc, quod male iuraverunt, poenitentia competenti.

But those who swear not to speak to their father, or mother, or sister, or brother, or to render to them the succor of humanity, are to be absolved from the observance of that oath, since it is illicit and contrary to all reason, yet with a suitable penance enjoined on them for this, that they swore badly.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Graeci a Latinis ordinari non debent, nec econtra, si in ritu ordinandi sunt diversi.

Greeks ought not to be ordained by Latins, nor conversely, if they are different in the rite of ordaining.

Coelestinus III. Hidronensi Archiepiscopo.

Celestine 3. To the Archbishop of Hydruntum.

Quum secundum regulas ecclesiasticas et sanctorum instituta Pontificum sacri sunt ordines in certis temporibus conferendi, quidam Graeci episcopi ritus sui et consuetudinis observantiam in Latinos clericos exercentes, eos ad sacros ordines passim provehunt, qui non sunt praeterquam in IV. temporibus conferendi. Sane sicut latoris praesentium Io. relatione cognovimus, quod, quum ipse a quodam domino, cui servierat, et ut in capella sua divina officia celebraret, cuidam Graeco episcopo foret praesentatus, idem episcopus Cathamarsenis eum in sacerdotem promovit, quem postmodum dioecesanus episcopus ab exsecutione officii vel taliter suscepti ordinis credidit suspendendum, quae utique consuetudo consuetudini ecclesiasticae inimica et detestabilis est et penitus improbanda, et, nisi multitudo et antiqua consuetudo esset in causa, sic ordinati non deberent permitti in susceptis ordinibus ministrare. Nam apud nos sic ordinati deponerentur, et ordinantes auctoritate ordinandi de censura canonum privarentur.

When according to ecclesiastical rules and the institutes of the holy Pontiffs sacred orders are to be conferred at fixed times, certain Greek bishops, exercising the observance of their own rite and custom upon Latin clerics, are everywhere promoting them to sacred orders, which are not to be conferred except in the 4 times. Indeed, as we have learned by the report of the bearer of these presents, Jo., that, when he had been presented by a certain lord whom he had served, and so that he might celebrate the divine offices in his chapel, to a certain Greek bishop, that same bishop at Cathamarsenis promoted him to priest, whom afterward the diocesan bishop judged ought to be suspended from the execution of the office or of the order thus received; which practice is surely hostile and detestable to ecclesiastical custom and utterly to be disapproved, and, unless a multitude and ancient custom were in the case, those thus ordained ought not to be permitted to minister in the orders received. For with us those so ordained would be deposed, and the ordainers would be deprived, by the censure of the canons, of the authority of ordaining.

Quia vero, sicut dicitur, in partibus Calabriae ut Latini a Graecis, et Graeci a Latinis secundum alterutrius institutionis observantiam ordinantur, et an sit antiquitus observatum, fraternitati tuae, quae, discernere melius ista poterit, eiusdem Iohannis iudicium duximus committendum, per apostolica scripta mandantes et potestatem tibi praesentium auctoritate indulgentes, ut, cognita diligentius veritate et observantia consuetudinis, si qua super his a Latinis clericis recepta est, et hactenus approbata, vel si tibi apparuerit aliter discernere de ipso Iohanne, quod cum salute animae suae poteris, cessante appellationis diffugio, statuere non moreris, studiosius attendens, utrum reordinandus sit, an sine periculo animae suae in sic recepto ordine debeat celebrare, addito, si quid noveris in supplemento ordinis adiungendum. Nolumus autem de cetero commixtiones et consuetudines rituum in ordinibus observari, nec sumi ab aliis in exemplum, si cum isto duxeris misericorditer dispensandum.

Because indeed, as it is said, in the parts of Calabria the Latins are ordained by the Greeks and the Greeks by the Latins, according to the observance of either party’s institution, and whether this has been observed from ancient times, we have judged to commit to your fraternity—who will be able to discern these matters better—the judgment concerning that same John, by apostolic writings both mandating and, by the authority of these presents, granting you the power that, once the truth and the observance of the custom have been more diligently ascertained—if any has been received by Latin clerics on these points and approved hitherto—or if it shall appear to you to decide otherwise concerning John himself, what you can with the safety of his soul, with the subterfuge of appeal set aside, you should not delay to establish, attending more studiously whether he is to be re-ordained, or whether without danger to his soul he ought to celebrate in the order thus received, adding, if you know anything that ought to be joined in supplementation of the order. We do not wish, moreover, henceforth that commixtures and customs of rites in ordinations be observed, nor that they be taken by others as an example, if you shall judge that with this man it is to be mercifully dispensed.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Si monachus unius ordinis in secundo ordine, ad quem transivit, recipit sacerdotium, ad primum ordinem rediens, in eo libere ministrabit.

If a monk of one order receives the priesthood in the second order, to which he has transferred, then returning to the first order, he will minister therein freely.

Innocentius III. Abbati et Conventui Cariloci.

Innocent III. To the Abbot and the Convent of Cariloc.

Ex parte vestra nostro fuit apostolatui reseratum, quod quidam monachus vester, se ad nigros monachos transferens, et habitum eorum nigrum ibidem assumens, ad sacerdotii ordinem in ipso habitu est promotus. Unde, quia in hoc articulo dubitastis utrum in assumpto taliter ordine ministrare debeat, nos huiusmodi dubietatis scrupulum enodantes, per apostolica vobis scripta mandamus, quatenus, nisi ei canonicum aliud obviet, ipsum monachum officium sacerdotis libere exsequi permittatis. [Dat.

On your part it was revealed to our apostolate that a certain monk of yours, transferring himself to the black monks and there assuming their black habit, was promoted to the order of priesthood in that very habit. Wherefore, because in this article you have doubted whether he ought to minister in the order thus assumed, we, untying the scruple of such doubt, by apostolic writings command you, to the end that, unless some other canonical impediment stands in his way, you permit that monk to execute the priest’s office freely. [Given.

Romae ap. S. Petrum, 1198.]

At Rome at St. Peter’s, 1198.]

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Si Graecus episcopus Latino subiectus ordinatur sine Latini licentia a Graeco, interdicitur sibi exsecutio: si vero de licentia, tunc toleratur.

If a Greek bishop subject to a Latin is ordained by a Greek without the Latin’s license, the execution is interdicted to him; but if with the license, then it is tolerated.

Idem C. Presbytero Cardinali, apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same to C., Cardinal Presbyter, Legate of the Apostolic See.

Quod translationem pontificis (Et infra: [cf. c. 4. de off. leg. I. 30]) Super eo vero, quod nos consulere voluisti, quod multi Graecorum clerici consistentes, in dioecesibus Latinorum ab episcopis Graecis non in quatuor temporibus, interdum omnes ordines simul, nonnunquam partem recipiunt, qui postmodum prohibentur a Latinis episcopis celebrare, Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum clericus Graecus, episcopo Latino subiectus, a Graeco pontifice ordinatur, nisi de mandato vel licentia sui episcopi fiat, interdicenda est ei ordinis exsecutio sic suscepti, tanquam ab alieno pontifice sine mandato vel licentia sui episcopi ordinato.

That the translation of a pontiff (And below: [cf. c. 4. on the office of the legate 1. 30]) As to that, moreover, about which you wished to consult us—namely, that many Greek clerics residing in the dioceses of the Latins receive from Greek bishops, not at the four Ember seasons, sometimes all the orders at once, sometimes a part, who afterward are forbidden by Latin bishops to celebrate—we thus respond to your Consultation: that, when a Greek cleric, subject to a Latin bishop, is ordained by a Greek pontiff, unless it be done by the mandate or license of his own bishop, the execution of the order thus received is to be interdicted to him, as having been ordained by an alien pontiff without the mandate or license of his own bishop.

Si vero de mandato vel licentia sui praesulis a Graeco pontifice secundum morem Graecorum fuerit ordinatus, licet culpandus sit episcopus Latinus, qui clericos suos a Graeco facit antistite ordinari, quamdiu tamen talis mos ab ecclesia toleratur, impediri non debet ab exsecutione ordinum taliter susceptorum. Nos tamen super hoc articulo disposuimus tempore oportuno de consilio fratrum nostrorum quod honestum visum fuerit ordinare.

But if indeed, by the mandate or license of his own prelate, he has been ordained by a Greek pontiff according to the custom of the Greeks, although the Latin bishop, who has his clerics ordained by a Greek prelate, is to be blamed, nevertheless, so long as such a custom is tolerated by the Church, he ought not to be impeded from the execution of the orders thus received. We, however, have determined, upon this article, at an opportune time, by the counsel of our brethren, to ordain what shall have seemed proper.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Ordinatus a Papa sine licentia Papae ad superiores ordines non promovetur.

Ordained by the Pope without the license of the Pope, he is not promoted to the superior orders.

Idem Mutinensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Modena.

Quum in distribuendis [ordinibus constitutiones canonicae tempora certa distinguant, quae praecipue circa sacros ordines approbata quoque consuetudo docuit observanda, mirari cogimur et moveri, quia, sicut a multis accepimus et in fama vulgatur, infamis Bononiensis episcopus Albertum Imolensem electum in diaconum et presbyterum simul ordinare praesumpsit. Quia vero dimittere nolumus incorrecta quae contra constitutiones canonicas attentantur, praesertim ubi celebrius canonica iura docentur, ne praesumptoribus transeant in exemplum, quum haec non solum praesumptionis et fatuitatis nota non careant, sed nec ambitionis et pravitatis: discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus super his inquiratis diligentissime veritatem, excusationes ordinatoris et ordinati, si quas forte duxerint allegandas, nihilominus audientes, ut per relationem vestram instructi plenius et securius in ipso negotio procedamus.] Meminimus enim, id a nobis fuisse suppliciter postulatum, et clementer indultum, ut, quia praefatus A. ecclesiae Romanae subdiaconus erat, mandaremus ipsum per Bononiensem episcopum promoveri. [Dat.

When in distributing [orders the canonical constitutions distinguish fixed times, which approved custom has taught must be observed especially concerning the sacred orders, we are compelled to marvel and be moved, because, as we have received from many and it is spread in report, the infamous bishop of Bologna presumed to ordain Albert, the elect of Imola, as deacon and presbyter at the same time. Since indeed we are unwilling to leave uncorrected the things that are attempted against the canonical constitutions, especially where the canonical laws are more famously taught, lest they pass into an example for the presumptuous, since these are not only not without the mark of presumption and fatuity, but also of ambition and depravity: to your discretion by apostolic writings we command by way of precept, that you inquire most diligently into the truth about these matters, nonetheless hearing the excuses of the ordainer and the ordained, if perchance they should deem any to be alleged, so that, instructed more fully and more securely by your report, we may proceed in the matter itself.] For we remember that this was humbly requested of us, and graciously granted: that, because the aforesaid A. was a subdeacon of the Roman Church, we should command that he be promoted by the bishop of Bologna. [Given.

Lateran. 1200.]

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Duo sacri ordines non possunt conferri eidem uno die, vel duobus, continuato ieiunio.

Two sacred orders cannot be conferred upon the same person in one day, or in two days, even with a continuous fast.

Idem eidem et Magistro H. Subdiacono nostro.

The same to the same, and to Master H., our subdeacon.

Literas vestras recepimus responsivas super inordinata ordinatione [A.] Imolensis electi, quem [G.] Bononiensis episcopus praecedenti sabbato in diaconum, et sequenti die dominico continuato ieiunio in presbyterum ordinavit. In quo quantum uterque deliquerit, evidenter intelligit qui prudenter attendit. Si enim utrumque ordinem eodem die conferre illi non licuit, pari non licuit ratione unum ordinem uno die, et alium altero ieiunio continuato conferri, quum propter continuationem ieiunii fictione canonica, sive mane diei dominicae trahatur ad sabbatum, sive vespera sabbati ad diem dominicam referatur, profecto mane cum vespera seu vespera cum mane ad eundem diem pertinere dicetur.

We received your responsive letters concerning the inordinate ordination of [A.], the elect of Imola, whom [G.], bishop of Bologna, ordained a deacon on the preceding Saturday, and, on the following Lord’s Day, with the fast continued, ordained a presbyter. In this, how much each has transgressed is clearly understood by whoever prudently attends. For if it was not permitted to him to confer both orders on the same day, by an equal rationale it was not permitted that one order on one day and the other on the next be conferred with the fast continued, since, on account of the continuation of the fast by canonical fiction, whether the morning of the Lord’s Day is drawn to Saturday, or the evening of Saturday is referred to the Lord’s Day, surely morning with evening, or evening with morning, will be said to pertain to the same day.

Nam si, quantum ad hunc necessitatis articulum pertinet, mane ad unum diem, et vespera referatur ad alium, cur esset continuatio ieiunii necessaria, quum et sabbato ante coenam, et dominica ante prandium intelligantur esse ieiuni? Ne autem si factum huiusmodi sub silentio transiremus, id alii licitum reputantes similia facere attentarent, et sic facti perversitas a posteris traheretur in exemplum, Praefatum itaque Bononiensem episcopum, ut puniatur in quo deliquit, a collatione ordinum, diaconii scilicet et presbyterii, alterum vero ab exsecutione officii sacerdotalis tamdiu volumus manere suspensos, donec de illis aliter disponamus. Ut igitur mandatum apostolicum, debitum consequatur effectum, per apostolica scripta vobis mandamus, quatenus quae praemissa sunt, faciatis tam ab ipsis episcopis quam per Bononiensem et Imolensem dioeceses publicari.

For if, so far as this point of necessity is concerned, the morning is referred to one day and the evening to another, why would the continuation of the fast be necessary, since both on Saturday before supper and on Sunday before the midday meal they are understood to be fasting? Lest, however, if we were to let an act of this kind pass in silence, others, reckoning it licit, should attempt to do similar things, and thus the perversity of the deed be drawn by posterity into an example, therefore we will that the aforesaid Bishop of Bologna, that he may be punished in that wherein he offended, be suspended from the collation of orders, namely of the diaconate and presbyterate, and that the other be suspended from the execution of the sacerdotal office, for so long until we shall otherwise dispose concerning them. Therefore, in order that the apostolic mandate may obtain its due effect, by apostolic writings we command you to cause the things aforesaid to be published both by the bishops themselves and through the dioceses of Bologna and Imola.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Ordinans puerum tredecim annorum in diaconum, suspenditur a collatione ordinum: et ordinatus ab ipsius executione usque ad aetatem legitimam.

Ordaining a boy of thirteen years into a deacon, he is suspended from the collation of orders: and the ordained from its execution until the lawful age.

Honorius III. Episcopo et Archidiacono Legionensi.

Honorius 3. To the Bishop and the Archdeacon of León.

Vel non est compos sui episcopus Conventrensis, vel nimis videtur a se scientiam repulisse, aut probatur ex malignitate peccasse, qui ut alia, quae de ipso dicuntur, enormia taceamus, M. puerum latorem praesentium adhuc XIII. annorum contra sacrorum canonum instituta inordinate in diaconum dicitur ordinasse, in ludibrium ordinis clericalis; quod utique, si nobis plene constaret, quantumcunque simus proniores ad veniam, quam ad debitam etiam ultionem, taliter hoc castigaremus in ipso, quod ex poena culpa notoria redderetur, et revelata eius ignominia efficeret alios in similibus cautiores. Nolentes autem hoc relinquere indiscussum, Discretioni vestrae mandamus, quatenus, inquisita super his et cognita veritate, si rem inveneritis ita esse, praedictum episcopum a collatione ordinum sublato appellationis obstaculo suspendentes, ipsum, ut eidem M., quem ab exsecutione officii diaconi usque ad aetatem legitimam in iniuriam suspendimus ordinantis, provideat in ecclesiastico beneficio competenti, per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione postposita compellatis.

Either the bishop of Coventry is not compos sui, or he seems to have too greatly repulsed knowledge from himself, or he is proved to have sinned out of malignity, who—so that we may be silent about other enormities said about him—is said to have inordinately ordained M., the bearer of the present letters, a boy still 13 years of age, as a deacon, against the statutes of the sacred canons, to the mockery of the clerical order; which assuredly, if it were fully clear to us, however much we are more prone to pardon than even to due vengeance, we would chastise this in him in such wise that from the penalty the fault would be rendered notorious, and, his ignominy being revealed, would make others more cautious in similar matters. Not wishing, however, to leave this unexamined, we command your Discretion that, inquiry having been made about these things and the truth known, if you find the matter to be so, removing the obstacle of appeal, you suspend the aforesaid bishop from the collation of orders, and you compel him, by ecclesiastical censure, appeal set aside, to provide for that same M.—whom we have suspended from the execution of the office of deacon until the legitimate age, to the injury of the ordainer—in a fitting ecclesiastical benefice.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Episcopus conferens eidem una die plures sacros ordines, etiamsi de mandato metropolitani hoc fecerit, ab ordinandi potestate suspenditur.

A bishop who, on one day, confers several sacred orders upon the same person, even if he has done this by mandate of the metropolitan, is suspended from the power of ordaining.

Idem Leton. et Cala. Abb.

The same. To the Abbots of Leton and Cala.

Dilectus filius G. Humiliensis canonicus nostro dudum apostolatui reseravit, quod Humiliensi ecclesia suo viduata pastore, canonici sui, de substituendi pastoris electione tractantes, ipsum unanimiter elegerunt. Qui quum esset citra sacros ordines constitutus, venerabilis frater noster archiepiscopus Cassalensis metropolitanus eorum episcopo Trecensi mandavit, ut eum uno et eodem die ad tres sacros ordines promoveret, quod ille non ausu proprio, sed ipsius archiepiscopi mandato perfecit; [demum idem archiepiscopus requisitus consecrationis ei munus huiusmodi ordinationis occasione praetensa, impendere recusavit. Unde fuit nobis humiliter supplicatum, ut super hoc circa praefatum W. dignaremur de benignitate sedis apostolicae dispensare, maxime quum ad ordines ita suscipiendos non ex voluntatis propriae diceretur festinantia properasse, sed tam te magna necessitate quam de utili providentia paene omnium ibi praesentium se permiserit taliter ordinari, pro eo, quod ecclesiae Ymilicensi multiplex periculum imminebat, si eiusdem W. citra presbyteratus officium ordinatio differretur.

Our beloved son G., a canon of Humiliensis, some time ago disclosed to our apostolate that, the Humiliensis church being bereft of its own shepherd, its canons, dealing with the election of a substituting pastor, unanimously elected him. And since he was situated short of the sacred orders, our venerable brother, the archbishop of Cassalensis, their metropolitan, commanded their bishop of Troyes to promote him on one and the same day to the three sacred orders, which the latter accomplished not by his own daring, but by the mandate of that archbishop; [at length the same archbishop, when asked, refused to impart to him the gift of consecration, with the occasion of such an ordination put forward. Whence it was humbly supplicated to us that in this matter concerning the aforesaid W. we would deign to dispense by the benignity of the apostolic see, especially since he is said to have hastened to receive orders thus not from a headlong rush of his own will, but as much by great necessity as by the useful providence of almost all there present he allowed himself to be ordained in such a manner, for this reason: that manifold peril was impending for the church of Ymilicensis, if the ordination of the same W., short of the office of the presbyterate, were deferred.

Licet autem contra normam ecclesiasticam in facto ipso enormiter fuisset excessum, de misericordia tamen, quae superaltat iudicio, venerabili fratri nostro Armachano archiepiscopo, et episcopo Midensi, et dilecto filio archidiacono Armachano dedisse recolimus in mandatis, ut inquisita super praemissis diligentius veritate, si rem invenirent taliter se habere, ac eundem W. alias idoneum et utilem ecclesiae Ymilicensi, dispensative ipsi tribuerent licentiam consecrandi, et quicquid in hoc per eundem invenirent archiepiscopum attentatum, per suas nobis literas intimarent, ut per eorum relationem certiores effecti providere in eo, sicut esset expediens, curaremus. Ipsi vero vocatis quos noverant evocandos, et investigata plenius veritate, depositiones testium productorum utrimque ad nostram praesentiam transmiserunt. Quibus inspectis intelleximus evidenter, quod celebrata de praedicto W. electione, quum die sequenti fuisset idem W. a supradicto Roffensi episcopo ad ordinem subdiaconatus promotus, idem episcopus archidiacono et canonicis Ymilicensibus seorsim vocatis, dicens, quod propter turbationem terrae ac multos malevolos, qui eidem W. insidias praeparabant, nolebat ipsum citra ordinem presbyteratus relinquere, iuramento firmavit, id supradictum archiepiscopum tam metu mortis ipsius W., quam propter imminens periculum Ymilicensis ecclesiae praecepisse, et quod officialis eiusdem archiepiscopi ex parte ipsius episcopo memorato inhibuit, ne iam dictum W., iam in subdiaconum ordinatum, tunc ad ulteriores ordines promoveret.

Although in the very deed there had been an egregious excess against ecclesiastical norm, yet out of mercy, which is exalted over judgment, we recall that we gave in mandates to our venerable brother the archbishop of Armagh, and to the bishop of Meath, and to our beloved son the archdeacon of Armagh, that, the truth on the aforesaid matters having been more diligently inquired, if they should find the matter to stand thus, and the same W. otherwise suitable and useful to the Ymilicensian church, they should grant to him, by way of dispensation, licence for consecration, and that whatever in this they should find to have been attempted by the same archbishop they should intimate to us by their letters, so that, made more certain by their report, we might take care to provide therein as would be expedient. They, in truth, having called those whom they knew ought to be summoned, and the truth having been more fully investigated, transmitted to our presence the depositions of witnesses produced on both sides. Which, having been inspected, we understood clearly that, the election of the aforesaid W. having been celebrated, when on the following day the same W. had been promoted by the aforesaid Roffensian bishop to the order of the subdiaconate, the same bishop, having separately called the archdeacon and the canons of Ymilicensis, saying that because of the disturbance of the land and the many ill‑wishers who were preparing ambushes for the same W., he did not wish to leave him short of the order of the presbyterate, confirmed by oath that the above‑said archbishop had commanded it both because of fear for the life of W. himself and because of the imminent danger of the Ymilicensian church, and that the official of the same archbishop, on the part of the archbishop, forbade the aforesaid bishop to promote the already‑ordained‑as‑subdeacon W. then to further orders.

Cui eodem episcopo respondente, quod plus archiepiscopo, qui hoc ei ore suo mandaverat, quam illi crederet in hac parte, extensa super altare manu per sacrosancta iuravit, quod id mandaverat archiepiscopus saepedictus, et sic in diaconum et presbyterum W. saepedictum promovit. Probatum insuper sufficienter invenimus, quod dictus archiepiscopus Ioanni decano de Hely iniunxit, ut praefato episcopo inhiberet, ne dictum W. eo die, quo ad tres ordines promotus exstitit, nisi ad subdiaconatus ordinem promoveret, eidem W. nihilominus inhibendo, ne se promoveri ulterius pateretur. Verum quum idem decanus ad Ymilicensem ecclesiam accessisset, tam saepedicto episcopo, qui iam subdiaconos ordinarat, vocatis his, qui erant in diaconos promovendi, et silentio cunctis indicto, ex parte Dei ac archiepiscopi Cassellensis inhibuit, ne iam dictum W. ad ulteriores ordines promoveret, quam praefato W., ne se promoveri ulterius sustineret.

To which, the same bishop responding that he would believe the archbishop, who had commanded this to him with his own mouth, more than him in this matter, with hand extended over the altar swore by the sacrosancta that the oft-said archbishop had commanded it, and thus he promoted the aforesaid W. to deacon and presbyter. Furthermore we found sufficiently proved that the said archbishop enjoined John, dean of Ely, that he should inhibit the aforesaid bishop, that he not promote the said W. on the day on which he stood promoted to three orders, except to the order of subdiaconate, nonetheless inhibiting the same W., that he should not allow himself to be promoted further. However, when the same dean had come to the Ymilicensian church, both to the oft-said bishop, who had already ordained subdeacons, having summoned those who were to be promoted to deacons, and with silence enjoined upon all, he inhibited, on behalf of God and of the archbishop of Cashel, both that he should not promote the already-said W. to further orders, and the aforesaid W., that he should not sustain being promoted further.

Constitit quoque nobis ex literis iudicum praedictorum, quod saepefatus episcopus interrogatus in iure respondit, quod archiepiscopus non mandarat eidem, ut W. eodem die ad tres ordines promoveret, sed ex verbis archiepiscopo eum credidit illud velle. Hoc idem etiam dictus episcopus per suas nobis literas intimavit. Praeterea ex ipsorum iudicum literis intelleximus, quod idem episcopus ultro iuravit in iure, quod universa, quae continebantur in eiusdem W. attestationibus, vera erant.

It was also established to us from the letters of the aforesaid judges that the oft-mentioned bishop, when questioned in court, responded that the archbishop had not ordered him to promote W. on the same day to the three orders, but from the archbishop’s words he believed that he wished this. This same thing the said bishop also intimated to us by his own letters. Moreover, from those judges’ letters we understood that the same bishop, of his own accord, swore in court that all the things which were contained in that same W.’s attestations were true.

Ex literis quoque tam supradicti archiepiscopi, quam capituli ecclesiae Ymilicensis, quod, quum tam super electione ac ordinatione saepedicti W., quam etiam super quibusdam eius excessibus in concilio apud Kolmoelloco celebrato coram praefato archiepiscopo inter dictum W. et canonicos quaestio suborta fuisset, et demum ab utraque parte ad nostram audientiam appellatum, idem W., non exspectato termino, quem appellationi suae duxerat praefigendum, supradictas a nobis literas veritate tacita impetravit.] Quum ergo [ex praemissis] nobis constiterit, supradictum episcopum in pluribus deliquisse, tum, quia sine mandato archiepiscopi, ut ipse confessus exstitit, ad huiusmodi ordinationem inordinate processit, tum, quia, et si de mandato archiepiscopi constaret, quum illi huiusmodi dispensatio a canone minime sit permissa, quam ad solum Romanum Pontificem non est dubium pertinere, ipsi obtemperare non debuit in hac parte; tum etiam, quia reatum periurii saepius variavit, iurando prius, quod archiepiscopus id praeceperat, et postea, quod illud non mandaverat in iudicio confitendo, ipsum de fratrum nostrorum consilio tamdiu ab ordinandi suspendimus potestate, donec nostram meruerit gratiam obtinere. [Saepedictum quoque etc. Dat.

From the letters both of the aforesaid archbishop and of the chapter of the church of Ymilicensis, that, when a question had arisen both about the election and ordination of the oft-mentioned W., and also about certain of his excesses, in a council held at Kolmoelloco before the aforesaid archbishop between the said W. and the canons, and at length an appeal had been made by both sides to our audience, that same W., not awaiting the term which he had caused to be prefixed to his appeal, obtained from us the aforesaid letters, the truth being kept silent.] Therefore, since [from the premises] it has been established to us that the aforesaid bishop has delinquented in many things, first, because without the mandate of the archbishop, as he himself confessed, he proceeded in inordinate fashion to such an ordination; second, because even if it were established to be by the mandate of the archbishop, since such a dispensation is by the canon by no means permitted to him—one which without doubt pertains to the Roman Pontiff alone—he ought not to have obeyed him in this part; third also, because he has often varied the charge of perjury, first swearing that the archbishop had commanded it, and afterwards confessing in judgment that he had not commanded it, by the counsel of our brethren we suspend him from the power of ordaining for so long until he shall have merited to obtain our favor. [The aforesaid also etc. Given.

Lat. Non. Ian.

Lateran, on the Nones of January.

Pont. nostr. Ao. XIII.

In the 13th year of our pontificate.

1211.]

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Ordinatus ad sacros extra tempora statuta, ordinem recipit, et post poenitentiam cum eo dispensat episcopus.

Ordained to the sacred orders outside the appointed times, he receives the order, and after penitence the bishop dispenses with him.

Gregorius IX. Archiepiscopo Baranensi.

Gregory 9. To the Archbishop of Baranensis.

Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod eos, qui extra tempora statuta sacros ordines receperunt, characterem non est dubium recepisse, quos pro transgressione huiusmodi, primo eis poenitentia imposita competenti, sustinere poteris in susceptis ordinibus ministrare, [attentius provisurus etc. Dat. Reate II. Id. Nov.

We thus respond to your consultation, that those who received sacred orders outside the appointed times have without doubt received the character; whom, for such a transgression, after first imposing on them fitting penance, you will be able to allow to minister in the orders they have received, [to provide more attentively, etc. Dated at Rieti, 2 Ides of November.

Pont. nostr. Ao. V. 1231.]

In the 5th year of our pontificate, 1231.]

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Occultus criminosus, praeter homicidam, post poenitentiam in susceptis ministrat, et ad superiores adscendit; ante poenitentiam monetur, ut etiam in susceptis non ministret.

A hidden criminal, except a homicide, after penance ministers in the things undertaken and ascends to higher offices; before penance he is admonished that he not minister even in the things undertaken.

Idem.

The same.

Quaesitum est de sacerdotibus vel aliis clericis, qui per reatum adulterii, periurii, homicidii vel falsi testimonii bonum conscientiae rectae perdiderunt (Et infra:) Respondemus: quod, si proposita crimina ordine iudiciario comprobata, vel alias notoria non fuerint, non debent hi, praeter reos homicidii, post poenitentiam in iam susceptis vel suscipiendis ordinibus impediri; qui, si non poenituerint, monendi sunt et sub interminatione divini iudicii obtestandi, ut in testimonium suae damnationis in susceptis etiam ordinibus non ministrent.

It has been asked about priests or other clerics who, through the charge of adultery, perjury, homicide, or false testimony, have lost the good of a right conscience (And below:) We answer: that, if the crimes alleged have not been proved by judicial process, or otherwise been notorious, these, except those guilty of homicide, ought not, after penance, to be impeded in the orders already received or to be received; who, if they have not repented, are to be warned and, under the threat of divine judgment, adjured, that, as a testimony of their condemnation, they should not minister even in the orders they have received.

TITULUS XII. DE SCRUTINIO IN ORDINE FACIENDO.

TITLE 12. ON THE SCRUTINY TO BE MADE IN CONFERRING ORDERS.

CAP. UN.

SOLE CHAPTER.

Episcopus interrogatus in scrutinio episcopi ordinandi, potest respondere illum dignum, si non novit illum indignum.

A bishop, when interrogated in the scrutiny for ordaining a bishop, can respond that he is worthy, if he does not know him to be unworthy.

Innocentius III.

Innocent 3.

Ex parte tua fuit propositum (Et infra:) Quaesivisti praeterea per sedem apostolicam doceri, ut, quum episcopi ad consecrationes episcoporum ab archiepiscopo vel etiam alio evocentur, et ipsi metropolitano electum offerant consecrandum, dicentes: "Reverende pater, postulat sancta mater ecclesia hunc electum in episcopum consecrari, et interrogante archiepiscopo, si sciant, illum esse dignum, respondeant, quod illum sciunt et credunt pariter esse dignum, et te in responsione huiusmodi, ne offenderes hominem, Deum existimes offendisse, quandoque praeter, quandoque contra conscientiam respondendo, quum electi conversatio aut minus tibi cognita aut penitus sit ignota, qualiter in huiusmodi interrogationibus, salva conscientia, valeas respondere. Ad quod Fraternitati tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum nos aliquem in diaconum vel presbyterum promovemus, prior diaconorum, qui nobis assistit, dicit: "Postulat sancta mater ecclesia catholica hunc diaconum vel subdiaconum ad onus presbyteratus vel diaconatus assumi," et nobis interrogantibus, si eum cognoverit esse dignum, idem respondet, quod, quantum humana fragilitas nosse sinit, et scit, et testificatur, illum ad huiusmodi onus officii esse dignum. Unde in tali responsione aliquem peccare non credimus, dummodo contra conscientiam non loquatur, quia non simpliciter illum asserit esse dignum, sed in quantum humana fragilitas nosse sinit, quum illum, quem indignum esse non novit, dignum debeat aestimare.

On your part it was proposed (And below:) You further sought to be taught through the apostolic see that, when bishops are called by the archbishop or even by another to the consecrations of bishops, and they themselves present the elect to the metropolitan to be consecrated, saying: "Reverend father, holy mother Church requests that this elect be consecrated as a bishop," and, when the archbishop asks whether they know that he is worthy, they answer that they know and likewise believe him to be worthy; and that you, in such a response, lest you offend a man, suppose that you have offended God, at times replying beside, at times against, conscience, when the conduct of the elect is either little known to you or altogether unknown—how, in interrogations of this sort, you may be able to respond with conscience safe. To this we answer your Fraternity thus: that, when we promote someone to the diaconate or presbyterate, the prior of the deacons, who assists us, says: "Holy mother Catholic Church requests that this deacon or subdeacon be assumed to the burden of the presbyterate or diaconate"; and when we ask whether he has known him to be worthy, the same replies that, in so far as human frailty allows one to know, he both knows and testifies that he is worthy for such a burden of office. Whence we do not believe that anyone sins in such a response, provided that he does not speak against conscience, because he does not assert simply that he is worthy, but in so far as human frailty allows one to know, since he ought to esteem worthy him whom he does not know to be unworthy.

Huiusmodi ergo responsione secure uti poteris, nisi forte de indignitate tibi constiterit consecrandi. Si autem illum indignum esse cognoscis, metropolitano, priusquam ad huiusmodi scrutinium veniatur, secreto studeas nunciare vel intimare, quamvis, ut duximus, nos interrogationem huiusmodi non in consecratione pontificis, sed in ordinatione diaconi vel presbyteri faciamus. [Postulasti etc.

Therefore you will be able to use a response of this sort securely, unless perhaps it has been established to you concerning the unworthiness of the one to be consecrated. But if you recognize him to be unworthy, you should strive to announce or intimate it secretly to the metropolitan, before one comes to a scrutiny of this sort, although, as we have deemed, we make an interrogation of this sort not in the consecration of a pontiff, but in the ordination of a deacon or presbyter. [You requested etc.

Dat. Rom. ap. S. Petr.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s.

Id. Mart. Ao. IX. 1206.]

The Ides of March, Year 9, 1206.]

TITULUS XIII. DE ORDINATIS AB EPISCOPO, QUI RENUNCIAVIT EPISCOPATUI.

TITLE 13. ON THOSE ORDAINED BY A BISHOP WHO HAS RENOUNCED THE EPISCOPATE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Episcopus, qui renunciavit loco tantum, invitatus conferre potest ordines, sicut prius. Si vero et dignitati, cum ordinato per eum ad minores vel ignoranter ad sacros dispensat episcopus suus; cum ordinato vero scienter ad sacros, non dispensat.

A bishop who has renounced only the place, when invited, can confer orders as before. But if he has also renounced the dignity, his bishop dispenses in the case of one ordained by him to the minor orders, or to the sacred orders unwittingly; but in the case of one ordained knowingly to the sacred orders, he does not dispense.

Alexander III. Toletano Archiepiscopo.

Alexander 3. To the Archbishop of Toledo.

Requisivit a nobis tua fraternitas, utrum clerici, qui post renunciationem factam a praedecessore tuo ordines receperunt, in ipsis debeant remanere, aut ad maiores de iure canonum promoveri? Nos igitur, quia nobis non plenarie de veritate constat, non possumus tibi super hoc breviter respondere. Respondemus igitur distinguendo, utrum renunciaverit loco tantum, an loco simul et dignitati.

Your fraternity has inquired of us whether the clerics who, after the renunciation made by your predecessor, received orders ought to remain in those same orders, or be promoted to higher ones by the canonical right? We therefore, since the truth is not established for us plenarily, cannot answer you briefly on this. We accordingly respond by distinguishing whether he renounced the place only, or both the place and the dignity.

Nam in primo casu ordines, sicut antea, nisi a summo Pontifice vel eius legato prohibitus fuerit, rogatus ab episcopo aliquo poterit de ratione conferre. In secundo vero casu distinguendum putamus, utrum sacros contulerit, an minores. Si enim a tali ordines usque ad subdiaconatum aliquis acceperit, quia et huiusmodi ordines a non episcopis quandoque conferuntur, et in illis deservire poterit, et ad maiores, si idoneus fuerit, promoveri.

For in the first case he will be able to confer orders, as before, unless he should be prohibited by the Supreme Pontiff or his legate, when asked by some bishop, and to confer them according to rule. In the second case, however, we think a distinction must be made, whether he conferred sacred orders or minor ones. For if someone has received orders up to the subdiaconate from such a man, since orders of this kind are sometimes conferred by non-bishops, both he will be able to serve in them and, if he is suitable, be promoted to the major [orders].

Sane si ab eodem sacros ordines facta renunciatione scienter quis receperit, quia indignum se fecit, exsecutionem officii non habebit. Ubi autem non scienter, poterit, nisi crassa et supina fuerit ignorantia, discretus pontifex dispensare.

Indeed, if anyone has knowingly received sacred orders from that same person after a renunciation has been made, because he has made himself unworthy, he will not have the execution of the office. However, where it was not knowingly, a discreet pontiff can dispense, unless the ignorance was crass and supine.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Breve est.

It is brief.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory 9.

Cum clericis, qui ab excommunicato episcopo ignoranter ordines receperunt, per suos poterit episcopos dispensari.

As for clerics who have ignorantly received orders from an excommunicated bishop, dispensation may be made by their own bishops.

TITULUS XIV. DE AETATE ET QUALITATE ET ORDINE PRAEFICIENDORUM.

TITLE 14. ON THE AGE AND QUALITY AND ORDER OF THOSE TO BE PUT IN CHARGE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Non summatur.

It is not summarized.

Ex concilio Pictaviensi.

From the council of Poitiers.

Ut abbates et decani et praepositi, qui presbyteri non sunt, presbyteri fiant, aut praelationes amittant; qui archidiaconatus tenent, diaconi fiant, qui vero archipresbyteratus, presbyteri, aut amittant honorem. Quod si aliqua iusta causa prohibente presbyteri aut diaconi esse non potuerint, praelationes amittant.

That abbots and deans and provosts, who are not presbyters, become presbyters, or lose their prelacies; those who hold archdeaconries, become deacons; but those who hold archpresbyterates, presbyters, or let them lose the honor. But if, with some just cause preventing, they cannot be presbyters or deacons, let them lose the prelacies.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Ecclesia dispensative minori concessa non per laicos, sed per clericos regi debet, donec ille perveniat ad aetatem.

A church granted by dispensation to a minor ought to be ruled not by laics, but by clerics, until he reaches age.

Alexander III. Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

Alexander 3. To the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ex ratione commissae tibi dignitatis et consideratione legationis ad universas ecclesias tuae legationis aciem sollicitudinis tuae debes extendere, et quae enormiter seu contra iustitiam facta fuerint pastorali cura corrigere et emendare, quatenus de commissis ovibus coram patrefamilias plenam reddere valeas rationem, et tibi pro labore et sollicitudine tua merces copiosa cumuletur in coelis. Accepimus autem, quod Conventrensis episcopus, non attendens, quid sacrorum canonum statuta decernant, nec modestiam pontificalem conservans, pueris, qui sunt infra decennium constituti, in archidiaconatu dilecti filii nostri R. archidiaconi Cistrensis ecclesias plures concessit, quae non per clericos, sed per laicos dispensantur et disponuntur. Unde quoniam hoc ecclesiasticae utilitati est inimicum et rationi contrarium, et ideo non debet hoc aliquatenus tolerari, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si ita res se habet, praedictum episcopum super his viva increpatione corripias et castiges, et clericis idoneis administrationes et custodiam praescriptarum ecclesiarum, donec praedicti pueri ad congruam veniant aetatem, omni occasione et appellatione cessantibus laicis amotis committas, eidem episcopo arctius prohibens, ne de cetero ecclesias, nisi personis, quae aetatem et scientiam habeant, regendas concedat.

Out of the rationale of the dignity committed to you and out of consideration of the legation, you ought to extend the edge of your solicitude to all the churches of your legation, and to correct and amend by pastoral care the things that have been done enormously or against justice, so that you may be able to render a full account before the paterfamilias concerning the sheep entrusted, and for your toil and solicitude a copious reward may be heaped up for you in the heavens. We have received, moreover, that the bishop of Coventry, not attending to what the statutes of the sacred canons decree, nor conserving pontifical modesty, has granted to boys who are placed under ten years, in the archdeaconry of our beloved son R., archdeacon of Chichester, several churches, which are not dispensed nor managed by clerics but by laymen. Wherefore, since this is inimical to ecclesiastical utility and contrary to reason, and therefore this ought not in any way to be tolerated, we command your fraternity by apostolic writings by way of precept, that, if the matter stands thus, you reprove and chastise the aforesaid bishop concerning these things with a spoken rebuke, and you commit the administrations and the custody of the aforesaid churches to fit clerics, the laymen removed, with every occasion and appeal ceasing, until the aforesaid boys come to a suitable age, more strictly forbidding the same bishop that henceforth he grant churches to be governed except to persons who have age and knowledge.

Quod si secus egerit, ei debitam poenam infligens, institutionem et concessionem ipsius omnino viribus carere decernas.

But if he shall do otherwise, inflicting upon him the due penalty, you are to decree that his institution and concession are entirely to lack force.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Regimen ecclesiae minori XIV. annis committi non debet.

The regimen of the church ought not to be committed to a minor under 14 years.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Suffragans.

Indecorum est admodum et absurdum, ut hi debeant ecclesias regere, qui non noverunt gubernare se ipsos, quum ad ecclesiarum regimen tales personae sint admittendae, quae discretione praeemineant, et morum fulgeant honestate. Nolentes itaque sustinere, ut ad preces vel ad instantiam aliquorum, sicut frequenter solet in vestris partibus fieri, parvulis ecclesiae regimen committatur, fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta [praecipiendo] mandamus, quatenus nemini infra annum XIV. constituto personatum cuiuslibet ecclesiae aliquorum gratia vel obtentu concedere praesumatis, scituri pro certo, quod, si praecepto nostro in hac parte contraire praesumpseritis, quod inde feceritis auctore Domino penitus irritabimus, et inobedientiam vestram graviter puniemus.

It is very indecorous and absurd that those should have to rule churches who do not know how to govern themselves, since to the governance (regimen) of churches such persons ought to be admitted as preeminent in discretion and shine with the honesty of morals. Unwilling, therefore, to endure that, at the prayers or at the instance of some, as is frequently wont to be done in your parts, the governance of the Church be committed to minors, we command your fraternity by apostolic writings [by commanding], that you presume to grant to no one constituted under the year 14 the personate of any church by the favor or procurement of certain persons, knowing for certain that, if you shall have presumed to contravene our precept in this matter, what you shall have done therein we will utterly annul, with the Lord as author, and we will gravely punish your disobedience.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Ad regimen ecclesiarum non debet institui indignus scientia, moribus, vel aetate, et qui habet duas ecclesias, alteram dimittere cogitur, nisi causa subsit.

To the regimen of churches there ought not to be instituted one unworthy in knowledge, morals, or age, and he who has two churches is compelled to relinquish the other, unless cause exists.

Idem.

The same.

Eam te decet in ordinandis ecclesiis tuae dioecesis curam habere, ne ullus in eis contra decreta, quae in Lateranensi concilio edidimus, vel etiam contra antiquas sacrorum canonum sanctiones clericus ordinetur, sed tales in ipsis satagas ponere, qui commissi sibi gregis curam commode gerere possint, et exemplo boni operis ad virtutes invitent. Inde est, quod praesentibus tibi literis Arctius inhibemus, ne personas, quae in ecclesiis tui episcopatus ad curam animarum fuerint ordinandae, in ipsis instituas, nec aliqua occasione, vel etiam literarum nostrarum obtentu institui patiaris, quae scientia, moribus et aetate concilii non congruant institutis. Sed etiam habentes plures ecclesias, quae ex una non pendeant, tibi liceat appellatione postposita cogere ad unam ipsarum, quam maluerint, dimittendam, nisi ita fuerint tenues in substantia, quod proprias sacerdotes non possint convenienter alere.

It befits you to have this care, in arranging the churches of your diocese, that no cleric be ordained in them against the decrees which we issued in the Lateran council, or even against the ancient sanctions of the sacred canons; but strive to place in them such men as can suitably bear the care of the flock committed to them, and by the example of good work invite to virtues. Therefore it is that by these present letters we more strictly forbid you, that you do not institute in them persons who are to be ordained to the cure of souls in the churches of your episcopate, nor under any pretext, or even under the pretense of our letters, allow to be instituted those who in knowledge, morals, and age do not agree with the institutes of the council. But also, as to those holding several churches which do not depend on one and the same, let it be permitted to you, appeals set aside, to compel them to resign one of them, whichever they shall have preferred, unless they are so slender in substance that they cannot suitably support their own priests.

Illas autem etc. [cf. c. 22. de iure patron. III.

Those, however, etc. [cf. ch. 22 on the right of patronage, 3.

38.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Is, qui nondum est in sacris, si alias est idoneus, ad regimen parochialis ecclesiae dispensative potest assumi.

He who is not yet in sacred orders, if otherwise suitable, can by dispensation be taken up to the governance of a parochial church.

Idem.

The same.

Praeterea licet ad regimen parochialis ecclesiae non debeat aliquis, nisi subdiaconus sit ad minus, admitti, dispensative tamen in minoribus ordinibus constituti consueverunt assumi, dum tamen tales sint, quod infra breve tempus possint in presbyteros ordinari.

Moreover, although no one ought to be admitted to the governance of a parochial church unless he be at least a subdeacon, nevertheless, dispensatively, those constituted in the minor orders are accustomed to be assumed, provided, however, that they are such that within a brief time they can be ordained as presbyters.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Propter necessitatem et utilitatem ecclesiae compelluntur clerici ipsius recipere ordines, suis beneficiis non annexos.

Because of the necessity and utility of the church, its clerics are compelled to receive orders not annexed to their benefices.

Idem.

The same.

Quaeris a nobis, quid agendum sit de clericis tuae iurisdictioni commissis, qui, quum beneficiis ecclesiasticis multis abundent, a te commoniti nolunt ad maiores ordines promoveri, se tale quid secreto commisisse dicentes, quod eos salva conscientia ordinari non sinit. Quum igitur super hoc casu videantur sacri canones discordare, quum quidam dicant, eos minime compellendos, alii vero contrarium asseverant, omnis contrarietatis vinculum praesenti pagina enodamus, statuentes, ut, si praedicti clerici perceptione maiorum ordinum propter occulta sua peccata se indignos esse fatentur, inferiores in eadem ecclesia, quorum sit vita probabilis, secundum institutionem canonicam praeferantur eisdem. Et nisi forte illi, qui ordinari pro iam dicta causa recusant, in aliis ecclesiae servitiis valde utiles fuerint, auferantur eis beneficia et aliis canonice conferantur.

You ask of us what ought to be done concerning the clerics committed to your jurisdiction who, although they abound in many ecclesiastical benefices, when admonished by you are unwilling to be promoted to the major orders, saying that they have committed something in secret such as does not allow them to be ordained with a safe conscience. Since therefore on this case the sacred canons seem to disagree—since some say they are by no means to be compelled, while others assert the contrary—we untie by the present page the bond of all contrariety, establishing that, if the aforesaid clerics confess themselves unworthy of the reception of the major orders on account of their hidden sins, the inferiors in the same church, whose life is reputable, be preferred to them according to canonical institution. And unless perchance those who refuse to be ordained for the already mentioned cause have been very useful in other services of the church, let the benefices be taken from them and canonically conferred upon others.

Quod si pro sola voluntate renuerint ordinari, et suaserit utilitas ecclesiae, aut necessitas prorsus exegerit, ipsos, dummodo idonei sint, ad maiores ordines recipiendos per amissionem locorum, vel ordinum, quos habent, et beneficiorum subtractionem, appellatione cessante, compellas.

But if they should refuse to be ordained out of mere will, and the utility of the Church should suggest it, or necessity should altogether require it, you shall compel them, provided they are suitable, to receive the higher orders, through the loss of the places or of the orders which they hold, and through the subtraction of benefices, appeal ceasing.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Eventus mortalitatis infirmi non impedit promoveri eius medicum peritum, sollicitum et traditiones artis observantem.

The event of the infirm person’s mortality does not impede his physician, expert, solicitous, and observant of the traditions of the art, from being promoted.

Clemens III. R. Coloniensi Canonico.

Clement 3. To R., Canon of Cologne.

Ad aures nostras te significante pervenit, quod, quum in arte physica eruditus sis, pluribus iuxta ipsius artis traditionem exhibuisti cum diligentia medicinam, licet pluries in contrarium successerit, et quibus putabas adhibere medelam, medicinis perceptis mortis periculum incurrerunt. Verum quia, sicut asseris, ad sacros ordines desideras promoveri, et super eo nos consulere voluisti. Tibi breviter respondemus, quod, si super praemissis conscientia tua te remordeat, ad maiores ordines de nostro consilio non ascendas.

It has come to our ears, you signifying, that, since you are trained in the art of physic, you have exhibited to many, according to the tradition of that art, medicine with diligence, although it has repeatedly succeeded to the contrary, and those to whom you thought to apply a remedy, having received the medicines, incurred danger of death. But because, as you assert, you desire to be promoted to sacred orders, and wished to consult us about this, we briefly answer you, that, if concerning the aforesaid your conscience bites you, do not ascend to the greater orders by our counsel.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Qui steterit per annum in suspensione, privatur beneficio, quod prius habebat, et quod interim acquisivit.

Who shall have remained for a year under suspension is deprived of the benefice which he previously had, and of that which he acquired in the meantime.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

Quum bonae memoriae Clemens Papa praedecessor noster I. Buccarum, Melearum, Maium Raofacam, et quosdam alios Baranenses clericos vocavisset, ut ad praesentiam ipsius accederent, H. archidiacono suo, quem graviter laeserant, responsuri, quia venire iuxta mandatum apostolicum contempserunt, in eos fecit per Vigiliensem episcopum sententiam suspensionis promulgari, in qua, sicut dicitur, triennio permanentes, quidam ex ipsis suspensi aliud beneficium ecclesiasticum sunt adepti. Et quia, utrum beneficia sic recepta possint rationabiliter retinere, nos consulere voluisti, significatione tibi praesentium respondemus, quod non licet eis nec illa, quae habuerunt beneficia, vel quae postmodum sunt adepti aliquatenus retinere. Unde venerabili fratri nostro Baranensi archiepiscopo dedimus in mandatis, ut eos pro tanta pertinacia et contemptu apostolico beneficiis, quae habent, non differat spoliare, ea tamdiu in suis manibus detenturus, donec quid super his facere debeat, literas nostras accipiat et mandatum.

When Pope Clement of good memory, our predecessor, had summoned I. Buccarum, Melearum, Maium, Raofacam, and certain other Baranese clerics to come into his presence to make answer to his archdeacon H., whom they had grievously injured, because they scorned to come according to the apostolic mandate, he caused a sentence of suspension to be promulgated against them through the Bishop of Vigilia; in which, as it is said, remaining for three years, some of them, while suspended, obtained another ecclesiastical benefice. And because you wished to consult us whether benefices thus received can reasonably be retained, we reply to you by the notification of these presents that it is not permitted to them to retain in any way either those benefices which they had or those which they afterwards obtained. Wherefore we have given orders to our venerable brother, the archbishop of Baranese, that he not delay, for such stubbornness and apostolic contempt, to despoil them of the benefices which they have, holding these in his own hands until he receives our letters and mandate as to what he ought to do concerning these matters.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Subdiaconus in episcopum eligi potest.

A subdeacon can be elected as a bishop.

Innocentius III.

Innocent 3.

A multis multotiens, an subdiaconus in episcopum eligi valeat, haesitatur. Siquidem Urbanus Papa primus decrevit, ut nullus in episcopum, nisi in sacris ordinibus et religiose vivens inventus fuerit, eligatur. "Sacros," inquit, "ordines diaconatum dicimus et presbyteratum; hos siquidem solos primitiva ecclesia legitur habuisse.

By many, very often, it is a matter of hesitation whether a subdeacon may be chosen into a bishop. Indeed Pope Urban the First decreed that no one be elected into a bishop, unless he be found in sacred orders and living religiously. "Sacred," he says, "orders we call the diaconate and the presbyterate; for these alone the primitive church is read to have had.

Subdiaconos vero, quia etiam ipsi ministrant altaribus, opportunitate exigente concedimus in episcopos eligi; si tamen praeclarae scientiae ac religionis exsistant; quod ipsum non sine Romani Pontificis vel metropolitani licentia fieri permittimus." In quibus verbis innuitur, quod Urbanus ad statum primitivae ecclesiae se referens, in quo subdiaconatus ordo sacer minime dicebatur, instituit, ut de subdiacono, nisi utilitatis causa, et tunc etiam, nisi de permissione metropolitani vel Romani Pontificis, non posset electio celebrari. § 1. Verum quum hodie subdiaconatus inter sacros ordines computetur, sicut Urbanus Papa II. sub his verbis expressit: "Erubescant impii et intelligant, iudicio Spiritus sancti eos, qui in sacris ordinibus, presbyteratu, diaconatu, subdiaconatu sunt positi, si caste non vixerint, excludendos ab omni eorundem graduum dignitate," et iterum: "Nemo ad sacrum ordinem permittatur accedere, nisi aut virgo aut probatae castitatis exsistat, et qui usque ad subdiaconatum unicam et virginem habuerit uxorem;" et ad similitudinem diaconi et presbyteri subdiaconus debet continentiam observare, sicut est in sexta synodo constitutum, ut, si quis eorum, qui ad clerum accedunt, nuptiali iure mulieri voluerit copulari, hoc ante subdiaconatus ordinem faciat; et beatus Gregorius statuisse legitur, ut nullum facere subdiaconum praesumant episcopi, nisi qui se caste victurum promiserit. § 2. Nos volentes super hoc articulo disceptationis materiam amputare, statuimus, ut subdiaconus in episcopum valeat libere eligi sicut diaconus vel sacerdos.

“Subdeacons indeed, because they also minister at the altars, when exigency of opportunity requires we concede to be chosen into bishops; if, however, they prove to be of outstanding knowledge and religion; and we permit this very thing to be done not without the license of the Roman Pontiff or the metropolitan.” In which words it is hinted that Urban, referring himself to the status of the primitive church, in which the order of subdiaconate was in no way called sacred, instituted that from a subdeacon, unless for a cause of utility, and then also not unless by the permission of the metropolitan or of the Roman Pontiff, an election could not be celebrated. § 1. But since today the subdiaconate is counted among the sacred orders, as Urban II under these words expressed: “Let the impious blush and understand, by the judgment of the Holy Spirit, that those who are placed in sacred orders—presbyterate, diaconate, subdiaconate—if they shall not have lived chastely, must be excluded from all the dignity of those same grades,” and again: “Let no one be permitted to accede to sacred order unless he be either a virgin or of proved chastity, and he who up to the subdiaconate shall have had one wife and a virgin;” and in likeness to the deacon and the presbyter the subdeacon ought to observe continence, as it has been constituted in the sixth synod, that, if any of those who accede to the clergy should wish to be joined to a woman by nuptial right, he do this before the order of subdiaconate; and it is read that blessed Gregory decreed that bishops presume to make no one a subdeacon unless he shall have promised that he will live chastely. § 2. We, wishing to cut off the matter of disputation on this article, have decreed that a subdeacon may be freely chosen into a bishop just like a deacon or a priest.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Irregularis et in minoribus potest dispensative in abbatem institui.

One irregular and in minor orders can, by dispensation, be instituted as abbot.

Idem tit. S. Crucis Presbytero cardinali.

The same title. To the Cardinal Presbyter of the Holy Cross.

Tuam in Domino diligentiam commendamus, quam super monasterio sancti Quirici reformando dignosceris adhibere. Devotioni tuae praesentium auctoritate Mandamus, quatenus, si non potes eidem monasterio de persona idonea melius providere, tu monachum illum, quem in literis tuis de honestate ac industria commendasti, per quem status eiusdem loci creditur reformandus, nullum prorsus habens respectum ad petitionem illicitam, quam quidam laici faciebant, sed ex tuae duntaxat provisionis officio, instituas in abbatem, ita videlicet, quod ad sacros ordines non ascendat, quum, instante necessitatis articulo possit in abbatem assumi etiam in minoribus ordinibus constitutus. Et laici memorati non sint consanguinitate vel affinitate coniuncti monacho memorato, ut ex ipsorum petitione debeat contra eum aliqua sinistra suspicio suboriri.

We commend your diligence in the Lord, which you are known to apply toward reforming the monastery of Saint Quiricus. To your devotion by the authority of these presents we command, that, if you cannot better provide for the same monastery with a suitable person, you institute as abbot that monk whom in your letters you commended for honesty and industry, through whom the state of that place is believed to be reformed, having no regard whatsoever to the illicit petition which certain laymen were making, but solely by the office of your own provision; namely, in such a way that he not ascend to sacred orders, since, with the crisis of necessity pressing, he can be assumed as abbot even being constituted in the minor orders. And let the aforesaid laymen not be joined by consanguinity or affinity to the aforesaid monk, so that from their petition no sinister suspicion should arise against him.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Abbas, si est presbyter, et est benedictus, conferre potest ordinem clericalem.

The abbot, if he is a presbyter and is blessed, can confer the clerical order.

Idem Rothomagensi Archiepiscopo.

The same, to the Archbishop of Rouen.

Quum contingat interdum, quod laici ad monasteria convolantes a suis abbatibus tonsurentur, apostolicae sedis oraculum requisisti, an clericatus ordo in tonsura conferatur? Super quo tibi respondemus, quod, quum in VII. synodo sit statutum, ut lectores per manus impositionem licentia sit unicuique abbati in proprio monasterio solummodo faciendi, dummodo ipsis ab episcopo, secundum morem praeficiendorum abbatum, manus impositio facta noscatur, et constet, eum exsistere sacerdotem, per primam tonsuram, iuxta formam ecclesiae datam, a talibus abbatibus clericalis ordo confertur.

When it happens sometimes that laymen, flocking to monasteries, are tonsured by their abbots, you have sought the oracular judgment of the apostolic see, whether the clerical order is conferred in the tonsure? Concerning which we answer you that, since in the 7th synod it was decreed that it is permitted to any abbot to make readers through the imposition of hands only in his own monastery, provided that the imposition of hands upon them by a bishop, according to the custom for appointing abbots, is known to have been done, and it is established that he is a priest, through the first tonsure, according to the form given by the Church, by such abbots the clerical order is conferred.

[Praeterea etc. (cf. c. 24. de rescr. I. 3.) Dat.

[Moreover etc. (cf. c. 24. on rescripts, 1. 3.) Given.

Later. Kal. Sept.

Lateran. September 1.

Ao. XIII. 1210.]

Year 13. 1210.]

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Si canonicus regularis factus monachus, iusta de causa ad canoniam reversus, ubi postea praeficiatur, licite tenere poterit praelaturam.

If a canon regular, having become a monk, returns for a just cause to the canonry, where he is afterward placed in charge, he may lawfully hold the prelature.

Idem.

The same.

Intelleximus, quod, quum ante, quam esses assumptus ad regimen abbatiae, in monasterio tuo fueris laudabiliter conversatus, ad monasterium sancti Innocentii talis ordinis accessisti, ubi, quum aliquamdiu in ipso ordine permansisses, demum ad cor reversus de metropolitani et aliorum [religiosorum] consilio ad primam domum redire curasti, in qua tandem sub regularis observantiae disciplina taliter Deo et hominibus placuisti, quod per tuorum exigentiam meritorum fratres tui praefecerunt te sibi unanimiter in abbatem. Ne igitur occasione morae, quam in praescripto monasterio contraxisti, quasi conscientia tua te re mordeat, [et] in susceptae administrationis cura tepescas, attendentes, quod cautum est in canone, ne quis canonicus regularis, nisi forte (quod absit) publice lapsus sit, efficiatur monachus, et si factus fuerit, ad canonicatus ordinem revertatur, ultimus in choro manendo, cucullam ad memoriam delaturus: discretioni tuae mandamus, quatenus circa curam tibi commissam sollicitudinem exercere studeas indefessam, et taliter sequentia bona continuare prioribus, quod dignum a Deo possis meritum exspectare. [Dat.

We have understood that, when before you were assumed to the regimen of the abbacy you had conducted yourself laudably in your monastery, you went to the monastery of Saint Innocent of the same order, where, when you had remained for some time in that very order, at length, having returned to your heart, by the counsel of the metropolitan and of other [religious], you took care to return to the first house, in which at last, under the discipline of regular observance, you pleased God and men in such wise that, by the exigency of your merits, your brothers set you unanimously over themselves as abbot. Lest, therefore, on the occasion of the delay which you contracted in the aforesaid monastery, as though your conscience should bite you for the matter, [and] you should grow tepid in the care of the administration undertaken, attending to the fact that it is provided in the canon that no canon regular, unless perhaps (which far be it) he has publicly lapsed, be made a monk; and if he has been made, let him return to the order of canonicatus, remaining last in the choir, about to bear the cowl for remembrance: we command to your discretion that, inasmuch as concerns the care committed to you, you strive to exercise unwearied solicitude, and so to continue the following goods with the former that you may be able to expect a worthy merit from God. [Given.

Lat. VII. Kal.

Lateran. 7 Kalends.

Mart. Pont. nostr.

March. Of our pontificate.

Ao. XIII. 1210.]

Year 13. 1210.]

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Ordinatus ad sacros sine titulo, ab ordinatore iuste petit beneficium.

Ordained to the sacred orders without a title, he justly petitions for a benefice from the ordainer.

Idem.

The same.

Accepimus te nostris auribus intimante, quod quidam clerici, qui ad sacros ordines sine titulo sunt promoti, te ad ecclesiam Bracharensem super beneficiis obtinendis infestant, quibus etiam de cunctis reditibus ecclesiae tuae tunc commode ministrare non posses, praesertim quum mandemus eisdem in necessariis provideri, qui nec meritis, neque scientia etiam in parochialibus ecclesiastica beneficia promerentur, ne dum in ecclesia Bracharensi, quorum vita et scientia nobis est penitus ignota. De quibus si certitudinem haberemus, nec in maioribus eis, nec in minoribus praeciperemus ecclesiis provideri. Et licet idoneis in tuis capellis et in aliis parochialibus ecclesiis extra civitatem velis iuxta mandatum apostolicum providere, quum omnibus in maiori providere non possis, ipsi tamen provisionem in eisdem ecclesiis recipere dedignantur.

We have received, you intimating to our ears, that certain clerics, who have been promoted to sacred orders without a title, are harassing you at the church of Braga regarding the obtaining of benefices, to whom you could not then conveniently minister out of all the revenues of your church, especially since we command that provision be made for the same in necessities—who by neither merits nor knowledge would deserve ecclesiastical benefices even in parochial churches, much less in the church of Braga—whose life and knowledge are to us utterly unknown. About whom, if we had certainty, we would not order that they be provided for in either greater or lesser churches. And although you wish, according to the apostolic mandate, to provide for suitable men in your chapels and in other parochial churches outside the city, since you cannot provide for all in the greater, nevertheless they themselves disdain to receive provision in those same churches.

Iudices quoque et monitores seu exsecutores, ad quos literas nostras deportant, exceptiones tuas legitimas, quas in eorum praesentia proponis, non admittunt, unde postulabas a nobis, ut tibi provideremus benignius in hac parte. § 1. Licet igitur in ordinationibus clericorum illam tu ac praedecessores tui diligentiam debueritis adhibere, ut minus idonei non ordinarentur a vobis, ac ideo post promotionem eorum exceptionem huiusmodi non poteris praetendere contra illos, nisi forte, postquam promoti fuerint, reddiderint se indignos, nos ex superabundanti tamen, quando scribere pro talibus nos oportet, facimus in literis nostris apponi, ut, si ordinatus, pro quo scribimus, idoneus habeatur et ecclesiastico beneficio non indignus, ei ab ordinatore vel successore ipsius competens beneficium tribuatur, quum, et si tecum de iure agere vellemus, te possemus merito ad provisionem eorum compellere, quos a te vel praedecessoribus tuis ordinatos fuisse constaret, eo praesertim, quod ad obtinendum ecclesiasticum beneficium eos debes idoneos reputare, quos ad ordines suscepisti. Unde graviter sustinere non debes, sed nobis potius devote inclinare teneris, si illos examinari per alios facimus, quos sine examinatione non credimus ordinatos, antequam ad provisionem eorum te compellere velimus.

Judges also and monitors or executors, to whom they carry our letters, do not admit your legitimate exceptions, which you propose in their presence; whence you were petitioning from us that we might provide for you more benignly in this part. § 1. Therefore, although in the ordinations of clerics you and your predecessors ought to have applied that diligence, that the less suitable should not be ordained by you, and for that reason, after their promotion you cannot put forward an exception of this kind against them, unless perhaps, after they have been promoted, they render themselves unworthy, nevertheless we, out of superabundance, whenever it behooves us to write on behalf of such men, cause it to be inserted in our letters that, if the ordained man on whose behalf we write be held fit and not unworthy of an ecclesiastical benefice, a competent benefice be granted to him by the ordainer or his successor; since, even if we wished to act with you according to law, we could deservedly compel you to the provision for those whom it would be established had been ordained by you or your predecessors, especially because you ought to reckon those fit for obtaining an ecclesiastical benefice whom you have admitted to orders. Wherefore you ought not to bear it grievously, but are rather bound to incline devoutly to us, if we have them examined by others—whom we do not believe to have been ordained without examination—before we should wish to compel you to their provision.

§ 2. Mandamus igitur fraternitati tuae per apostolica praecipiendo scripta, quatenus eis, pro quibus te contigerit recipere nostra mandata in forma communi, in maiori ecclesia vel aliis ecclesiis parochialibus dioecesis Bracharensis providere non tardes, quum te pro minus idoneis compelli nolumus; exceptiones autem, si quas contra tales impetratores literarum nostrarum in delegatorum praesentia proposueris, praecipimus audiendas.

§ 2. We therefore mandate to your fraternity by apostolic writings by way of precept, that you do not delay to provide for those, for whom it shall have befallen you to receive our mandates in the common form, in the greater church or in other parochial churches of the diocese of Braga, since we are unwilling that you be compelled with respect to the less suitable; but as for exceptions, if any you shall have proposed against such impetrators of our letters in the presence of the delegates, we command that they be heard.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Minus idoneus in sacerdotem promoveri vel ad regimen animarum assumi non debet.

One less suitable ought not to be promoted into the priesthood or to be assumed to the regimen of souls.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the General Council.

Quum sit ars artium regimen animarum, districte praecipimus, ut episcopi promovendos in sacerdotes diligenter instruant et informent, vel per se ipsos, vel per alios idoneos viros super divinis officiis et ecclesiasticis sacramentis, qualiter ea rite valeant celebrare, quoniam, si de cetero rudes et ignaros ordinare praesumpserint, quod quidem facile poterit deprehendi, et ordinatores et ordinatos ultioni gravi decernimus subiacere. Sanctius enim est, maxime in ordinatione sacerdotum paucos bonos, quam multos malos habere ministros, quia, si caecus caecum ducit, ambo in foveam dilabuntur.

Since the regimen of souls is the art of arts, we strictly prescribe that the bishops diligently instruct and inform those to be promoted into priests, either by themselves or through other suitable men, concerning the divine offices and the ecclesiastical sacraments, how they may be able to celebrate them rite; since, if henceforth they presume to ordain untutored and ignorant men—which indeed can easily be detected—we decree that both the ordainers and the ordained are subject to grave punishment. For it is more holy, especially in the ordination of priests, to have few good rather than many bad ministers, because, if the blind leads the blind, both slip into the pit.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Defectus scientiae deiicit iam promotum.

A defect of knowledge casts down one already promoted.

Honorius III. Capitulo Bremensi.

Honorius 3. To the Chapter of Bremen.

Quamvis multa proposita fuerint contra venerabilem fratrem nostrum episcopum Calinensem, etsi nihil probatum esset de illis, quia tamen confessus est coram nobis, se nunquam de grammatica didicisse, nec etiam legisse Donatum, et per evidentiam facti usque adeo de illiteratura et insufficientia sua constat, quod contra Deum esset et canonicas sanctiones, tantum in episcopo tolerare defectum, de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio ipsum a pontificalis officii exsecutione et ab administratione Calinensis ecclesiae penitus duximus amovendum, irritantes si quid nomine ipsius ecclesiae vel de bonis eiusdem de cetero attentabit.

Although many things had been proposed against our venerable brother, the Bishop of Calinensis, even if nothing of them had been proven, yet because he confessed before us that he had never learned grammar, nor even read Donatus, and by the evidence of the fact it is established to such a degree concerning his illiteracy and insufficiency, that it would be against God and the canonical sanctions to tolerate so great a defect in a bishop, by the common counsel of our brothers we have deemed him to be entirely removed from the execution of the pontifical office and from the administration of the Church of Calinensis, annulling whatever hereafter he may attempt in the name of that church or concerning its goods.

TITULUS XV. DE SACRA UNCTIONE.

TITLE 15. ON THE SACRED ANOINTING.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Ecclesia Graecorum in ordinationibus et consecrationibus servare debet unctiones, quas servat ecclesia Romana; episcopus autem, quum consecratur, inungitur chrismate in capite et manibus; quod, si fuerit praetermissum, per tres episcopos est supplendum. ñ § 5. Tractat de unctione regum, et de differentiis in unctione inter reges et pontifices. Pan.

The Church of the Greeks in ordinations and consecrations ought to observe the unctions which the Roman Church observes; moreover, when a bishop is consecrated, he is anointed with chrism on the head and hands; which, if it shall have been omitted, is to be supplied by three bishops. ñ § 5. It treats of the anointing of kings, and of the differences in anointing between kings and pontiffs. Pan.

ñ § 6. Tractat de Christianorum omnium unctione. ñ § 7. Tractat de unctione chrismatis post baptismum, quae dicitur confirmatio. § 8. Tractat de consecratione altaris.

ñ § 6. It treats of the anointing of all Christians. ñ § 7. It treats of the anointing of chrism after baptism, which is called confirmation. § 8. It treats of the consecration of the altar.

Abbas.

Abbot.

Innocentius III.

Innocent III.

Quum venisset ad apostolicam sedem venerabilis frater noster Barcarensis episcopus, qui in consecratione sua sacram non acceperat unctionem, quoniam apud vos non consueverunt pontifices, quum consecrantur, inungi, nos quod illi defuerat mandavimus in ipso suppleri, facientes caput eius et manus per venerabilem fratrem nostrum Ioannem Albanensem episcopum, assistentibus ei duobus episcopis, secundum morem ecclesiasticum sacro chrismate deliniri. Hoc enim catholica ecclesia tenet, non solum ex praecepto divino, verum etiam Apostolorum exemplo. In Exodo quippe legitur praecepisse Dominus Moysi, ut Aaron et filios eius inungeret, quatenus sacerdotio fungerentur.

When our venerable brother the Barcarensian bishop came to the Apostolic See, who at his consecration had not received the sacred unction, since among you the pontiffs, when they are consecrated, are not accustomed to be anointed, we ordered that what had been lacking to him be supplied in him, having his head and hands anointed with sacred chrism by our venerable brother John, bishop of Albano, with two bishops assisting him, according to ecclesiastical custom. For the Catholic Church holds this, not only by divine precept, but also by the example of the Apostles. Indeed in Exodus it is read that the Lord commanded Moses to anoint Aaron and his sons, in order that they might perform the priesthood.

Et Anacletus Papa, natione Graecus, qui a B. Petro fuit in presbyterum ordinatus, et postea in apostolatus officio Clementi successit, tradit in ordinatione sua, ungendos episcopos more Apostolorum et Moysi, quia omnis sanctificatio in Spiritu sancto consistit, cuius invisibilis virtus sancto chrismati est permixta. Unde § 1. Scire te volumus, duas esse species unctionis: exteriorem, quae materialis est et visibilis, et interiorem, quae spiritualis est et invisibilis. Exteriori visibiliter inungitur corpus; interiori invisibiliter inungitur cor.

And Pope Anacletus, by nation a Greek, who by Blessed Peter was ordained into the presbyterate, and afterwards in the office of the apostolate succeeded Clement, hands down in his ordination that bishops are to be anointed after the manner of the Apostles and of Moses, because all sanctification consists in the Holy Spirit, whose invisible virtue is mingled with the holy chrism. Whence § 1. We wish you to know that there are two species of unction: the exterior, which is material and visible, and the interior, which is spiritual and invisible. By the exterior the body is anointed visibly; by the interior the heart is anointed invisibly.

De prima Iacobus Apostolus ait: "Infirmatur quis in vobis, inducat presbyteros ecclesiae, et orent super eum, ungentes eum oleo in nomine Domini, et oratio fidei salvabit infirmum." De secunda Ioannes Apostolus ait: "Vos unctionem, quam accepistis ab eo, maneat in vobis, et non necesse habetis, ut aliquis doceat vos, sed sicut unctio eius docet vos de omnibus." Unctio visibilis et exterior signum est interioris et invisibilis unctionis. Unctio vero invisibilis et interior non solum est signum, sed etiam sacramentum, quia, si digne sumitur, vel agit vel auget absque dubio quod designat. § 2. Ad exhibendum autem exteriorem et visibilem unctionem benedicitur oleum, quod dicitur catechumenorum vel infirmorum, et conficitur chrisma, quod ex oleo fit et balsamo mystica ratione.

Concerning the first James the Apostle says: "Is anyone among you sick? let him call the presbyters of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith will save the sick man." Concerning the second John the Apostle says: "You have an anointing, which you received from him; let it remain in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you, but as his anointing teaches you about all things." The visible and exterior anointing is a sign of the interior and invisible anointing. But the invisible and interior anointing is not only a sign, but also a sacrament, because, if it is received worthily, without doubt it either effects or augments that which it designates. § 2. Moreover, to exhibit the exterior and visible anointing, oil is blessed, which is called the oil of catechumens or of the infirm, and the chrism is prepared, which is made from oil and balsam by a mystical rationale.

Per oleum enim nitor conscientiae designatur, iuxta quod legitur: "Prudentes virgines acceperunt oleum in vasis suis cum lampadibus;" per balsamum autem odor famae exprimitur, propter quod dicitur: "Sicut balsamum aromatizans, odorem dedi. § 3. Hoc ergo chrismate ungi debet episcopus, non tam in corpore, quam in corde, ut et interius habeat nitorem conscientiae, quantum ad Deum, et exterius habeat odorem famae, quoad proximum. De nitore conscientiae dicit Apostolus: "Gloria nostra haec est, testimonium conscientiae nostrae," nam "omnis gloria filiae regis ab intus." De odore famae idem Apostolus ait: "Christi bonus odor sumus in omni loco, et aliis sumus odor vitae in vitam, aliis odor mortis in mortem." Debet enim episcopus bonum habere testimonium, et ab iis, qui sunt intus, et ab iis, qui sunt foris, ut cortina cortinam trahat, et qui audit dicat: veni.

For by oil the luster of conscience is designated, according to what is read: "The prudent virgins took oil in their vessels with their lamps;" but by balsam the odor of fame is expressed, wherefore it is said: "Like balsam giving aroma, I gave an odor." § 3. With this chrism, therefore, the bishop ought to be anointed, not so much in body as in heart, so that inwardly he may have the luster of conscience with respect to God, and outwardly he may have the odor of fame with respect to his neighbor. Of the luster of conscience the Apostle says: "This is our glory, the testimony of our conscience," for "all the glory of the king’s daughter is from within." Of the odor of fame the same Apostle says: "We are Christ’s good odor in every place, and to some we are an odor of life unto life, to others an odor of death unto death." For the bishop ought to have good testimony both from those who are within and from those who are without, so that curtain may draw curtain, and he who hears may say: come.

§ 4. Hoc unguento caput et manus episcopi consecrantur. Per caput enim mens intelligitur, iuxta illud: "Unge caput tuum, et faciem tuam lava." Per manus opera intelliguntur, iuxta illud: "Manus meae distillaverunt myrrham." Manus igitur ungitur oleo pietatis, ut episcopus operetur bonum ad omnes, maxime autem ad domesticos fidei. Caput autem ungitur balsamo caritatis, ut episcopus diligat Deum ex toto corde, et ex tota mente, et ex tota anima, et proximum suum sicut se ipsum.

§ 4. By this unguent the head and hands of the bishop are consecrated. For by the head the mind is understood, according to that: "Anoint your head, and wash your face." By the hands works are understood, according to that: "My hands have distilled myrrh." Therefore the hand is anointed with the oil of piety, that the bishop may work good toward all, but especially toward the household of the faith. The head, however, is anointed with the balsam of charity, that the bishop may love God with all his heart, and with all his mind, and with all his soul, and his neighbor as himself.

Caput inungitur propter auctoritatem et dignitatem, et manus propter ministerium et officium. Caput inungitur, ut ostendatur illius repraesentare personam, de quo dicitur per Prophetam: "Sicut unguentum in capite eius quod descendit in barbam, barbam Aaron." Caput enim viri Christus, caput Christi Deus, qui de se dicit: "Spiritus Domini super me eo, quod unxit me, evangelizare pauperibus misit me." Manus episcopi inunguntur, ut ostendatur accipere potestatem benedicendi et consecrandi. Unde, quum eas consecrator inungit, "Consecrare," inquit, "et sanctificare digneris, Domine, manus istas, per istam sanctam unctionem et per nostram benedictionem, ut quaecunque consecraverint consecrentur, et quaecunque benedixerint benedicantur in nomine Domini." § 5. Unde in veteri testamento non solum ungebatur sacerdos, sed etiam rex et Propheta, sicut in libro Regum Dominus praecepit Heliae: "Vade et revertere in domum tuam per desertum in Damascum, quumque perveneris illuc, unges Hazael regem super Syriam, et Iehu filium Namsi unges regem super Israel.

The head is anointed on account of authority and dignity, and the hands on account of ministry and office. The head is anointed, so that it may be shown to represent the person of him of whom it is said through the Prophet: "Like the unguent upon his head which descends upon the beard, the beard of Aaron." For the head of the man is Christ, the head of Christ is God, who says about himself: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me; he has sent me to evangelize the poor." The hands of the bishop are anointed, so that it may be shown that he receives the power of blessing and consecrating. Whence, when the consecrator anoints them, he says, "Deign to consecrate and to sanctify, O Lord, these hands, through this holy unction and through our benediction, so that whatever they shall have consecrated may be consecrated, and whatever they shall have blessed may be blessed in the name of the Lord." § 5. Whence in the Old Testament not only was the priest anointed, but also the king and the Prophet, just as in the Book of Kings the Lord commanded Elijah: "Go and return on your way through the desert to Damascus, and when you have come there, you shall anoint Hazael king over Syria, and Jehu son of Namsi you shall anoint king over Israel."

Elisaeum autem filium Saphat, qui est de Abel-Meula, unges Prophetam pro te." Sed ubi Iesus Nazarenus, quem unxit Deus Spiritu sancto, sicut in Actibus Apostolorum legitur, unctus est oleo pietatis prae consortibus suis, qui secundum Apostolum est caput ecclesiae, quae est corpus ipsius, principis unctio a capite [scilicet] ad brachium est translata, ut princeps extunc non ungatur in capite, sed in brachio, sive in humero, vel in armo, in quibus principatus congrue designatur, iuxta illud, quod legitur: "Factus est principatus super humerum eius, etc." Ad quod etiam significandum Samuel fecit poni armum ante Saul, cui dederat locum in capite ante eos, qui fuerunt invitati. In capite vero pontificis sacramentalis est delibutio conservata, quia personam capitis in pontificali officio repraesentat. Refert autem inter pontificis et principis unctionem, quia caput pontificis chrismate consecratur, brachium vero principis oleo delinitur, ut ostendatur, quanta sit differentia inter auctoritatem pontificis et principis potestatem.

But “Elisha, the son of Saphat, who is of Abel-Meula, you shall anoint prophet in your stead.” But when Jesus the Nazarene, whom God anointed with the Holy Spirit, as is read in the Acts of the Apostles, was anointed with the oil of piety before his consorts, he who, according to the Apostle, is the head of the church, which is his body, the ruler’s unction was transferred from the head [namely] to the arm, so that from then on the prince is not anointed on the head, but on the arm, or on the shoulder, or on the upper arm, in which the principate is suitably designated, according to that which is read: “Dominion was made upon his shoulder, etc.” To signify this as well Samuel had the shoulder set before Saul, to whom he had given a place at the head before those who had been invited. But upon the head of the pontiff the sacramental anointing has been preserved, because he represents the person of the Head in the pontifical office. Moreover, it differs between the unction of the pontiff and that of the prince, because the head of the pontiff is consecrated with chrism, but the arm of the prince is anointed with oil, to show how great the difference is between the authority of the pontiff and the power of the prince.

§ 6. Quia vero Christus fecit nos in sanguine suo Deo nostro regnum et sacerdotes, propter quod Petrus Apostolus ait: "Vos estis genus electum, regale sacerdotium:" idcirco in novo testamento non solum reges et sacerdotes unguntur, sed etiam omnes Christiani bis ante baptismum, scilicet oleo benedicto, primum in pectore, deinde inter scapulas, et bis post baptismum, scilicet chrismate sancto, primum in vertice, demum in fronte. In pectore namque baptizandus inungitur, ut per sancti Spiritus donum abiiciat errorem et ignorantiam, et suscipiat fidem rectam, quia iustus ex fide vivit. Inter scapulas autem baptizandus inungitur, ut per Spiritus sancti gratiam excutiat negligentiam et torporem, et bonam operationem exerceat, quia fides sine operibus mortua est, ut per fidei sacramentum sit munditia cogitationum in pectore, et per operis exercitium sit fortitudo laborum.

§ 6. But because Christ has made us, in his blood, a kingdom and priests for our God, wherefore the Apostle Peter says: “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood,” therefore in the New Testament not only kings and priests are anointed, but all Christians as well—twice before baptism, namely with blessed oil, first on the breast, then between the shoulder-blades; and twice after baptism, namely with holy chrism, first on the crown of the head, finally on the forehead. For on the breast the one-to-be-baptized is anointed, that through the gift of the Holy Spirit he may cast away error and ignorance, and take up right faith, because the just lives by faith. But between the shoulder-blades the one-to-be-baptized is anointed, that through the grace of the Holy Spirit he may shake off negligence and torpor, and practice good works, because faith without works is dead; so that through the sacrament of faith there may be a cleanliness of thoughts in the breast, and through the exercise of work there may be a fortitude of labors.

In scapulis, quatenus fides per dilectionem secundum Apostolum operetur. In vertice vero baptizatus inungitur, ut sit paratus omni petenti de fide reddere rationem, quia per caput intelligitur mens, iuxta quod legitur: "Oculi sapientis in capite eius," cuius superior pars est ratio, et inferior est sensualitas. Unde bene per verticem, quae est superior pars capitis, intelligitur ratio, quae est superior pars mentis.

On the shoulders, inasmuch as faith may operate through love according to the Apostle. On the vertex, however, the baptized is anointed, that he may be ready to render a reason concerning the faith to everyone who asks, because by the head is understood the mind, according to what is read: "The eyes of the wise man are in his head," whose higher part is reason, and the lower is sensuality. Whence rightly by the vertex, which is the higher part of the head, is understood reason, which is the higher part of the mind.

In fronte ungitur baptizatus, ut libere confiteatur quod credit, quia "corde creditur ad iustitiam, ore vero fit confessio ad salutem," memor eius, quod Dominus ait: "Qui me confessus fuerit coram hominibus, confitebor et ego ei coram Patre meo." Ante baptismum ergo ungitur oleo benedicto, et post baptismum chrismate sancto, quia chrisma soli competit Christiano. Christus enim a chrismate dicitur, vel potius a Christo dicitur chrisma, non secundum nominis formam, sed secundum fidei rationem. A Christo vero Christiani dicuntur, tanquam uncti deriventur ab uncto, ut omnes concurrant in odorem illius unguenti, cuius nomen oleum est effusum.

The baptized is anointed on the forehead, that he may freely confess what he believes, because “with the heart one believes unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation,” mindful of that which the Lord said: “Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father.” Before baptism, therefore, he is anointed with blessed oil, and after baptism with holy chrism, because chrism befits the Christian alone. For Christ is said from chrism, or rather chrism is said from Christ, not according to the form of the name, but according to the reason of faith. From Christ indeed Christians are named, as though the anointed are derived from the Anointed, that all may converge into the odor of that unguent, whose name is oil poured out.

§ 7. Per frontis chrismationem manus impositio designatur, quae alio nomine dicitur confirmatio, quia per eam Spiritus sanctus ad augmentum datur et robur. Unde quum ceteras unctiones simplex sacerdos vel presbyter valeat exhibere, hanc non nisi summus sacerdos, id est episcopus, debet conferre, quia de solis Apostolis legitur, quorum vicarii sunt episcopi, quod per manus impositionem Spiritum sanctum dabant, quemadmodum Actuum Apostolorum lectio manifestat: "Quum audissent," inquit, "Apostoli, qui erant Hierosolymis, quia recepisset Samaria verbum Dei, miserunt ad eos Petrum et Ioannem; qui quum venissent, oraverunt pro ipsis, ut acciperent Spiritum sanctum. Nondum enim in quemquam illorum venerat, sed baptizati tantum erant in nomine Domini Iesu; tunc imponebant manus super illos, et accipiebant Spiritum sanctum." Cuius adventus per unctionis ministerium designatur, quia columba, in qua Spiritus sanctus super Christum in baptismo descendit, ad vesperum in cataclysmo revertens, ramum retulit virentis olivae, cuius utique sacramentum David Propheta praenoscens, exhilarandam faciem in oleo praedicavit.

§ 7. Through the chrismation of the forehead the imposition of hands is designated, which by another name is called confirmation, because through it the Holy Spirit is given for increase and for strength. Hence, whereas a simple priest or presbyter is able to administer the other anointings, this one ought to be conferred by none but the high priest, that is, the bishop, because it is read of the Apostles alone—of whom the bishops are the vicars—that they gave the Holy Spirit by the imposition of hands, as the reading of the Acts of the Apostles makes manifest: "When," he says, "the Apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John; who, when they had come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For He had not yet come upon any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus; then they laid hands upon them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit." The advent of whom is signified by the ministry of anointing, because the dove, in which the Holy Spirit descended upon Christ in baptism, returning at evening in the cataclysm (the Flood), brought back a branch of a green olive, whose sacrament, as David the Prophet foreknew, he proclaimed that the face is to be gladdened with oil.

§ 8. Ungitur praeterea secundum ecclesiasticum morem, quum consecratur altare, quum dedicatur templum, et quum benedicitur calix, non solum ex mandato legis divinae, verum etiam exemplo beati Silvestri, qui, quum consecrabat altare, illud chrismate perungebat. Praecepit enim Dominus Moysi, ut faceret oleum unctionis, de quo ungeret testimonii tabernaculum et arcam testamenti, mensamque cum vasis, de quibus etiam unctionibus, si forsitan dubitaveris, quum a te fuerimus requisiGksIGZyYXRlcm5pdGF0ZW0gdHVhbSBwbGVuaXVzIGluc3RydWVtdXMuIFZlcnVtIHRhbWVu unctionis sacramentum aliud quidem efficit et figurat tam in novo quam in veteri testamento, unde non iudaizat ecclesia, quum unctionis celebrat sacramentum, sicut antiqui mentiuntur, qui neque scripturas, neque Dei novere virtutem. § 9. Monemus igitur, fraternitatem tuam et exhortamur attentius, per apostolica [tibi] scripta mandantes, quatenus ad mandatum dilecti filii nostri tit.

§ 8. Moreover, according to ecclesiastical custom, there is an anointing when the altar is consecrated, when a temple is dedicated, and when a chalice is blessed, not only by the mandate of the divine law, but also by the example of blessed Sylvester, who, when he was consecrating an altar, would smear it with chrism. For the Lord commanded Moses to make the oil of anointing, with which he should anoint the tabernacle of testimony and the ark of the testament, and the table with the vessels; concerning which anointings also, if perchance you should have doubted, when we have been asked by you, we will instruct your fraternity more fully. Nevertheless, the sacrament of anointing indeed effects and prefigures something else both in the New and in the Old Testament; whence the Church does not Judaize when it celebrates the sacrament of anointing, as the ancients falsely assert, who know neither the scriptures nor the power of God. § 9. We admonish, therefore, your fraternity and we exhort more attentively, mandating through apostolic writings [to you], that, to the extent of the mandate of our beloved son, tit.

sanctae Crucis presbyteri cardinalis apostolicae sedis legati tu quoque sacram suscipias unctionem, ne quid tibi desit ad plenitudinem sacramenti, ut, quum sacro fueris chrismate delibutus, archiepiscopos et episcopos tuos similiter ungas, et per eos facias manus sacerdotum inungi oleo benedicto, ut illum de cetero in ordinandis presbyteris et consecrandis episcopis morem serves et facias observari quem apostolica sedes observat, quae disponente Domino cunctorum fidelium mater est et magistra. Mittimus autem tibi per cardinalem praedictum pontificalia ornamenta, caligas et sandalia, amictum et albam, cingulum et succinctorium, orarium et manipulum, tunicam et dalmaticam, chirothecas et annulum, planetam et mitram. Pallium vero per dilectum filium Io. capellanum nostrum antea miseramus.

You too, presbyter cardinal of the Holy Cross, legate of the Apostolic See, receive the sacred unction, lest anything be lacking to you for the plenitude of the sacrament, so that, when you have been anointed with sacred chrism, you may anoint your archbishops and bishops likewise, and through them you may have the hands of the priests anointed with blessed oil, so that henceforth in ordaining presbyters and in consecrating bishops you may observe and cause to be observed the custom which the Apostolic See observes,
which, with the Lord disposing, is the mother and teacher of all the faithful. Moreover, we send to you through the aforesaid cardinal the pontifical ornaments: buskins and sandals, the amice and alb, the cincture and subcincture, the orarium (stole) and the maniple, the tunic and dalmatic, the gloves and the ring, the chasuble and the miter. As for the pallium, we had previously sent it through our beloved son John, our chaplain.

Et Licet Romanus Pontifex non utatur baculo pastorali, tum propter historiam, tum etiam propter mysticam rationem, quod idem cardinalis, sicut a nobis accepit, poterit edocere, tu tamen ad similitudinem aliorum pontificum poteris eo uti. [Dat. Anagniae VI. Kal.

And although the Roman Pontiff does not use the pastoral staff, both on account of history and also on account of a mystic rationale, which the same cardinal, as he has received from us, will be able to instruct, you nevertheless, in the likeness of other pontiffs, will be able to use it. [Given at Anagni 6. Kal.

Mart. Pont. nostr.

March, of our pontificate.

Ao. VII. 1204.]

Year 7. 1204.]

TITULUS XVI. DE SACRAMENTIS NON ITERANDIS.

TITLE 16. ON SACRAMENTS NOT TO BE ITERATED.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

In ordinato in subdiaconum sine manuum impositione, et confirmato non chrismatis, sed olei unctione, non fiet iteratio, sed supplebitur praetermissum.

In one ordained as a subdeacon without the imposition of hands, and in one confirmed not by the anointing of chrism but of oil, there shall be no repetition, but the omitted will be supplied.

Innocentius III.

Innocent III.

Pastoralis (Et infra: [cf. c. 28. de off. iud. del.

Pastoral (And below: [cf. ch. 28 on the office of the delegated judge.

I. 29.]) Praeterea nos consulere voluisti, an permitti debeat ministrare qui sine impositione manuum fuerit ad ordinem subdiaconatus assumptus, et si confirmationis sacramentum in eo debeat iterari, qui per errorem fuit non chrismate, sed oleo delinitus. Ad quod fraternitati tuae breviter duximus respondendum, quod in talibus non est aliquid iterandum, sed caute supplendum quod incaute fuerat praetermissum. [Dat.

1. 29.]) Furthermore you wished to consult us, whether he ought to be permitted to minister who had been assumed to the order of the subdiaconate without the imposition of hands, and whether the sacrament of confirmation ought to be repeated in him who through error was anointed not with chrism, but with oil. To which we have judged it should be briefly answered to your fraternity, that in such cases nothing is to be repeated, but with caution there is to be supplied what had incautiously been omitted. [Given.

Rom. ap. S. Petr. XIV.

Rome, at St. Peter’s, 14.

Kal. Ian. 1204.]

Kalends of January, 1204.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Prohibet sepultos a schismaticis exhumari, vestimenta, cum quibus celebrarunt, iterum benedici, et altaria, in quibus celebrarunt, iterum consecrari.

It forbids the buried to be exhumed by schismatics, the vestments with which they celebrated to be blessed again, and the altars on which they celebrated to be consecrated again.

Honorius III. Archiepisco Londonensi et eius Suffraganeis.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishop of London and his Suffragans.

A nobis humiliter quaesivistis, quid fieri debeat de mortuorum corporibus, qui tempore schismatici et reprobi Waldemarii a schismaticis sunt sepulti, et de indumentis sacerdotalibus, cum quibus, nec non de altaribus, in quibus degradati presbyteri celebrarunt. Nos autem inquisitioni vestrae breviter respondemus, quod non credimus, ob hoc duntaxat sepultos huiusmodi exhumandos, aut debere indumenta talia iterum benedici, vel reconsecrari altaria supradicta.

You have humbly asked of us what ought to be done about the bodies of the dead, who in the time of the schismatic and reprobate Waldemar were buried by schismatics, and about the sacerdotal vestments with which, and likewise about the altars on which, degraded presbyters have celebrated. But we briefly answer to your inquiry that we do not believe, for this reason only, that persons thus buried are to be exhumed, or that such vestments ought to be blessed again, or the aforesaid altars reconsecrated.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Si in ordinatione presbyteri vel diaconi manus impositio fuerit praetermissa, statutis temporibus supplebitur.

If in the ordination of a presbyter or deacon the imposition of hands has been omitted, it shall be supplied at the appointed times.

Gregorius IX. Archiepiscopo Londonensi.

Gregory IX. To the Archbishop of London.

Presbyter et diaconus quum ordinatur, manus impositionem tactu corporali ritu ab Apostolis introducto recipiunt. Quod si omissum fuerit, non est aliquatenus iterandum, sed statuto tempore ad huiusmodi ordines conferendos caute supplendum quod per errorem exstitit praetermissum. Suspensio autem manuum debet fieri, quum oratio super caput effunditur ordinandi.

When a presbyter and a deacon are ordained, they receive the imposition of hands with bodily touch, by a rite introduced by the Apostles. But if this shall have been omitted, it is by no means to be repeated, but at the appointed time for conferring such orders, what was through error omitted should cautiously be supplied. Moreover, the suspension of the hands ought to be done when the prayer is poured forth over the head of the one being ordained.

[Datum. Anagniae V. Id. Dec. Pont.

[Given at Anagni 5 days before the Ides of December, of the pontificate.]

nostr. Ao. VI. 1232.]

of our pontificate, year 6, 1232.]

TITULUS XVII. DE FILIIS PRESBYTERORUM ORDINANDIS VEL NON.

TITLE 17. ON THE SONS OF PRESBYTERS TO BE ORDAINED OR NOT.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Illegitimus non ordinatur, nisi ut religiosus fiat, nec tunc praeficitur, id est ad praelaturam non habilitatur.

An illegitimate person is not ordained, except so that he may become a religious; nor even then is he put in charge—that is, he is not habilitated for a prelature.

Ex concilio Pictaviensi.

From the council of Poitiers.

Ut filii presbyterorum et ceteri ex fornicatione nati ad sacros ordines non promoveantur, nisi aut monachi fiant, vel in congregatione canonica regulariter viventes. Praelationem vero nullatenus habeant. Sed neque servi, nisi a dominis suis libertate donentur.

That the sons of presbyters and the others born of fornication are not to be promoted to the sacred orders, unless either they become monks, or live regularly in a canonical congregation. But let them by no means have prelation. Nor slaves either, unless they are endowed with liberty by their masters.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Illegitimus filius sacerdotis, qui, hoc tacito, per rescriptum apostolicum paternam ecclesiam impetravit, removetur ab illa.

An illegitimate son of a priest, who, this kept silent, has obtained the paternal church through an apostolic rescript, is removed from it.

Alexander III. Linconensi Electo.

Alexander III. To the Elect of Lincoln.

Ad praesentiam nostram accedens R. presbyter, tacito, quod esset filius sacerdotis, per fraudem [literas] impetravit a nobis, ut in ecclesia de Bilesbi, in qua pater eius ministravit, exsisteret capellanus. Ideoque discretioni tuae per apostolica scripta [praecipiendo] mandamus, quatenus infra XL. dies post harum susceptionem literarum rei veritatem inquiras diligenter, et si tibi constiterit, quod memoratus R. sit in sacerdotio genitus, et quod pater eius in eadem ecclesia ministravit, non obstantibus praedictis literis nostris, ipsum omni occasione et appellatione cessantibus amoveas ab eadem.

Approaching our presence, R., a presbyter, keeping silent that he was a priest’s son, by fraud obtained [letters] from us, that he might be chaplain in the church of Bilesbi, in which his father ministered. Therefore to your discretion through apostolic writings [by ordering] we mandate, that within 40. days after the receipt of these letters you diligently inquire into the truth of the matter, and if it is established to you that the aforesaid R. was begotten in priesthood, and that his father ministered in the same church, notwithstanding our aforesaid letters, you remove him from the same, all occasion and appeal ceasing.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Non potest filius sacerdotis ecclesiae paternae praeesse. H. d. cum sequ.

The son of a priest cannot preside over his father’s church. This decree with what follows.

Idem.

The same.

Praesentium etiam auctoritate tibi iubemus, ut filios sacerdotum in ecclesiis paternis ministrare, vel eas qualibet occasione obtinere nullatenus patiaris, sed ipsos ab ecclesiis, in quibus patres eorum ministrasse noscuntur, cessante omni appellationis obstaculo studeas penitus amovere.

By the authority of these presents we also command you that you by no means allow the sons of priests to minister in their paternal churches, or to obtain them on any occasion whatsoever; but that you strive to remove them utterly from the churches in which their fathers are known to have ministered, with every obstacle of appeal ceasing.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Idem dicit.

The same says.

Idem Vigorensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Vigor.

Conquerente nobis M. clerico auribus nostris innotuit, quod, quum R. presbyter ecclesiam B. Mariae de Vicum tanquam persona diutius habuisset, [et] post mortem eius idem Milo a Richardo Paciford domino fundi fuisset praesentatus, R. filius eius presbyteri in sacerdotio genitus institutionem ipsius clerici nisus est impedire, et ad habendam ecclesiam eandem modis omnibus, quibus potest, adspirat. Quoniam igitur indignum est et canonicae obviat sanctioni, ut filii debeant patribus succedere in ecclesiis, nos ad enormitatem istam eradicandam sollicite volentes et diligenter intendere, Fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si publicum est et notorium, patrem praedicti R. clerici habuisse in praedicta ecclesia personatum, filium eius ibidem ministrare aut eiusdem ecclesiae personatum habere nullatenus patiaris, et, si forte [aliqua causa] iam institutus est ibi, eum, sublato appellationis remedio, auctoritate nostra inde non differas amovere, et memoratum M. si tibi ad ipsam ecclesiam fuerit praesentatus ab eo, ad quem praesentatio spectare dignoscitur, ibi dummodo alias idoneus sit, contradictione et appellatione cessantibus, non postponas recipere, ipsumque facias praedictam quiete possidere ecclesiam.

With the clerk M. bringing complaint to us, it became known to our ears that, when R. the presbyter had for a long time held the church of Blessed Mary of Vicum as a person (i.e., with the personate), [and] after his death that same Milo had been presented by Richard Paciford, the lord of the estate, R., his son, begotten in the priesthood, endeavored to impede the institution of that clerk, and aspires by all the ways by which he is able to have that same church. Since therefore it is unworthy and runs counter to canonical sanction that sons ought to succeed their fathers in churches, we, wishing and diligently intending to root out that enormity, command your Fraternity by apostolic writings by way of precept, to wit, that, if it is public and notorious that the father of the aforesaid clerk R. had the personate in the aforesaid church, you should by no means allow his son to minister there or to have the personate of the same church; and if perhaps [for some reason] he has already been instituted there, you are not to delay to remove him from there, the remedy of appeal being taken away, by our authority; and the aforesaid M., if he shall have been presented to you to that very church by him to whom the presentation is recognized to pertain, there, provided he is otherwise suitable, with contradiction and appeal ceasing, do not postpone to receive, and you are to cause him to possess the aforesaid church in quiet.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Episcopus, qui scienter contulit filio sacerdotis paternam ecclesiam, exinde eum removere non potest.

The bishop who knowingly conferred upon the son of a priest his father’s church cannot remove him therefrom.

Idem Londonensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of London.

Veniens ad praesentiam nostram N. clericus lator praesentium supplici nobis insinuatione proposuit, quod, quum illum ad capellam ecclesiae sancti I. de Novoburgo, quam ei concessisti et assignasti, attitulasses, et ad eandem in presbyterum ordinasses, ipsum ea postea spoliasti eo, quod pater eius in praedicta ecclesia ministravit. Ideoque fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si tibi innotuerit, quando eam sibi dedisti, quod pater eius presbyter in dicta ecclesia ministrasset, ipsam ei dilatione et appellatione cessante restituas et in pace dimittas, amoto alio, si quem instituisti forsitan in eadem. Verum si hoc ignorans fecisti, ex quo ad ecclesiam ipsam eum in presbyterum ordinasti, eam sibi restituas, et donec in alia ecclesia sibi provideas, unde honeste valeat sustentari, eidem nullum super praedicta ecclesia gravamen inferas vel molestiam.

Coming into our presence, N., a cleric, the bearer of these presents, set forth to us by humble insinuation that, when you had attitled him to the chapel of the church of Saint I. of Newburgh, which you had granted and assigned to him, and had ordained him as presbyter for the same, you afterward despoiled him of it on the ground that his father ministered in the aforesaid church. Therefore we command your fraternity by apostolic writings by way of precept, that, if it has become known to you that, when you gave it to him, his father, a presbyter, had ministered in the said church, you restore it to him, delay and appeal ceasing, and dismiss him in peace, removing the other, if perhaps you have instituted anyone in the same. But if you did this in ignorance, since you ordained him as presbyter to that church, restore it to him, and until you provide for him in another church whence he may be able to be honorably sustained, you are to inflict upon him no burden or molestation concerning the aforesaid church.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Gratiam continet et hoc dicit: Ex quo filius sacerdotis est ordinatus, non debet carere beneficio. Ioan. Andr.

It contains grace and says this: Since the son of a priest has been ordained, he ought not to lack a benefice. John Andr.

Idem Oxonensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Oxford.

Proposuit nobis R. lator praesentium, quod quum ipse ad ecclesiam de Saleb. a domino fundi fuerit praesentatus, tu curam animarum noluisti sibi committere, vel huic rei assensum tuum praestare pro eo, quod esset filius sacerdotis. Super quo utique discretionem tuam, sicut dignum est, in Domino commendamus, et providentiam tuam gratam gerimus admodum et acceptam.

R., the bearer of the present, proposed to us that, when he himself had been presented to the church of Saleb. by the lord of the fief, you were unwilling to commit to him the cure of souls, or to lend your assent to this matter, on the ground that he was the son of a priest. Wherein, as is worthy, we commend your discretion in the Lord, and we hold your providence as very pleasing and acceptable.

Ceterum, quia necessitatibus eius et laboribus, quos ad nos veniendo sustinuit, interna mentis affectione compatimur, et indignum est, ut ipse, postquam est in subdiaconum, ut asserit, ordinatus, omnino debeat ecclesiastici beneficii provisione carere, discretionem tuam per apostolica scripta monemus atque mandamus, quatenus aliquem honestum presbyterum cum assensu eiusdem clerici infra XL. dies post harum susceptionem literarum, contradictione et appellatione cessantibus invenire studeas, qui ecclesiae serviat supradictae, ita, quod praefatus R. medietatem omnium beneficiorum praedictae ecclesiae, eidem in suo ordine serviendo, divino intuitu, quoad vixerit, nostra et tua auctoritate pacifice debeat obtinere. Non enim solus presbyter missarum solemnia vel alia divina officia potest sine ministri suffragio celebrare.

Moreover, because we sympathize with his necessities and the labors which he endured by coming to us with an inward affection of mind, and it is unworthy that he himself, after he has been ordained, as he asserts, into the subdeacon, should altogether have to lack the provision of an ecclesiastical benefice, we admonish and command your discretion through apostolic writings, to the extent that you should strive to find some honorable presbyter, with the assent of the same cleric, within 40. days after the receipt of these letters, contradiction and appeal ceasing, who may serve the aforesaid church, in such wise that the aforesaid R., serving the same in his own order, by divine regard, as long as he shall live, ought by our authority and yours peacefully to obtain the half of all the benefices of the aforesaid church. For a presbyter alone cannot celebrate the solemnities of masses or other divine offices without the support of a minister.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Filius praeesse potest ecclesiae, cui pater praefuit mediate.

A son can preside over the church over which his father presided mediately.

Idem Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ex transmissa nobis conquestione G. clerici percepimus, quod ad dilecti filii nostri abbatis de Castris praesentationem in quodam beneficio ecclesiae de N. eum in praesenti recipere distulisti eo, quod quidam [E.], qui dicebatur pater eius, in praefata ecclesia ministravit, quo defuncto media intercessit persona, cui praedictum beneficium est collatum. Ideoque fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus atque praecipimus, quatenus, si est ita, praenominatum G. ad praefatum beneficium admittere non postponas omni occasione et appellatione cessantibus, non ideo minus observato apostolici rescripti decreto, quod hic successionem in ecclesia Dei hereditariam detestatur, ut canonicam approbet possessionem. [Porro si his exsequendis ambo non poteritis interesse, alter vestrum nihilominus exsequatur.]

From the complaint transmitted to us of G., a clerk, we have perceived that, upon the presentation of our beloved son, the abbot of Castris, to a certain benefice of the church of N., you have deferred to receive him at present, because a certain [E.], who was said to be his father, ministered in the aforesaid church, and upon his decease an intermediate person intervened, to whom the aforesaid benefice was conferred. Therefore, to your fraternity through apostolic writings we command and strictly enjoin, that, if it is so, you do not postpone to admit the aforementioned G. to the aforesaid benefice, all pretext and appeal ceasing, the decree of the apostolic rescript being nonetheless observed, which here detests hereditary succession in the Church of God, in order that it may approve canonical possession. [Moreover, if in carrying these things out you both are not able to be present, let one of you nevertheless carry them out.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Filius praeesse potest ecclesiae, in qua pater sine titulo ministravit.

A son can preside over the church in which his father ministered without a title.

Idem Vigorensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Vigor.

Constitutus in praesentia nostra G. clericus lator praesentium supplici nobis insinuatione monstravit, quod, quum capellam de Storton. canonice fuisset adeptus, et eam pluribus annis pacifice possedisset, R. miles ipsum ea sine iudicio et iustitia spoliavit. Quumque memoratus clericus exinde apud te, frater coepiscope, deposuisset querelam, obiectum fuit ei, quod pater suus in capella ministravit eadem, et praefatam capellam nondum potuit rehabere.

Having appeared in our presence, G., a cleric, the bearer of these presents, showed to us by suppliant insinuation that, when he had canonically obtained the chapel of Storton., and had peacefully possessed it for many years, R., a knight, despoiled him of it without judgment and justice. And when the aforesaid cleric thereafter had lodged a complaint before you, brother fellow-bishop, it was objected to him that his father had ministered in the same chapel, and he has not yet been able to recover the aforesaid chapel.

Quia vero ad nostrum spectat officium, insolentiam laicorum contra viros ecclesiasticos debita severitate compescere: Fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, rei veritate diligenter inquisita et cognita, si tibi constiterit, quod idem clericus a capella fuerit praedicta per potentiam laicalem eiectus, et quod pater eius praefatae capellae persona seu perpetuus vicarius non fuerit, licet in eadem nomine eiusdem G. quandoque ministraverit, ipsam sibi cum reditibus inde perceptis, amoto alio, si quis eam detinet, dilatione, occasione et appellatione cessantibus, restituere non omittas, literis nostris, si quae sint impetratae, veritati et iustitiae non praeiudicantibus, et ipsum sicut canonice adeptus fuit, faciatis pacifice possidere. [Si his exsequendis ambo interesse non poteritis, alter adhibitis sibi discretis viris et honestis ea nihilominus exsequatur.]

Since indeed it pertains to our office to restrain with due severity the insolence of laymen against ecclesiastical men: we command your Fraternity by apostolic writings, by way of precept, that, the truth of the matter diligently inquired and known, if it has become clear to you that the same cleric was ejected from the aforesaid chapel by lay power, and that his father was not the parson (persona) of the aforesaid chapel nor the perpetual vicar, although in the same, in the name of the same G., he at some time ministered, you do not omit to restore it to him, with the revenues therefrom received, removing any other, if anyone detains it, delays, pretexts, and appeals ceasing, our letters, if any have been obtained, not prejudicing truth and justice, and cause him to possess it peaceably, just as he had canonically obtained it. [If you both cannot be present for carrying out these things, let the one or the other nonetheless carry them out, having associated to himself discreet and honorable men.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Si is, cui concessum est a Papa, ut possit dispensare cum filiis sacerdotum circa ecclesias paternas immediate tenendas cum aliquo dispensat, ille per literas iustitiae postea contra eum impetratas removeri non poterit.

If he to whom it has been conceded by the Pope that he may dispense with sons of priests concerning paternal churches to be held immediately dispenses with someone, that man cannot afterward be removed by letters of justice obtained against him.

Idem Eboracensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of York.

Ex tua nobis parte est propositum, quod, quum olim ad tuam consultationem super filiis sacerdotum tales a nobis literas recepisses, ut eos posses in ecclesiis, quas patres eorum nullo mediante possederant, sustinere, quos probatae vitae et sanae conversationis cognosceres, vel quos longo tempore illas tenuisse constaret: quidam ad iudices literas impetraverunt, ut, si constaret, eos esse filios sacerdotum vel clericorum, qui in proximo ante eos ecclesias tenuerunt, super his imponatur eis, appellatione cessante, silentium, et ecclesias istas ipsis assignent, quamvis in eis se ostendere nequeant per episcopos institutos. Super quo tibi taliter respondemus, quod, si per priores literas nostras cum aliquibus clericis dispensasti, dispensationem tuam posteriorum literarum nostrarum intuitu nolumus irritari, sed eam servari praecipimus illibatam. Alios vero clericos laicae donationis intuitu in ecclesiis parochiali iuri subiectis sine auctoritate pontificis sui institui, aut institutos in eis remanere, auctoritate apostolica prohibemus.

It has been proposed to us on your part that, since formerly, upon your consultation concerning the sons of priests, you had received from us such letters that you might be able to sustain them in the churches which their fathers had possessed without any intermediary, those whom you should know to be of proved life and sound conversation, or those whom it should be established to have held them for a long time: certain persons have procured letters to judges, that, if it should be established that they are sons of priests or clerics who immediately before them held the churches, upon these matters, appeal ceasing, silence be imposed upon them, and that these churches be assigned to them, although they cannot show themselves to have been instituted therein by the bishops. Whereupon we thus respond to you, that, if by our prior letters you have dispensed with some clerics, we do not wish your dispensation to be invalidated in view of our later letters, but we command that it be kept inviolate. But other clerics, by reason of lay donation, to be instituted in churches subject to parochial right without the authority of their own pontiff, or, having been instituted, to remain in them, we prohibit by apostolic authority.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Si manifestum est, quod filius in ecclesia immediate successit patri, sine aliqua testium receptione ab illa removebitur.

If it is manifest that the son in the church immediately succeeded the father, he will be removed from it without any reception of witnesses.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Suffragans.

Quoniam est sacris canonibus prohibitum, ne qui hereditario iure ecclesiastica beneficia possidere praesumant, nec hi, qui in sacerdotio sunt geniti, nisi probate vixerint in claustro monachorum vel canonicorum regularium, ad sacros ordines debeant promoveri, vobis Praecipimus, quatenus, si manifestum et publicum fuerit, patres in ecclesiis personatus gessisse, filios ab eisdem ecclesiis, si etiam eas adepti sunt, appellatione cessante penitus excludatis, nec ad earum gubernationem ulterius assumantur. Nolumus enim, ut propterea causa in iudicium deducatur, vel testes etiam admittantur, si hoc manifestum exsistat.

Since it is prohibited by the sacred canons, that any presume to possess ecclesiastical benefices by hereditary right, nor that those who are begotten in the priesthood ought to be promoted to holy orders, unless they have lived approved in the cloister of monks or of regular canons, we command you, in so far as, if it be manifest and public that fathers have borne personates in churches, you utterly exclude the sons from those same churches, if they have even obtained them, appeal ceasing, nor be further taken up to their governance. For we are unwilling that on that account the case be brought into judgment, or that witnesses even be admitted, if this is manifest.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Filius etiam legitimus removetur ab ecclesia, in qua immediate successit patri vicario vel rectori.

A legitimate son also is removed from the church in which he immediately succeeded his father as vicar or rector.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ad exstirpandas successiones a sanctis ecclesiis studio totius sollicitudinis debemus intendere; te etiam ad hoc decet vigilem curam exhibere, ne circa ministerium suscepti regiminis videamur minus diligentes exsistere, si id vitium in ecclesiis vel in negotiis ecclesiasticis et viris permittimus pullulare. Hinc est, quod Fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si qui filii presbyterorum provinciae tuae teneant ecclesias, in quibus patres eorum tanquam personae vel vicarii nulla persona media ministrarunt, eos, sive geniti sint in sacerdotio, sive non, ab eisdem ecclesiis, contradictione et appellatione cessantibus, non differas amovere. Si vero aliqui sint filii clericorum, qui ecclesias quas patres eorum tenuerunt, personis aliis mediis sunt adepti, eos dummodo idonei sint, in illis poteris sustinere; ita quod si unus plures ecclesias, quas pater eius tenuerat, possidet, quarum una possit sibi sufficere, ipsum una, quam maluerit, facias esse contentum, dummodo tales non sint, a quarum una reliquae, pendere noscantur.

To exstirpate successions from the holy churches we ought to apply the zeal of all solicitude; you also ought to exhibit vigilant care to this end, lest we seem to be less diligent concerning the ministry of the governance undertaken, if we allow that vice to sprout in the churches or in ecclesiastical affairs and men. Hence it is that by apostolic writings we command your Fraternity by way of precept, to wit, that, if any sons of presbyters in your province hold churches in which their fathers ministered as parsons or vicars with no person intervening, them, whether begotten in the priesthood or not, you should not delay to remove from the same churches, with contradiction and appeal ceasing. But if there are some sons of clerics who have obtained the churches which their fathers held, with other persons intervening in between, them, provided they are suitable, you may sustain in those; with this proviso, that if one possesses several churches which his father had held, of which one could suffice for him, you shall cause him to be content with one, whichever he prefers, provided they are not such that the rest are known to depend upon one of them.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Filius episcopi legitime natus, promoveri potest ad ordines, et in paterna ecclesia beneficiari.

The son of a bishop, legitimately born, can be promoted to orders, and be beneficed in his father’s church.

Clemens III. Cassel. Archiepiscopo.

Clement III. To the Archbishop of Cashel.

Ad haec ex parte tua nostris auribus est relatum (Et infra:) Quod a nobis fraternitas tua requisivit, an a pontificibus generati valeant ad sacros ordines promoveri, si scientia fuerint et morum honestate probabiles: sciat fraternitas tua, quod, si ex legitimo sint matrimonio procreati, nec aliud canonicum obviat, licite possunt ad sacros ordines ascendere, et in eisdem ecclesiis, in quibus praesunt vel etiam praefuerunt genitores eorum, beneficium obtinere.

To these things, from your side it has been reported to our ears (And below:) That your fraternity has inquired of us whether those begotten by pontiffs may be promoted to sacred orders, if they should be found commendable in knowledge and in the uprightness of morals: let your fraternity know that, if they have been procreated from legitimate matrimony, and no other canonical impediment opposes, they can lawfully ascend to sacred orders, and in the same churches in which their parents preside or also have presided, obtain a benefice.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Non potest filius esse vicarius illius ecclesiae, in qua pater proximus fuit rector.

A son cannot be the vicar of that church in which his father was most recently rector.

Idem.

The same.

Michael presbyter de sancto Germano transmissa nobis conquestione monstravit, quod, quum ecclesiam sancti I. de Corona tuae dioecesis canonice sit adeptus, M. filius Antonii, qui proximo ante ipsius ecclesiae habuit personatum, ad se vicariam ipsius asserit pertinere. Quia igitur in ecclesia successiones in praelaturis et dignitatibus ecclesiasticis statutis canonicis damnantur, Fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, veritate diligentius inquisita si constiterit tibi, ipsum M. fuisse filium Antonii, qui eiusdem ecclesiae, sicut praemisimus, habuit proximo personatum, omni contradictione et appellatione cessantibus, ei super eadem vicaria perpetuum silentium imponere non postponas.

Michael, presbyter of Saint Germanus, by a complaint sent to us showed that, since he has canonically obtained the church of Saint I. of the Crown of your diocese, M., the son of Anthony, who most recently held the personate of that church, asserts that the vicarage of the same pertains to himself. Therefore, since in the Church successions in prelatures and ecclesiastical dignities are condemned by established canons, we command by apostolic letters to your Fraternity that, the truth having been more diligently inquired, if it is established to you that that M. was the son of Anthony, who, as we premised, had the personate of the same church immediately before, with every contradiction and appeal ceasing, you should not postpone to impose upon him perpetual silence concerning the same vicarage.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Illegitime genitus, etiam de uxore, sine dispensatione ad ordines vel beneficia promoveri non potest.

Illegitimately begotten, even from a wife, cannot be promoted to orders or benefices without dispensation.

Idem.

The same.

Literas dilectionis vestrae accepimus, votum latoris praesentium et eius originem continentes. Intelleximus siquidem, quod H. in sacerdotio genitus, de uxore legitima natus et conceptus, voto laudabili affectavit a pueritia ministrare Domino in officio clericali. Verum licet a filiis paterna incontinentia modis omnibus propellenda noscatur, et propter cautelam presbyterorum filii a sacris ordinibus iuxta sanctionem canonicam removentur, non expedit, ut super huiusmodi ita supplicantium precibus annuamus, quod videamur aliis impetrandi similia spem aliquam facilius impertiri.

Letters of your affection we have received, containing the vow of the bearer of the present [letters] and his origin. We have understood indeed that H., begotten in priesthood, born and conceived of a legitimate wife, by a laudable vow has aspired from boyhood to minister to the Lord in clerical office. However, although paternal incontinence is known to be in every way to be repelled from the sons, and, for caution’s sake, the sons of presbyters are removed from sacred orders according to canonical sanction, it is not expedient that we should so assent to the prayers of petitioners in a matter of this kind that we seem to impart to others some hope of obtaining similar things more easily.

Sed ut suae postulationis affectu, quum ad sedem apostolicam humiliter accesserit, ex toto defraudari se non doleat, praesenti scripto vobis significamus, quod, si tamen aliter dignus inventus fuerit, permittimus ipsum ordinari in clericum, et ad ecclesiasticum beneficium, unde commode sustentari valeat, promoveri.

But so that, in the impulse of his postulation, when he has humbly approached the Apostolic See, he may not grieve at being altogether defrauded, by the present writing we signify to you that, if nevertheless he be otherwise found worthy, we permit him to be ordained as a cleric and to be promoted to an ecclesiastical benefice, whence he may be suitably sustained.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Illegitimus in ecclesia paterna praebendari non debet.

An illegitimate man ought not to be granted a prebend in his father’s church.

Innocentius III.

Innocent 3.

Quum decorem domus Dei [et locum tabernaculi gloriae suae diligere vos oporteat, accurata vobis est sollicitudine praecavendum, ne in commissis vobis ecclesiis illa temere praesumantur, quae vel in eis lampadem religionis exstinguere, vel munditiam videantur ministrorum Domini maculare. Ad nostram siquidem noveritis audientiam pervenisse, quod quidam in vestris dioecesibus constituti publice cum mulieribus contrahentes, ecclesiasticas non verentur suscipere dignitates, et nonnullarum ecclesiarum canonici, quorum lumbos iuxta verbum evangelicae veritatis deceret esse praecinctos, ac in eorum manibus lucernas bonae operationis ardere, usque adeo luxuriae sordibus putruerunt, quod nec etiam ignominiam suam velint turpitudinemque velare, quin immo filios ex infami generatione susceptos ad ministerium altaris, quo se reddunt indignos, indignius secum trahunt, ac si non satis in opprobrium ordinis clericalis eorum incontinentia foret cognita, nisi natorum in publicum deductorum loquentiumqne testimonium contra ipsos, esset ostensione sedula comprobata. Quumque in ecclesiis, in quibus huiusmodi clerici locum habent, multa enormiter attententur, dum in eisdem fermentata patrum et filiorum, nepotum etiam et affinium parentela inordinate ministrat, quia videlicet, amore praedominante carnali, reverentia spiritualis tepuit inter ipsos, unde nequaquam unus quodlibet facere propter alium praetermittit per insolentiam eorundem,] interdum ludi etc.

When the decorum of the house of God [and the place of the tabernacle of His glory it behooves you to love, you must with careful solicitude take precautions, lest in the churches committed to you those things be rashly presumed which either extinguish in them the lamp of religion, or seem to stain the cleanliness of the ministers of the Lord. For you should know that it has come to our hearing that certain men established in your dioceses, publicly contracting with women, do not fear to receive ecclesiastical dignities; and that the canons of some churches—whose loins, according to the word of evangelical truth, it would be fitting to be girded, and in whose hands the lamps of good operation should burn—have so far rotted in the filth of luxury that they are unwilling even to veil their own ignominy and turpitude; nay rather, they drag with themselves, more unworthily, to the ministry of the altar—for which they render themselves unworthy—the sons received from an infamous generation; as if their incontinence were not sufficiently known to the opprobrium of the clerical order unless by the testimony of their offspring, brought forth into public and speaking against them, it had been verified by diligent showing. And since in the churches in which such clerics have a place many things are attempted in enormous fashion, while in the same the leavened kindred of fathers and sons, grandsons also and affines, ministers inordinate—since, namely, with carnal love predominating, spiritual reverence has grown tepid among them—whence by the insolence of the same not one omits to do whatever on account of another,] sometimes games, etc.

(cf. c. 12. de vita et hon. cler. III.

(cf. ch. 12 on the life and honor of clerics, 3.)

1.) Filiis quoque canonicorum praebendas in eisdem ecclesiis conferri non sinatis, quarum sunt canonici patres eorum, quum indecorum sit, ut in altaris officio illegitimus filius impudico patri ministret, in quo unigenitus Dei filius aeterno patri pro salute humani generis victimatur. Praelibatam vero etc. (cf. c. 12. de vita et hon.

1.) Do not allow prebends to be conferred in those same churches upon the sons of canons, in which their fathers are canons, since it is indecorous that in the service of the altar an illegitimate son should minister to an unchaste father, in which the only-begotten Son of God is sacrificed to the eternal Father for the salvation of the human race. But the prelibated, etc. (cf. c. 12. on the life and honor)

cler. III. 1.) [Dat.

cler. 3. 1.) [Given

Rom. ap. S. Petr. VI. Id. Ian.

Rome, at St. Peter’s, January 8.

Ao. IX. 1207.]

Year 9. 1207.]

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Si illegitimus, maxime filius spurius, instituitur in ecclesia, in qua institutus est pater, institutio non valet, et instituens a suis beneficiis suspendatur.

If an illegitimate person, especially a spurious son, is instituted in the church in which the father has been instituted, the institution is not valid, and the one instituting shall be suspended from his benefices.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the general council.

Ad abolendam pessimam, quae in pluribus inolevit ecclesiis, curruptelam, firmiter inhibemus, ne canonicorum filii, maxime spurii, canonici fiant in saecularibus ecclesiis, in quibus instituti sunt patres eorum, et si fuerit contra praesumptum, decernimus non valere. Qui vero tales, ut dictum est, canonicare praesumpserint, a suis beneficiis suspendantur.

To abolish the very worst corruption, which has taken root in many churches, we firmly forbid that the sons of canons, especially spurious ones, become canons in the secular churches in which their fathers were instituted; and if anything has been presumed contrary to this, we decree it not to be valid. But those who shall have presumed, as has been said, to enroll such men as canons shall be suspended from their benefices.

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Alius quam Papa non dispensat, ut filius in ecclesia paterna immediate succedat.

No one other than the Pope grants dispensation for a son to succeed immediately in his father’s church.

Honorius III.

Honorius 3.

Dilectus filius G. praepositus ecclesiae sanctae Mariae in Brugis transmissa nobis petitione monstravit, quod, quum Virgilius presbyter Tornacensis dioecesis quandam ecclesiam, curam animarum habentem, quam nullo medio habuit pater eius, tam contra Lateranensis quam generalis concilii statuta obtineat in scandalum plurimorum, idem ipsum monuit diligenter, ut resignaret eandem; sed idem asserens, quod bonae memoriae H. Remensis archiepiscopus, tunc apostolicae sedis legatus, dispensavit cum eo, id efficere contradicit, quamquam cum eo non fuerit per Romanum Pontificem dispensatum. Quocirca discretioni vestrae de utriusque partis procuratorum assensu mandamus, quatenus, partibus convocatis, et auditis hinc inde propositis, non obstante dispensatione aliqua, quae a sede apostolica non manaverit, quod canonicum fuerit appellatione postposita statuatis.

The beloved son G., provost of the church of Saint Mary in Bruges, by a petition transmitted to us showed that, whereas Virgilius, a presbyter of the diocese of Tournai, holds a certain church having the cure of souls, which his father held with no intermediary, both against the statutes of the Lateran and of the general council, to the scandal of many, the same (G.) diligently admonished him to resign the same; but he, asserting that H., archbishop of Reims of good memory, then legate of the apostolic see, dispensed with him, refuses to effect this, although he had not been dispensed with by the Roman Pontiff. Wherefore we command your discretion, with the assent of the proctors of both parties, that, the parties having been convoked and the proposals on either side heard, notwithstanding any dispensation which may not have emanated from the apostolic see, you establish, appeal set aside, what shall be canonical.

CAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER 18.

Illegitimus absque dispensatione Papae ad dignitatem, vel personatum, vel beneficium curatum promoveri non potest.

An illegitimate person, without the dispensation of the Pope, cannot be promoted to a dignity, or to a personate, or to a benefice with cure.

Gregorius IX. Turonensi Archiepiscopo.

Gregory IX. To the Archbishop of Tours.

Nimis in tua provincia ecclesiae deformatur honestas ex eo, quod filii sacerdotum et alii non legitime nati ad dignitates et personatus, et alia beneficia curam animarum habentia sine dispensatione sedis apostolicae promoventur. Quocirca mandamus, quatenus praedictis personis a personatibus, et dignitatibus, et huiusmodi beneficiis prorsus amotis, ea personis idoneis conferri facias per illos, ad quos collationem ipsorum de iure noveris pertinere. Et ne id de cetero praesumatur, districtius inhibemus.

Exceedingly in your province the church’s decency is deformed from this: that the sons of priests and others not legitimately born are promoted to dignities and personates, and to other benefices having the cure of souls, without dispensation of the Apostolic See. Wherefore we command that, the aforesaid persons being entirely removed from the personates, and dignities, and benefices of this kind, you cause these to be conferred upon suitable persons by those to whom you know by right the collation of them to pertain. And lest this be presumed hereafter, we more strictly inhibit it.

TITULUS XVIII. DE SERVIS NON ORDINANDIS ET EORUM MANUMISSIONE.

TITLE 18. ON SLAVES NOT TO BE ORDAINED AND THEIR MANUMISSION.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Servus ante plenam manumissionem ordinari non debet.

A slave ought not to be ordained before full manumission.

Ex concilio Toletano.

From the Council of Toledo.

Instruendi sunt praeterea laici, ut sciant, quod nullatenus alio loco manumittere proprios possunt servos, quos dominicis castris adgregari decreverunt, nisi in sacrosancta ecclesia ordine supra notato. Quomodo enim clerici extra ecclesiam libertatem consequi possunt, qui a lege mundana extranei sunt, et quibus interdicitur, ne ad saeculare iudicium procedant, quomodo saeculari iudicio a iugo servitutis absolvuntur? Sed Forte dicet, aliquis: clericus fieri non permittitur, nisi ante clericatum ingenuitatis dignitate potiatur.

Instructed are moreover the laity, that they may know that by no means can they manumit their own slaves, whom they have decreed to be aggregated to the Lord’s camps, in any other place, unless in the sacrosanct church in the order noted above. For how can clerics obtain liberty outside the church, who are extraneous to the mundane law, and to whom it is interdicted to proceed to secular judgment—how are they by a secular judgment absolved from the yoke of servitude? But Perhaps someone will say: he is not permitted to become a cleric, unless before the clericate he obtain the dignity of ingenuousness (freeborn status).

Revera verum dicit. Et ideo quod infirmari vel vituperari potest praecaveri debet. Non solum autem qui ad clericatus ordinem promovendi sunt in ecclesia manumittendi sunt, verum etiam ii, quos quisque pro remedio animae suae emancipari vult, quia sic scriptum est in pacto Francorum.

In truth, he speaks the truth. And therefore what can be infirmed or vituperated ought to be guarded against beforehand. Not only, moreover, are those who are to be promoted to the order of the clericate to be manumitted in the church, but also those whom anyone wishes to emancipate for the remedy of his soul, because thus it is written in the pact of the Franks.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Servus sine licentia domini ordinatus deponitur, et domino restituitur.

A slave ordained without the master's permission is deposed, and is restored to his master.

Ex eodem.

From the same.

De servorum ordinatione, qui passim ad gradus ecclesiasticos indiscrete promoventur, placuit omnibus cum sacris canonibus concordare [debere, et] Statutum est, ut nullus episcoporum deinceps ad sacros ordines eos promovere praesumat, nisi prius a dominis propriis libertatem fuerint consecuti. Et si quilibet servus fugiens dominum suum, aut latitans, aut adhibitis testibus munere conductis vel corruptis, aut qualibet calliditate vel fraude ad gradus pervenerit ecclesiasticos, decretum est, ut deponatur, et eius dominus eum recipiat. Si vero avus vel pater ab alia patria in aliam migrans, in eadem provincia filium genuerit, et ipse filius ibidem educatus et ad gradus ecclesiasticos promotus fuerit, et utrum servus sit ignoraverit, et postea veniens dominus illius legibus eum acquisierit, sancitum est, ut si dominus eius illi libertatem dare voluerit, in gradu suo permaneat.

On the ordination of slaves, who are indiscriminately promoted everywhere to ecclesiastical grades, it has pleased that all agree with the sacred canons [ought, and] It has been established, that none of the bishops henceforth presume to promote them to sacred orders, unless first they shall have obtained liberty from their proper lords. And if any slave, fleeing his lord, or skulking, or with witnesses adduced who were hired by a bribe or corrupted, or by any cunning or fraud whatsoever, shall have arrived at ecclesiastical grades, it has been decreed that he be deposed, and that his lord receive him. But if a grandfather or a father, migrating from one fatherland into another, in that same province shall have begotten a son, and the son himself, brought up in the same place and promoted to ecclesiastical grades, has been ignorant whether he be a slave, and afterwards the lord of that man coming shall have acquired him according to the laws, it has been sanctioned that, if his lord is willing to give him liberty, he remain in his grade.

Si vero eum catena servitutis a castris dominis abstrahere voluerit, gradum amittat, quia iuxta sacros canones vilis persona manens sacerdotii dignitate fungi non potest.

But if he should wish to draw him away from the Lord’s camp by the chain of servitude, let him lose his grade, because, according to the sacred canons, a base person, remaining such, cannot discharge the dignity of the priesthood.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Servus ab ecclesia manumissus ordinari potest, et quod acquirit post suum obitum erit ecclesiae manumittentis; quam si accusat, vel contra eam testificatur libertate et ordine privetur.

A slave manumitted by the Church can be ordained, and whatever he acquires, after his death, shall belong to the Church that manumitted him; if he accuses it, or testifies against it, let him be deprived of liberty and of order.

Ex eodem.

From the same.

De famulis ecclesiae constituere presbyteros et diaconos per parochias liceat, [quos tamen vitae rectitudo et probitas morum commendat,] ita tamen, ut antea manumissi statum recipiant libertatis, [et denuo ad ecclesiasticos honores succedant. Irreligiosum est enim, obligatos exsistere servitute, qui sacri ordinis suscipiunt dignitatem.] § 1. Quicquid autem talibus aut per libertatem concessum, aut successione exstiterit debitum, aut [a] quolibet [quoquo] modo collatum, eis quippiam inde in personas extraneas transmittere non licebit, sed omnia ad ius ecclesiae, a qua manumissi sunt, post eorum obitum debeant pertinere. § 2. Quibus, sicut [et] ceteris ecclesiae libertis, accusandi vel testificandi adversus ecclesiam aditus praecludatur, ad quod si adspiraverint non solum libertatis beneficio careant, sed etiam [et] honoris gradu, quem non dignitate naturae, sed necessitate temporis meruerunt.

Let it be permitted to appoint presbyters and deacons from the church’s household-servants throughout the parishes, [whom, however, uprightness of life and probity of morals commends,] yet in such a way that, having first been manumitted, they receive the status of liberty, [and then again they may accede to ecclesiastical honors. For it is irreligious that those who assume the dignity of sacred order should exist bound by servitude.] § 1. Whatever, moreover, to such persons either has been granted through freedom, or has become due by succession, or [by] anyone [in whatever] way conferred, it will not be permitted for them to transmit anything thereof to extraneous persons, but all things ought, after their death, to pertain to the right of the church by which they were manumitted. § 2. For them, just as [also] for the other freedmen of the church, let access for accusing or testifying against the church be shut off; and if they aspire to this, let them lack not only the benefit of liberty, but [also] the rank of honor, which they merited not by the dignity of nature, but by the necessity of the time.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Dominus in servo, quem manumittit, potest spirituales operas retinere.

The lord, with respect to the slave whom he manumits, can retain the spiritual services.

Ex concilio apud Alichi.

From the council at Alichi.

Nullus clericus ad gradum presbyterii promoveatur, nisi ut scriptum in canonibus habetur. Si enim propter Dei dilectionem quis de servis suis quemquam elegerit, et docuerit literas, et donaverit libertati, et per intercessionem erga episcopum ipsum in presbyterum fecerit ordinari, [et secundum Apostolos victum et vestitum ei donaverit,] ille autem postea in superbiam elatus, domino suo canonicas horas observare et psallere renuerit, et eis iuste obedire, dicens, se liberum esse, noluerit, et quasi libere cuius vult homo fiat: hoc sancta synodus anathematizat, et illum a sancta communione arceri iudicat, donec resipiscat, et domino suo obediat secundum canonica praecepta. Sin autem obstinato animo et hoc contempserit, accusatus apud episcopum, qui ordinaverit eum, degradetur, et fiat servus illius, id est domini sui, sicut natus fuerit.

No cleric be promoted to the grade of the presbyterate, unless as it is held written in the canons. For if, on account of the love of God, someone from among his servants should choose anyone, and should teach him letters, and should grant him to liberty, and through intercession with the bishop should have caused him to be ordained a presbyter, [and according to the Apostles should have granted him food and clothing,] but he afterwards, lifted up into pride, should refuse to observe the canonical hours and to chant psalms for his lord, and to obey them justly, saying that he is free, and should be unwilling, and, as if free, become the man of whomever he wishes: this the holy synod anathematizes, and judges that he is to be kept from holy communion, until he come to his senses and obey his lord according to the canonical precepts. But if with an obstinate mind he should even despise this, having been accused before the bishop who ordained him, let him be degraded, and let him become the servant of that man, that is, of his master, as he was born.

Quisquis vero talem secum habuerit, et postquam rem illius praedictam audierit, et domino suo non reddiderit, vel a se non proiecerit, sive episcopus, sive comes, sive clericus, sive laicus, anathematis illius societate innodatus poenam excommunicationis ducet.

But whoever shall have had such a one with him, and, after he shall have heard the aforesaid matter of his, shall not have returned him to his lord, or shall not have cast him out from himself—whether bishop, or count, or cleric, or layman—being entangled in the fellowship of that anathema, will incur the penalty of excommunication.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Spurii vel servi ordinari non debent.

Illegitimate persons or slaves are not to be ordained.

Alexander III. Archiepiscopo Turonensi.

Alexander 3. To the Archbishop of Tours.

Consuluit nos tua fraternitas, utrum tibi liceat spurios et servos ad ordines promovere; super quo utique Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod neque spurios, neque servos ordinare debes, et, si memor es, in consecratione tibi dictum fuit: "Vide, ne quemlibet servilis conditionis ad ordines promovere praesumas."

Consulted us your fraternity, whether it is permitted for you to promote spurious (illegitimate) persons and slaves to orders; upon which we indeed thus respond to your consultation, that you ought to ordain neither spurious (illegitimate) persons nor slaves; and, if you remember, at your consecration it was said to you: "Vide, ne quemlibet servilis conditionis ad ordines promovere praesumas."

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Manumissus ab ecclesia, ut fiat clericus, et ipsi ecclesiae perpetuo serviat in divinis, ad aliam ecclesiam se transferre non potest; secus si pure fuerit manumissus. Vel sic: secus si fuerit manumissus, ut serviat. Io. Andr.

Manumitted by the church, so that he may become a cleric and serve that same church perpetually in divine things, he cannot transfer himself to another church; otherwise, if he has been manumitted purely. Or thus: it is otherwise if he has been manumitted, that he may serve. Io. Andr.

Innocentius III. Variensi Episcopo.

Innocent III. To the Bishop of Varia.

Eo libentius [tuis inquisitionibus respondemus, quo devotius sedem apostolicam veneraris] (Et infra:) Adiecisti aliam quaestionem, an illorum filii, qui ecclesiae servili conditione tenentur, traditi a parentibus militiae clericali cum suorum conniventia dominorum, ut Deo in eadem cuius sunt, ecclesia debeant deservire, assequentes propterea libertatem, post tempus, ea relicta, possint ad aliam se transferre? In quo capitulo credimus distinguendum, utrum eo tenore fuerint manumissi et obligati ordini clericali, quod manumittenti ecclesiae, dum vixerint, deberent impendere famulatum in obsequiis divinorum, et tunc transferendi se ad aliam est eis licentia deneganda; vel manumissi exstiterint absolute, sicque libertatem habeant ad aliam transeundi. [Datum Viterbii V. Id. Iun.

So much the more willingly [we respond to your inquiries, the more devoutly you venerate the Apostolic See] (And below:) You added another question, whether the sons of those who are held by the church in a servile condition, handed over by their parents to the clerical militia with the consent of their lords, so that they ought to serve God in the same church to which they belong, having thereby obtained liberty, after a time, having left it, can transfer themselves to another? In which chapter we believe a distinction must be made: whether they were manumitted on this tenor and obligated to the clerical order, that they ought, as long as they live, to render service to the manumitting church in the observances of the divine offices—and then leave to transfer themselves to another is to be denied to them; or they were manumitted absolutely, and thus have the liberty of passing over to another. [Given at Viterbo on the 5th before the Ides of June.]

Ao. 1207.]

Year 1207.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Ius, quod est de servo facto diacono, etiam de subdiacono debet intelligi.

The law, which is about a slave made a deacon, ought also to be understood about a subdeacon.

Idem.

The same.

Miramur non modicum [de tua prudentia, quod, quum ad nos tua consultatio destinata, si canones et leges studeas intueri, nihil fere dubitationis continere putetur, super hoc, quod certum est, apostolatum nostrum consulere curasti,] quum certum sit in constitutionibus antiquorum, quando servi in gradus ecclesiasticos ordinati debeant in servitutem vel non debeant revocari. [Unde, quia te credimus non ignorare decreta, nil aliud fraternitatem tuam in hoc articulo facere volumus, nisi quod in eorum sanctionibus invenitur.] De subdiaconali [tamen] ordine, quia de eo non fit mentio in Patrum statutis expresse, videtur nobis, quod et is cum diaconali gradu privilegio gaudet eodem. Nam licet sacer ordo non reputaretur in ecclesia primitiva, tamen a constitutione Gregorii atque Urbani secundum moderna tempora sacer gradus esse minime dubitatur.

We marvel not a little [at your prudence, that, when your consultation, addressed to us, if you would strive to look upon the canons and the laws, is thought to contain scarcely anything of doubt, yet concerning this, which is certain, you took care to consult our apostolate,] since it is certain in the constitutions of the ancients when slaves ordained into ecclesiastical grades ought to be recalled into servitude or ought not to be recalled. [Whence, because we believe you do not ignore the decrees, we wish your fraternity to do nothing else in this article except what is found in their sanctions.] Concerning the subdiaconal [however] order, because express mention of it is not made in the statutes of the Fathers, it seems to us that it also enjoys the same privilege as the diaconal grade. For although it was not reckoned a sacred order in the primitive church, nevertheless from the constitution of Gregory and Urban, according to modern times, it is by no means doubted to be a sacred grade.

[Datum Laterani in eodem anno.]

[Given at the Lateran in the same year.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Natus ex patre servo et libera matre liber est, et licite promovetur.

Born of a slave father and a free mother, he is free, and is lawfully promoted.

Gregorius IX. Archiepiscopo Neapolitano.

Gregory 9. To the Archbishop of Naples.

Dilectus filius G. diaconus proposuit, quod I. miles ea occasione, quod patrem ipsius hominem suum esse proponit, licet mater sua, cuius debet imitari conditionem, libera esse noscatur, ne promoveatur in presbyterum, impedire praesumit. Quocirca mandamus, quatenus, si tibi constiterit de praemissis, eundem militem ab huiusmodi impedimento cessare compescas.

The beloved son G., deacon, has set forth that I., a knight, on the pretext that he asserts his (i.e., G.’s) father to be his man, although his mother, whose condition he ought to imitate, is known to be free, presumes to hinder him lest he be promoted to presbyter (priest). Wherefore we command that, if you have ascertained the foregoing, you restrain that same knight to cease from such an impediment.

TITULUS XIX. DE OBLIGATIS AD RATIOCINIA ORDINANDIS, VEL NON.

TITLE 19. ON THOSE OBLIGATED TO ACCOUNTING TO BE ORDAINED, OR NOT.

CAP. UNIC.

CHAPTER SOLE.

Obligatus ratiociniis, deposito onere et reddita ratione, ordinari potest; prius vero non.

One obligated to ratiocinations (accounts), the burden laid down and the reckoning rendered, can be ordained; but before that, not.

Ex concilio Carthaginensi.

From the Carthaginian council.

Magnus episcopus Augustensis dixit: Quid dilectioni vestrae videtur, procuratores, et actores, et exsecutores seu curatores pupillorum si debeant ordinari? Gratus episcopus dixit: Si post deposita onera et reddita ratiocinia actus vitae ipsorum fuerint comprobati in omnibus, debent et cum laude Dei, si postulati fuerint, honore munerari. Si enim ante libertatem negotiorum vel officiorum ab aliquo sine consideratione fuerint ordinati, ecclesia infamatur.

Magnus, bishop of Augusta, said: What seems to your Charity, whether procurators, and actors (agents), and executors or curators of wards ought to be ordained? Gratus the bishop said: If, after the burdens have been laid down and the reckonings rendered, the conduct of their life has been approved in all things, they ought also, with the praise of God, if they shall have been requested, to be rewarded with honor. For if, before freedom from their business affairs or offices, they have been ordained by someone without consideration, the Church is defamed.

Universi dixerunt: Recte quoque, statuit sanctitas vestra, ideoque ita est nostra sententia.

All said: Rightly also, your Sanctity has decreed, and therefore such is our sentence.

TITULUS XX. DE CORPORE VITIATIS ORDINANDIS VEL NON.

TITLE 20. ON THOSE VITIATED IN BODY TO BE ORDAINED OR NOT.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Presbyter, qui in duello digiti partem amisit, ex dispensatione sui episcopi potest in suo ordine ministrare.

A presbyter who has lost part of a finger in a duel, by the dispensation of his bishop, may minister in his own order.

Alexander III.

Alexander 3.

De presbytero autem Campaniae, qui duellum sponte obtulit, et oblatum suscepit, et in eo partem digiti amisit, sicut olim, ita et nunc prudentiae tuae respondemus, quod, quum ipse, sicut etiam nos videmus, non perdiderit tantum de digito, quin ipse sine scandalo possit solenniter celebrare, satis potes post peractam poenitentiam cum eo misericorditer agere, et permittere ipsum in suo ordine ministrare, licet eius excessus gravis admodum exstitisset. [Presbyter autem etc. cf. c. 7. de hom.

Concerning the presbyter of Campania, who of his own accord proffered a duel and accepted the duel proffered, and in it lost part of a finger, just as formerly, so also now we respond to your prudence that, since he himself, as we also see, has not lost so much of the finger that he cannot without scandal solemnly celebrate, you can quite well, after penance has been performed, deal mercifully with him and permit him to minister in his own order, although his excess was very grave indeed. [But the presbyter etc.; cf. c. 7 on hom.]

V. 12.]

5. 12.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Habens in oculo maculam, quae non inducit magnam deformitatem, etiam ad episcopatum poterit promoveri.

One having a spot in the eye, which does not induce great deformity, can even be promoted to the episcopate.

Idem Cisterciensi Electo.

The same to the Cistercian Bishop-Elect.

Quum de tua et aliorum electione, qui sunt in quibusdam ecclesiis Anglicanis electi, in praesentia nostra et fratrum nostrorum quaestio mota fuisset, et singulis vestris quaedam obiicerentur: tibi, quod in oculo maculam habeas, et quod filius canonici fueris, est obiectum. Unde Cantuariensi archiepiscopo apostolicae sedis legato dedimus in mandatis, ut pro eo, quod canonici filius diceris, in promotione tua ex multa dispensatione procedat. De macula vero, quam in oculo habere diceris, hoc archiepiscopo praedicto mandavimus, ut cum consilio suffraganeorum suorum, et praesertim venerabilium fratrum nostrorum Wigorniensis et Exonensis episcoporum, quod exinde sibi visum fuerit exsequatur.

When, concerning your election and that of others who have been elected in certain English churches, a question had been raised in our presence and in that of our brothers, and certain things were objected to each of you: against you it was alleged that you have a blemish in the eye, and that you had been the son of a canon. Wherefore we have given in mandates to the archbishop of Canterbury, legate of the apostolic see, that, for the fact that you are said to be the son of a canon, he proceed in your promotion with ample dispensation. But concerning the blemish which you are said to have in the eye, we have mandated to the aforesaid archbishop that, with the counsel of his suffragans, and especially of our venerable brothers the bishops of Worcester and Exeter, he execute what shall from this have seemed good to him.

Tu itaque eundem archiepiscopum, frater, requirere super his studeas humiliter et devote: in quo tibi ex maxima dispensatione in hac parte sollicite curavimus providere, utpote qui personam tuam sincera caritate diligimus, et libenter, quantum secundum Deum possumus, ad tuum intendimus commodum et honorem.

You, therefore, brother, should strive humbly and devoutly to apply to that same archbishop about these things: wherein we, by a very great dispensation in this matter, have solicitously taken care to provide for you, as we love your person with sincere charity, and gladly, insofar as according to God we are able, we intend toward your advantage and honor.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Sectus in cunabulis, licite promovetur.

He who was cut in the cradle is licitly promoted.

Clemens III. Variensi Episcopo.

Clement III. To the Bishop of Varia.

Ex parte Bartholomaei monachi et diaconi petitorium fuit nostro apostolatui praesentatum, quod, quum ipse in cunabulis sectus fuerit, postmodum sub regula et abbate devote Deo militans in diaconatus ordinem est promotus, unde suppliciter petiit facultatem sibi a sede apostolica indulgeri, ut sit ei licitum in presbyterum ordinari. Sane quum secundum statuta Nicaeni concilii illi ad clericatus ordinem prohibeantur accedere, et si etiam in clero fuerint, cessare debeant, qui se ipsos sani absciderint, vel affectaverint, ut ab aliis abscindantur, non credimus ei aliquod impedimentum afferre, quo minus possit provehi, qui in cunabulis sectus fuit; quia non videtur hoc eo tempore affectasse, quo iudicium animi non habebat, praesertim quum in canonibus Apostolorum sit manifeste sancitum, quod eunuchus, si per insidias hominum factus, vel ita natus sit, aut etiam in persecutione sint ei amputata virilia, et dignus est, possit in episcopum promoveri. Cognoscenti itaque de substantia veritatis, si precibus eius noveris veritatem inesse, et alias dignus inveniatur, maxime quum diu in ordine perseveraverit monachali, ipsum in presbyterum promovendi licentiam auctoritate praesentium indulgemus.

On the part of Bartholomew, a monk and deacon, a petition was presented to our apostolate, that, since he was cut in the cradle, afterwards, serving God devoutly under the rule and an abbot, he was promoted to the order of the diaconate; whence he humbly sought that a faculty be indulged to him by the Apostolic See, that it be lawful for him to be ordained a presbyter. Indeed, since according to the statutes of the Nicene council those are prohibited from acceding to the clerical order, and, if they should even be in the clergy, ought to cease, who, being sound, have cut themselves off, or have aimed to be cut off by others, we do not believe that this brings any impediment to him, whereby he may not be able to be advanced, who was cut in the cradle; because he does not seem to have aimed at this at a time when he did not have the judgment of mind—especially since in the Canons of the Apostles it is manifestly sanctioned that a eunuch, if made so by the plots of men, or is thus born, or even if in persecution his manly parts have been amputated, and he is worthy, can be promoted to a bishop. Therefore, to you who will judge concerning the substance of the truth, if you know truth to be in his petitions, and he is found otherwise worthy, especially since he has long persevered in the monastic order, by the authority of the present [letters] we indulge the license of promoting him to presbyter.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Sacerdos, qui sine causa virilia sibi fecit abscindi, credens inde mereri de dispensatione episcopi suum officium, praeter altaris ministerium, poterit exercere.

A priest, who without cause has caused his genitals to be cut off for himself, believing thereby to merit from the bishop’s dispensation, will be able to exercise his office, apart from the ministry of the altar.

Idem Ravennati Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Ravenna.

Significavit nobis R. archipresbyter sancti Stephani de Longasco, quod B. presbyter, credens se obsequium praestare Deo, fecit sibi virilia amputari. Sed quum idem archipresbyter sit senectute gravatus, nec relinquere valeat presbyterum memoratum, nobis humiliter supplicavit, ut ei concedere debeamus, ea, quae praeter missam ad sacerdotem pertinent, ministrare. Quocirca mandamus, quatenus inquiras diligenter veritatem, et, si iam dictum presbyterum alias Deo dignum inveneris, ei sacerdotale officium absque omni altaris ministerio, auctoritate nostra fretus et tua, prout videris expedire, concedas.

R., archpriest of Saint Stephen of Longasco, has signified to us that B., a presbyter, believing that he was rendering obsequy to God, had his manly parts amputated. But since that same archpriest is burdened with old age, and is not able to relinquish the aforesaid presbyter, he has humbly supplicated us that we ought to grant him to minister those things which pertain to a priest besides the mass. Wherefore we command that you diligently inquire the truth, and, if you shall have found the already-said presbyter otherwise worthy of God, relying on our authority and yours, as you shall see it to be expedient, grant to him the sacerdotal office without any ministry of the altar.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Sacerdos, qui ex iusta causa fecit sibi virilia abscindi, potest, ut prius, sacerdotale officium exercere.

A priest, who for a just cause has had his virile parts cut off, can, as before, exercise the sacerdotal office.

Innocentius III.

Innocent III.

Ex parte dilecti filii M. presbyteri fuit in audientia nostra propositum, quod, quum sibi sentiret leprae periculum imminere, de consilio medici virilia fecit sibi abscindi, ut posset a tam gravi infirmitatis vitio liberari, et ut provideremus ei super exsecutione sui officii, a nobis humiliter postulavit. Quoniam igitur canones sanctorum Patrum hunc a sacri altaris ministratione non prohibent, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, et memoratus M. est alias idoneus, ut sui ministerii officium exsequatur, nullius contradictione vel appellatione obstante, auctoritate fretus apostolica liberam ei tribuas facultatem. [Datum Laterani IV. Id. Febr.

On the part of our beloved son M., presbyter, it was set forth in our audience that, when he perceived the peril of leprosy to be imminent to himself, by the counsel of a physician he had his virile parts cut off, so that he might be freed from so grave a taint of infirmity, and he humbly asked of us that we might provide for him concerning the execution of his office. Since, therefore, the canons of the holy Fathers do not prohibit this man from the ministration of the sacred altar, we command to your fraternity by apostolic writings that, if it is so, and the aforesaid M. is otherwise fit, you, relying on apostolic authority, grant him free faculty to carry out the office of his ministry, with no one’s contradiction or appeal standing in the way. [Given at the Lateran 4 Id. Feb.

1198.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Mutilatus manu, si promotus fuerit in abbatem, ab abbatia deponitur.

One mutilated in the hand, if he has been promoted to abbot, is deposed from the abbacy.

Idem Militensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Mileto.

Exposuisti nobis in nostra praesentia constitutus, quod I. quondam praedecessor tuus H. in abbatem promovit, nesciens, quod ipse esset manu altera mutilatus. Quia vero abbas ipse noscitur sinistra carere, quid super hoc agendum sit, nostra voluisti responsione doceri. Nos igitur fraternitati tuae taliter respondemus quod, quum pro tam enormi defectu ad sacros non possit ordines promoveri, et ipse in promotione sua id tacuerit fraudulenter, ab abbatiae officio est non immerito amovendus.

You set forth to us, having been placed in our presence, that I., once your predecessor, promoted H. to abbot, not knowing that he was mutilated in the other hand. But since the abbot himself is known to lack the left hand, you wished to be instructed by our response as to what ought to be done in this matter. Therefore we answer to your fraternity thus: since on account of so enormous a defect he cannot be promoted to sacred orders, and he himself fraudulently kept silence about it at his promotion, he is not undeservedly to be removed from the office of the abbacy.

[Dat. Romae ap. S. Petr. V. Kal.

[Dated at Rome at St. Peter’s 5 before the Kalends.

Iul. 1198.]

July 1198.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Carens ungula pollicis, dummodo sit fortis in pollice, licite ad sacerdotium promovetur.

Lacking the nail of the thumb, provided that he is strong in the thumb, he is licitly promoted to the sacerdotal office.

Honorius III. Episcopo Engolismensi.

Honorius 3. To the Bishop of Angoulême.

Thomas Monachus sancti Amantii de Brixia proposuit coram nobis, quod, quum in annis puerilibus esset constitutus, quaedam barra ferrea super dextrae suae pollicem fortuito casu cadens, ungulam avulsit ab eo. Quum autem desideret, sicut asserit, in sacerdotali officio Domino famulari, nobis humiliter supplicavit, ut per te, qui eius dioecesanus exsistis, promoveri eum in sacerdotem mandaremus. Quocirca fraternitati tuae mandamus, quatenus, si ad frangendum eucharistiam sit in pollice ipso potens, et aliud canonicum non obsistat, propter deformitatem huiusmodi non dimittas, quin eum ad ordinem promoveas sacerdotis.

Thomas, a monk of Saint Amantius of Brescia, set forth before us that, when he was in boyhood years, a certain iron bar, falling by a chance mishap upon the thumb of his right hand, tore the nail from it. But since he desires, as he asserts, to serve the Lord in the priestly office, he has humbly supplicated us that through you, who are his diocesan, we should command that he be promoted into a priest. Wherefore we command your fraternity that, inasmuch as, if for breaking the Eucharist he is strong in that thumb itself, and no other canonical obstacle stands in the way, you do not, on account of such deformity, omit to promote him to the order of priest.

TITULUS XXI. DE BIGAMIS NON ORDINANDIS.

TITLE 21. CONCERNING BIGAMISTS NOT TO BE ORDAINED.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Breve est.

It is brief.

Ex Concilio Aurelianensi.

From the Council of Orléans.

Ut bigami, vel poenitentes, vel repudiatarum mariti, ad sacerdotium non ascendant.

That bigamists, or penitents, or husbands of repudiated women, are not to ascend to the priesthood.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Cum bigamo, qui ordinatus est ad sacros, non dispensatur, et ordinator privabitur potestate ordinandi, nisi cum eo fuerit dispensatum.

With a bigamist who has been ordained to the sacred orders, no dispensation is granted, and the ordainer will be deprived of the power of ordaining, unless a dispensation has been granted to him.

Lucius III. Spal. Archiepiscopo.

Lucius III. To the Archbishop of Spalato.

Super eo, quod a nobis tua fraternitas quid faciendum sit de bigamis requisivit, inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod ordinatores eorum potestate et officio ordinandi, et ordinati, si ad sacros ordines fuerint promoti, ordinibus eis ideo sunt privandi, quia in bigamis contra Apostolum dispensare non licet, ut debeant ad sacros ordines promoveri, vel in eis, si promoti fuerint, possint aliquatenus remanere. In ordinatore autem potest dispensatio adhiberi, ut ordinandi potestate et officio non privetur. [De simoniace etc.

Concerning this, that your fraternity has asked of us what is to be done about bigamists, we thus answer your inquiry: that their ordainers are to be deprived of the power and office of ordaining, and the ordained, if they shall have been promoted to sacred orders, are therefore to be deprived of those orders, because in the case of bigamists it is not permitted to dispense against the Apostle, so that they ought to be promoted to sacred orders, or, if they shall have been promoted, be able in any measure to remain in them. But in the case of the ordainer a dispensation can be applied, that he not be deprived of the power and office of ordaining. [On simoniacal etc.

cf. c. 22. de sim. V. 2.]

cf. ch. 22. on simony 5. 2.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Bigamus, uxore vivente, vel mortua, non ordinatur.

A bigamist, whether with his wife living or dead, is not ordained.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

De bigamis [autem] presbyteris et viduarum maritis idem sancimus omnino, ut nec viventibus uxoribus, nec defunctis, ad divinorum debeant celebrationem admitti, maxime quum a doctrina sit Apostoli et institutionibus ecclesiae alienum.

Concerning bigamous [however] presbyters and husbands of widows, we likewise decree altogether that neither with their wives living nor deceased ought they to be admitted to the celebration of the divine rites, especially since it is alien to the doctrine of the Apostle and to the institutions of the church.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Qui mortua uxore promotus ad sacros, cum secunda de facto contraxit, et cognovit, bigamiae poenam incurrit, licet non sit bigamus.

He who, his wife having died, has been promoted to the sacred [orders], when he has contracted de facto with a second and has known her, incurs the penalty of bigamy, although he is not a bigamist.

Innocentius III. Ratispa Episcopo.

Innocent III. To the Bishop of Ratisbon.

Nuper a nobis (Et infra: [cf. c. 29. de sent. exc. V. 39.]) Tertius et ultimus inquisitionis articulus videbatur habere non modicum quaestionis, quoniam, quum in matrimoniis contrahendis non iuris effectus, sed animi destinatio attendatur, unde illum comitatur infamia, qui duas simul habet uxores, quod partim ad factum convenit retorqueri, sicut et quod in canone legitur de presbytero, qui non legalibus nuptiis detinetur, eadem censura tales videntur inter bigamos reputandi, licet obviet ex adverso, quod opinioni sit veritas praeferenda, et quod iuxta praemissa qui nullam uxorem habuit foret bigamus reputandus, quod contingeret, si quis de facto contraheret cum diversis, quibus de iure non posset matrimonialiter copulari.

Recently by us (And below: [cf. c. 29. de sent. exc. 5. 39.]) the third and last article of inquiry seemed to have no small question, since, when marriages are being contracted, it is not the effect of law, but the intention of the mind, that is attended to; whence infamy accompanies him who has two wives at the same time, which is agreed in part to be referred back to the deed, just as what is read in the canon concerning a presbyter who is held not by lawful nuptials: by the same censure such seem to be to be reckoned among bigamists, although there opposes on the other hand that truth is to be preferred to opinion, and that, according to what has been set forth, he who had no wife at all would be reckoned a bigamist—which would come to pass if someone in fact were to contract with various women with whom by law he could not be joined in matrimony.

Nos autem in hac quaestione tibi respondemus, quod, quum huiuscemodi clericis, qui, quantum in ipsis fuit, secundas mulieres sibi matrimonialiter coniunxerunt, tanquam cum bigamis non liceat dispensari, licet in veritate bigami non exsistant, non propter sacramenti defectum, sed propter affectum intentionis cum opere subsecuto. [Dat. Lat.

We, however, in this question answer you that, since to clerics of this sort, who, so far as in them lay, joined second women to themselves matrimonially, it is not permitted to grant dispensation, as with bigamists, although in truth they are not bigamists, not on account of a defect of the sacrament, but on account of the affect of intention with the ensuing deed. [Dat. Lat.

XVII. Kal. Iun.

May 16.

1199.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Qui contraxit cum virgine, licet prius ab alio fuerit desponsata, bigamus non censetur.

He who has contracted with a virgin, although she had previously been betrothed by another, is not considered a bigamist.

Idem Metensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Metz.

Debitum pastoralis officii (Et infra: [cf. c. 4. de bapt. III. 42.]) Secundus autem tuae dubitationis articulus continebat, an is, qui mulierem ab alio viro traductam, sed non cognitam, sibi matrimonialiter copulavit, valeat ad sacerdotium promoveri?

The debt of the pastoral office (And below: [cf. ch. 4. on bapt. 3. 42.]) But the second article of your doubt contained, whether he who has matrimonially coupled to himself a woman brought over from another husband, but not carnally known, may be able to be promoted to the priesthood?

Licet autem is, qui relictam ab alio duxit in coniugem, sive cognita fuerit ab illo, sive incognita manserit, videatur duxisse viduam in uxorem, utpote cuius vir erat mortuus, quando duxit eandem, sicut et ille bigamus esse videtur, qui cum duabus legitime contraxit uxoribus, sive neutram, sive alteram tantum cognoverit, quia vir exstitit duarum uxorum: nos tamen Fraternitati tuae ita duximus respondendum, quod, quum duo sint in coniugio, videlicet consensus animorum et commixtio corporum, quorum alterum significat caritatem, quae consistit in spiritu inter Deum et iustam animam, ad quod pertinet illud, quod dicit Apostolus: "Qui adhaeret Deo, unus spiritus est cum eo;" reliquum vero designat conformitatem, quae consistit in carne inter Christum et sanctam ecclesiam, ad quod pertinet illud, quod Evangelista testatur: "Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis," profecto coniugium illud, quod non est commixtione corporum consummatum, non pertinet ad illud coniugium designandum, quod inter Christum et ecclesiam per incarnationis mysterium est contractum, iuxta quod Paulus exponens illud, quod dixerat Protoplastus; "Hoc nunc os ex ossibus meis, et caro de carne mea, et propter hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem, et adhaerebit uxori suae, et erunt duo in carne una," statim subiungit: "Hoc autem dico magnum sacramentum in Christo et ecclesia." Quum ergo propter sacramenti defectum inhibitum sit, ne bigamus aut maritus viduae praesumat ad sacros ordines promoveri, quoniam nec illa est unica unici, nec iste unus unius: profecto, ubi deficit inter huiusmodi coniuges commixtio corporum, non deest huiusmodi signaculum sacramenti. Unde is, qui mulierem ab alio viro ductam, sed minime cognitam, duxit uxorem, quia nec illa, nec ipse carnem suam divisit in plures, propter hoc impediri non debet, quin possit ad sacerdotium promoveri. [Dat.

Although the man who has taken to wife one left by another, whether she was known by him or remained unknown, may seem to have taken a widow as a wife—inasmuch as her husband was dead when he married her—just as that man seems to be a bigamist who has lawfully contracted with two wives, whether he has known neither or only the one, because he has been the husband of two wives; nevertheless we have judged that it should be answered to your Fraternity thus: since there are two things in conjugal union, namely the consensus of souls and the commixture of bodies—the former signifies charity, which consists in the spirit between God and a just soul, to which pertains that which the Apostle says: “He who adheres to God is one spirit with him;” but the latter designates conformity, which consists in the flesh between Christ and the holy church, to which pertains that which the Evangelist attests: “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us”—assuredly that marriage which has not been consummated by the commixture of bodies does not pertain to designate that marriage which was contracted between Christ and the church through the mystery of the Incarnation; according to which Paul, expounding that which the Protoplast had said: “This now is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; and for this cause a man shall leave father and mother and shall adhere to his wife, and the two shall be in one flesh,” straightway subjoins: “Now I say this is a great sacrament in Christ and the church.” Therefore, since on account of a defect of the sacrament it is inhibited that a bigamist or the husband of a widow presume to be promoted to holy orders—since neither is that woman the single one of a single man, nor is he one man of one woman—assuredly, where between such spouses the commixture of bodies is lacking, this signaculum of the sacrament is not lacking. Whence he who has taken to wife a woman led away from another husband, but by no means known, because neither she nor he has divided his flesh among several, ought not on this account to be impeded, but may be promoted to the priesthood. [Given.

Faventini V. Kal. Sept. Ao. IX. 1206.]

At Faenza, the 5th day before the Kalends of September, Year 9, 1206.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Qui plures habuit concubinas, ex eo bigamus non est.

He who has had several concubines is not for that reason a bigamist.

Idem Lugd. Archiepiscopo, apostolicae sedis Legato.

The same to the Archbishop of Lyons, Legate of the apostolic see.

Quia circa minima et maxima frequenter humanus deficit intellectus, [prudentis est, quaerere, ubi scrupulus dubitationis occurrit.] Sane postulasti per sedem apostolicam edoceri, si presbyteri successive plures concubinas habentes, bigami censeantur, [ut cum eis tanquam irregularibus quoad exsecutionem sui officii nequeas dispensare?] (Et infra:) Ad quod [sic] duximus respondendum, quod, quum sacerdotes praedicti, sive uno, sive disersis temporibus plures habuerint concubinas, irregularitatem non incurrerint bigamiae, cum eis tanquam simplici fornicatione notatis quoad exsecutionem sacerdotalis officii poteris dispensare, [si vivere curaverint continenter. De presbyterorum etc. Dat.

Because around the least things and the greatest the human intellect frequently fails, [it is the part of the prudent man to inquire where the scruple of doubt occurs.] Truly you have requested to be instructed through the Apostolic See, whether presbyters having several concubines successively are to be judged bigamists, [so that with them, as irregular with regard to the execution of their office, you would not be able to dispense?] (And below:) To which [sic] we have deemed it to be answered that, since the aforesaid priests, whether at one time or at diverse times, have had several concubines, they have not incurred the irregularity of bigamy; with them, as noted for simple fornication, as to the execution of the sacerdotal office you will be able to dispense, [if they have taken care to live continently. Of the presbyters etc. Given.

Signiae V. Non. Oct. Pont.

At Signia, 3 October. Pontificate.

nostr. Ao. XVI. 1213.]

in the 16th year of our pontificate, 1213.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Subdiaconus, qui cum vidua contraxit, et eam cognovit, bigamiae poenam incurrit, licet bigamus non sit.

A subdeacon, who has contracted marriage with a widow, and has known her, incurs the penalty of bigamy, although he is not a bigamist.

Idem.

The same.

A nobis fuit (Et infra:) Ille autem, qui in subdiaconatus ordine constitutus de facto tantum, quia de iure non potuit, duxit viduam in uxorem, perfecto bigamus non exstitit. Sed nec viduae potest in veritate dici maritus, quum inter ipsum et illam non fuerit vinculum maritale contractum. Cum eo tamen contra doctrinam Apostoli, tanquam cum marito viduae, dispensare non licet, non propter sacramenti defectum, sed propter affectum intentionis cum opere subsecuto.

By us it was (And below:) But he who, constituted in the order of the subdiaconate de facto only, because de iure he could not, took a widow as a wife, did not become a bigamist in the full (perfect) sense. But neither can he in truth be called the widow’s husband, since between him and her no marital bond was contracted. Yet with him, contrary to the doctrine of the Apostle, it is not permitted to dispense as with the husband of a widow, not on account of a defect of the sacrament, but on account of the disposition of intention with the act ensuing.

TITULUS XXII. DE CLERICIS PEREGRINIS.

TITLE 22. ON FOREIGN CLERICS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Ultramarini et valde remoti ordinationem suam probare debent per quinque episcoporum sigilla.

Those from beyond the sea and very remote must prove their ordination by means of five bishops’ seals.

Alexander III. Cenomanensi Episcopo.

Alexander III. To the Bishop of Le Mans.

Tua nos duxit fraternitas consulendos, quid sit agendum de clericis, qui in remotis regionibus ordinati literas eorum ostendunt, a quibus sibi proponunt manus impositas, et utrum episcoporum sigilla sint, quae repraesentant, incertum exsistit. Tuae igitur consultationi significatione praesentium respondemus, tutius esse, ut in his statuta Patrum veterum observentur, quam novum aliquid statuatur. Statutum autem est de transmarinis, ut ad minus quinque episcoporum super ordinatione sua testimonio muniantur, quod in aliis, si similiter sunt incogniti, credimus observandum, ita tamen ut in suspensione aliquanto tempore habeantur in quo videntes plenius de actibus instruantur ipsorum.

Your fraternity has led us to be consulted as to what is to be done concerning clerics who, ordained in remote regions, display the letters of those by whom they propose that hands were imposed upon them, and it remains uncertain whether the seals they present are episcopal. To your consultation, therefore, we answer by the signification of these presents that it is safer that in these matters the statutes of the ancient Fathers be observed than that something new be established. Now it has been statuted concerning those from across the sea that they be fortified with the testimony of at least five bishops regarding their ordination; which we believe should be observed in the case of others, if they are similarly unknown—yet in such a way that they be held under suspension for some time, during which those seeing them may be more fully instructed about their acts.

Sed et de inferioribus ordinibus inquiri oportet, quia posset contingere, ut aliquibus praetermissis saltum fecissent. His autem peractis, si digni inventi fuerint, circa eos poterit dispensari. [Super eo vero etc.

But also concerning the inferior orders inquiry ought to be made, because it could happen that, with some having been passed over, they have made a leap. However, these things having been completed, if they shall have been found worthy, it may be dispensed concerning them. [But concerning that matter, etc.

cf. c. 15. de off. deleg. I. 29.]

cf. ch. 15. on the office of the delegate. 1. 29.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Clericus peregrinus, qui iurat se ordinatum, nisi aliter probet, in illo ordine non suscipietur, nec ad superiores promovebitur.

A peregrine cleric, who swears that he has been ordained, unless he prove otherwise, will not be received in that order, nor will he be promoted to superior orders.

Innocentius III. Constantinopolitano Patriarchae.

Innocent 3. To the Patriarch of Constantinople.

Inter quatuor (Et infra: [cf. c. 8. de maior. et obed. I. 33.]) Consuluit nos iterum tua fraternitas, utrum clericos ad te sine suorum ordinatorum literis venientes, et offerentes praestare corporaliter iuramentum, quod sint in quovis ecclesiasticorum ordinum constituti, debeas ad superiores ordines promovere.

Among the four (And below: [cf. c. 8. de maior. et obed. 1. 33.]) your fraternity consulted us again, whether clerics coming to you without letters from their ordainers, and offering to furnish a corporal oath that they are constituted in any of the ecclesiastical orders, you ought to promote to superior orders.

Nos igitur Inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, nisi de ipsorum ordinatione canonica per idonea tibi constiterit argumenta, eos nec in illis suscipere, nec ad maiores debes ordines promovere, praesertim antequam conversatio eorum fuerit approbata. [Edoceri quoque etc. Dat.

We therefore respond to your Inquiry thus: unless it has been established to you by suitable proofs concerning their canonical ordination, you ought neither to receive them in those, nor to promote them to higher orders, especially before their manner of life has been approved. [To be instructed also etc. Given.

Ferentini IV. Non. Aug. Ao. IX. 1206.]

At Ferentino, August 2, Year 9, 1206.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Peregrinus, de cuius ordinatione non constat, non permittitur celebrare in publico, sed in occulto sic.

A peregrine, concerning whose ordination it is not ascertained, is not permitted to celebrate in public, but in secret thus.

Idem Patriarchae Hierosolymitano.

The same to the Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Tuae fraternitatis discretio postulavit per sedem apostolicam edoceri, Utrum clericos illos, qui ad partes Hierosolymitanas sine commendatitiis literis veniunt, permittere debeas celebrare divina, quum plerique illorum, de quorum canonica ordinatione non constat, statim ut veniunt, praesumunt, non expetita licentia, celebrare? Nos autem tuam in Domino sollicitudinem commendantes super primo articulo Respondemus, quod, nisi legitime tibi constiterit, sive per literas sive per testes, de illorum ordinatione canonica, qui penitus sunt ignoti, non debes ipsos permittere in tuis plebibus celebrare; sed si forsitan eorum aliqui secreto ex devotione celebrare voluerint, poteris sustinere. [Super secundo etc.

The discretion of your fraternity has requested to be instructed through the apostolic see, whether you ought to permit those clerics, who come to the Jerusalem parts without commendatory letters, to celebrate the divine rites, when most of them, of whose canonical ordination it is not evident, presume, as soon as they come, without the license sought, to celebrate? But we, commending your solicitude in the Lord, concerning the first article We Respond, that unless it has lawfully been established to you, whether by letters or by witnesses, concerning the canonical ordination of those who are utterly unknown, you ought not to permit them to celebrate among your peoples; but if perhaps some of them should wish to celebrate secretly out of devotion, you can tolerate it. [Concerning the second etc.

cf. c. 3. de apostatis V. 9. Dat. Romae ap. S. Petrum II. Kal. Febr.

cf. ch. 3, On Apostates, Book 5, Title 9. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, on January 31.

Ao. IX. 1207.]

Year 9. 1207.]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Inferiores praelati sine dioecesanorum consensu, in ecclesiis suis peregrinos non possunt instituere.

Lower prelates, without the consent of the diocesans, cannot institute foreigners in their churches.

Honorius III. Regino Episcopo.

Honorius 3. To Bishop Reginus.

Te nobis proponente didicimus, quod quidam praelati ecclesiarum tuae iurisdictionis in ecclesiis sibi commissis sine conscientia tua et assensu clericos de alienis episcopatibus instituere non verentur. Attendentes igitur, id eis nulla ratione licere, quum sit honestati contrarium et a sanctorum Patrum institutionibus alienum, ad exemplar felicis recordationis Alexandri Papae praedecessoris nostri inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, si qui clerici de alienis episcopatibus in ecclesiis tuae iurisdictionis sine conscientia et assensu tuo sunt vel fuerint in posterum instituti, tibi licet eos exinde auctoritate nostra appellatione postposita removere, nisi aliquos ex iis ex dispensatione in eisdem ecclesiis duxeris dimittendos.

At your proposal we learned that certain prelates of the churches under your jurisdiction, in the churches committed to them, do not hesitate, without your knowledge and assent, to institute clerics from alien bishoprics. Considering, therefore, that this is in no wise lawful for them, since it is contrary to honesty and alien to the institutions of the holy Fathers, after the example of Pope Alexander of happy memory, our predecessor, we thus answer your inquiry: if any clerics from alien bishoprics in the churches of your jurisdiction have been, or in future shall be, instituted without your knowledge and assent, it is permitted to you to remove them therefrom by our authority, appeal set aside, unless you shall judge that some of them, by dispensation, ought to be left in the same churches.

TITULUS XXIII. DE OFFICIO ARCHIDIACONI.

TITLE 23. ON THE OFFICE OF THE ARCHDEACON.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Ponit quae spectant ad officium archidiaconi.

He sets forth the things which pertain to the office of the archdeacon.

Ex libro Romani ordinis.

From the book of the Roman order.

Ut archidiaconus post episcopum sciat se vicarium esse eius in omnibus, et omnem curam in clero, tam in urbe positorum, quam eorum, qui per parochias habitare noscuntur, ad se pertinere; sive de eorum conversatione, sive de honore et restauratione ecclesiarum, sive doctrina ecclesiasticorum vel ceterarum rerum studio, et delinquentium rationem coram Deo redditurus est. Et ut de tertio in tertium anum, si episcopus non potest, parochiam universam circumeat, et cuncta, quae emendatione indigent, ad vicem sui episcopi corrigat et emendet.

That the archdeacon, after the bishop, should know himself to be his vicar in all things, and that all care for the clergy, both of those stationed in the city and of those who are known to dwell throughout the parishes, pertains to himself; whether concerning their conversation (conduct), or the honor and restoration of the churches, or the doctrine of ecclesiastics or the zeal for other matters, and he will render an account of delinquents before God. And that every third year, if the bishop cannot, he should go around the entire parish, and everything which has need of emendation he should correct and amend in the stead of his bishop.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Non summatur, sed ponit quaedam, quae spectant ad officium archidiaconi.

It is not summarized, but he sets forth certain things that pertain to the office of the archdeacon.

Ex concilio Toletano.

From the Council of Toledo.

Officium vero archidiaconi est, evangelium quando voluerit legere, vel alicui de diaconis praecipere, et quando episcopus missam canit, ad iussionem illius induant se Levitae vestimentis sacris, qualiter cum pontifice ad missam procedant; omnem querimoniam seu causam vel iustitiam presbyterorum, vel diaconorum, vel subdiaconorum ipse debet deliberare, ordinare et facere. Ideo vero strenuus, providus, cautus, vicem sui episcopi agens, episcopii totius curam habeat, et § 1. Omne ecclesiasticum officium providendo, lectiones aut responsoria in matrice ecclesia dare debet, et auscultare, in tantum, ut nullus evangelium, aut epistolam, aut responsoria, vel quamlibet in ecclesia lectionem legat vel cantet, donec ante ipsum legat vel cantet, et auscultetur ab ipso. § 2. Acolythos quoque ipse ordinet, quis eorum candelabra, quis thuribulum deferre quisve minorum in ecclesia aliqua officia agere debeat.

But indeed the office of the archdeacon is, to read the Gospel whenever he wishes, or to command one of the deacons to do so; and when the bishop sings the Mass, at his order let the Levites put on sacred vestments, in such a way as to proceed with the pontiff to the Mass; he himself ought to deliberate, arrange, and do every complaint or case or matter of justice of the presbyters, or deacons, or subdeacons. Therefore indeed, energetic, provident, cautious, acting in the stead of his bishop, let him have the care of the whole bishopric, and § 1. Providing for every ecclesiastical office, he ought to assign the readings or responsories in the mother church, and to listen, to such an extent that no one reads or sings the Gospel, or the Epistle, or the responsories, or any reading in the church, until it is read or sung before him, and is listened to by him. § 2. He likewise himself should arrange the acolytes: which of them ought to carry the candlesticks, which the thurible, and which should perform some of the lesser offices in the church.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Custodia vasorum ecclesiae spectat ad archidiaconum.

The custody of the church’s vessels pertains to the archdeacon.

Gregorius III. Archidiacono Salonitano.

Gregory 3. To the Archdeacon of Salona.

Ea, quae nobis contra vos tu et episcopus tuus direxistis scripta, doluimus agnoscentes eo, quod inter vos nihil caritas recognoscit. Verumtamen te in officio ordinis tui administrare praecipimus, et, si illic potest superante gratia causa vestri scandali definire, multum credimus vestrae animae acquisivisse. Sin vero ita inter vos discordia partes suas armavit, ut in tumore scandali voluntas vestra debeat remanere, tu ad nostram audientiam indifferenter occurre, et episcopus tuus pro se dirigat quam elegerit personam instructam, ut omnia subtili ratione perpensa constituere quae visa fuerint partibus debeamus.

Those writings which you and your bishop sent to us against one another, we were pained on recognizing this: that charity acknowledges nothing between you. Nevertheless, we command you to administer in the office of your rank; and, if there it is possible, grace prevailing, to define the case of your scandal, we believe much has been acquired for your soul. But if in truth discord has so armed its parties between you that your will must remain in the swelling of scandal, you, without delay, come to our hearing; and let your bishop, on his own behalf, dispatch whatever instructed person he shall have chosen, so that, all things weighed with subtle reasoning, we may determine those things which shall have seemed fitting to the parties.

Scire vero te volumus, quod a te districte quaesituri sumus, quia vel propriae ecclesiae, vel ea, quae de diversis ecclesiis cimilia sunt collecta, non sub omni sollicitudine et fide servantur. Quod si quid ex eis vel negligentia, vel cuiusquam fraude deperiit, tu in hoc reatu adstringeris, qui per archidiaconatus ordinem custodiae eiusdem ecclesiae arctius deputaris.

We wish you to know, moreover, that we shall very strictly call you to account, because either the property of your own church, or those things which, as cimelia, have been collected from diverse churches, are not being kept with all solicitude and faith. And if anything of these has been lost either by negligence or by someone’s fraud, you are bound in this guilt, inasmuch as by the order of the archdiaconate you are more strictly deputed to the custody of that same church.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Archidiaconus sine mandato episcopi non committit curam animarum, id est, non habet institutionem auctorizabilem.

The archdeacon, without the mandate of the bishop, does not commit the cure of souls; that is, he does not have an authorizable institution.

Alexander III. Eliensi Archidiacono.

Alexander III. To the Archdeacon of Ely.

Quum satis sit absurdum et a sanctorum Patrum institutionibus alienum, ut archidiaconus auctoritate propria debeat cuilibet curam ecclesiarum committere, aegre nimis ferimus, quod tu sine mandato episcopi tui personis animarum curam committis. Quoniam igitur obtentu alicuius consuetudinis non debes contra sanctorum Patrum constitutiones venire, et quod ad tuum non spectat officium vendicare, ideo mandamus, ut nemini de cetero sine licentia et mandato episcopi tui curam praesumas committere animarum.

Since it is sufficiently absurd, and alien from the institutions of the holy Fathers, that an archdeacon by his own authority should commit to anyone the care of churches, we are exceedingly aggrieved that you, without your bishop’s mandate, commit to persons the care of souls. Since therefore under the pretext of some custom you ought not to go against the constitutions of the holy Fathers, nor to claim what does not pertain to your office, we therefore command that henceforth you presume to commit the care of souls to no one without the license and mandate of your bishop.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Archidiaconus de iure communi non potest excommunicare. Ant. de But.

The archdeacon by common law cannot excommunicate. Ant. de But.

Idem Vigoriensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Worcester.

Archidiaconis non videtur de ecclesiastica institutione licere, nisi auctoritas episcoporum et consensus accesserit, in aliquos sententiam promulgare.

It does not seem permitted by ecclesiastical institution for archdeacons to promulgate a sentence against certain persons, unless the authority and consensus of the bishops has intervened.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Archidiaconus semel in anno, nisi necessitas exigat plus, visitat suam provinciam, id est paroeciam. Hoc dicit.

The archdeacon visits his province once in a year, unless necessity requires more—that is, his parochia (parish). He says this.

Idem Episcopo Conventrensi et Abbati Cestrensi.

The same to the Bishop of Coventry and the Abbot of Chester.

Mandamus, quatenus prohibeatis R. Cestrensi archidiacono, ne clericos sive laicos, qui pro suis excessibus puniendi sunt, poena pecuniaria mulctare, sive in examinatione ignis vel aquae a quolibet viro vel muliere extorquere praesumat, aut pro annua et indebita exactione pecuniae personas suspendere, vel ecclesias interdicere, neque ad ecclesias sui archidiaconatus visitandas nisi semel in anno accedat, nisi forte talis causa emerserit, propter quam ipsum oporteat praefatas ecclesias saepius visitare. Et tunc cum ea moderantia hominum et equitaturarum, quod qui in eis morantur, exinde non debeant merito querelari. Si autem contra inhibitionem vestram venire praesumserit, ecclesiastica severitate percellatis, omni occasione et appellatione cessantibus, et sententiam ipsam usque ad dignam satisfactionem faciatis inviolabiliter observari, ita quod in vos et illos hoc non cogamur durius, vindicare.

We command that you prohibit R., the Archdeacon of Chester, from presuming to mulct with a pecuniary penalty clerics or laymen who are to be punished for their excesses, or to extort in the examination (ordeal) of fire or water from any man or woman, or to suspend persons for an annual and undue exaction of money, or to interdict churches; nor let him go to visit the churches of his archdeaconry except once in the year, unless perhaps such a cause shall have emerged on account of which it would behove him to visit the aforesaid churches more frequently. And then with such moderation in men and in horse-services, that those who dwell in them ought not with good reason to complain therefrom. But if he shall presume to go against your inhibition, you shall smite him with ecclesiastical severity, all pretext and appeal ceasing, and you shall cause that sentence itself to be inviolably observed until worthy satisfaction, in such wise that we be not compelled to avenge this more harshly upon you and them.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Dicit primo, quod sit officium archidiaconi, et in quo per illud relevetur episcopus. Et secundo dicit, decanos rurales per episcopum et archidiaconum eligendos et amovendos, si illorum vices communiter gerant.

He says first what the office of the archdeacon is, and in what respect the bishop is relieved through it. And second he says that rural deans are to be elected and removed by the bishop and the archdeacon, if they jointly carry their vicarious duties.

Innocentius III.

Innocent III.

Ad haec non dicimus (Et infra:) § 1. Sane consuluit nos tuae fraternitatis devotio, quid ad officium archidiaconi debeat pertinere, et in quibus per ipsum cura episcopalis sollicitudinis debeat relevari. Et nos, prout possumus, respondemus, quod archidiaconus secundum statuta B. Isidori imperat subdiaconibus et Levitis; parochiarum sollicitudo et earum ordinatio ad ipsum pertinet, et audire debet iurgia singulorum. § 2. Archipresbyteri autem, qui a pluribus decani nuncupantur, eius iurisdictioni se noverint subiacere.

To these things we do not say (And below:) § 1. Indeed, the devotion of your fraternity has consulted us, as to what ought to pertain to the office of the archdeacon, and in what matters through him the care of episcopal solicitude ought to be relieved. And we, so far as we are able, respond that the archdeacon, according to the statutes of Blessed Isidore, commands the subdeacons and the Levites; the solicitude of the parishes and their ordering pertains to him, and he ought to hear the lawsuits of individuals. § 2. But the archpresbyters, who by many are called deans, should know themselves to be subject to his jurisdiction.

§ 3. Secundum vero Romani ordinis constitutionem maior post episcopum et ipsius episcopi vicarius reperitur, omnem sollicitudinem et curam tam in clericis quam in ecclesiis eorum, prout melius secundum Deum poterit, impendendo, quum super his sit redditurus rationem in districti examinis iudicio. § 4. Item in epistola B. Clementis Papae praedecessoris nostri oculus episcopi archidiaconus appellatur, ut loco episcopi per episcopatum prospiciens, quae corrigenda viderit corrigat et emendet, nisi adeo fuerint ardua negotia, quod absque maioris sui praesentia nequeant terminari. § 5. In quadam vero nostra constitutione iam alia vice nos meminimus expressisse, quod institutio corporalis tam super beneficiis quam etiam dignitatibus ad ipsum debeat pertinere, examinatio etiam clericorum, si fuerint ad sacros ordines promovendi; et hoc idem in collationibus beneficiorum credimus observandum, ut qui beneficiis ecclesiasticis praeficiendi fuerint a suo prius examinentur archidiacono, et per ipsum postmodum episcopo praesententur.

§ 3. According to the constitution of the Roman order, he is found to be the greater after the bishop and the vicar of the bishop himself, expending every solicitude and care both for the clerics and for their churches, as he will be able the better according to God, since concerning these things he is to render an account in the judgment of a strict examination. § 4. Likewise, in the epistle of Blessed Clement, Pope, our predecessor, the archdeacon is called the eye of the bishop, so that, looking out over the episcopate in the place of the bishop, he may correct and emend what he shall have seen needs correction, unless the affairs are so arduous that they cannot be concluded without the presence of his superior. § 5. Moreover, in a certain constitution of ours we have already on another occasion remembered to express that corporal institution both over benefices and also dignities ought to pertain to him, as well as the examination of clerics, if they are to be promoted to sacred orders; and we believe this same thing must be observed in the collations of benefices, that those who are to be set over ecclesiastical benefices should first be examined by their own archdeacon, and thereafter be presented through him to the bishop.

§ 6. Subsequenter postea quaesivisti, utrum decani rurales, qui pro tempore statuuntur, ad mandatum tuum solum, vel archidiaconi, vel etiam utriusque institui debeant vel destitui, si fuerint amovendi. Ad hoc breviter respondemus, quod, quum iuxta imperialis sanctionis auctoritatem ab omnibus quod omnes tangit approbari debeat, et quum commune eorum decanus officium exerceat, communiter est eligendus, vel etiam amovendus.

§ 6. Subsequently thereafter you asked whether the rural deans, who are established for the time being, ought to be instituted at your mandate alone, or the archdeacon’s, or even by both, or be destituted, if they are to be removed. To this we briefly respond that, since according to the authority of the imperial sanction what touches all ought to be approved by all, and since the dean exercises their common office, he is to be chosen in common, and likewise to be removed in common.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Archidiaconus non dat commendatitias ad ordines.

The archdeacon does not issue commendatory letters for orders.

Idem.

The same.

Significasti (Et infra:) Interdicas autem archidiacono tuo, ne sine conscientia tua et auctoritate literas suas promovendis concedat, et eis etiam districte prohibeas, ne ad ordines taliter audeant convolare. Qui si contra prohibitionem tuam venire praesumpserint, exsecutionem eis ordinum susceptorum totaliter interdicas. [Dat.

You have signified (And below:) Moreover, you shall interdict your archdeacon, lest without your conscience and authority he grant his letters to those being promoted, and you shall also strictly forbid them, lest they dare to flock thus to orders. And if they shall presume to come against your prohibition, you shall totally interdict to them the execution of the orders received. [Given.

Lat. XV. Kal. Oct.

Lateran, 15th day before the Kalends of October.

1199.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Archidiaconus examinat et praesentat ordinandos, et ponit praelatos in sede.

The Archdeacon examines and presents the ordinands, and sets the prelates in the seat.

Idem.

The same.

Ut nostrum (Et infra:) [(cf. c. un. ut. eccl. ben. III.

As our (And infra:) [(cf. c. un. ut. eccl. ben. 3.

12.) Quia vero maiorum excessus maiori debent severitate puniri, quum iuxta divinae legis oraculum sacerdos, si unctus est, peccaverit, faciet delinquere populum, quod inhoneste super retentione proventuum praesumpsisti de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio irritavimus, et in poenam praesumptionis huiusmodi, ut in eo puniaris, in quo peccaveras, a collatione dignitatis vel ecclesiastici beneficii, quod ad tuam donationem in tua primo vacabit ecclesia, censuimus suspendendum. Ceterum quia divina docente scriptura didicimus, quod melior est sapiens viro forti, et qui dominatur animo expugnatore urbium, quantumcunque voluerimus aut vellemus, si salva possemus iustitia (contra quam non iudicamus nos posse, quum simus in sede iustitiae constituti), praefatam cancellariam praedicto subdiacono nostro conferri, saepedictum tamen H. de Lamp. non invenimus ita culpabilem, ut eum exigente iustitia ipsa cancellaria privare possimus, quum, etsi parentes eius simplicitate deliquerint, nihil tamen pro ea dantes aut etiam promittentes, ipse tamen investituram cancellariae sicut verus canonicus, et cui ratione canonicatus non poterat opponi de iure defectus, sine pactione qualibet et conventione recepit.] Nec [etiam] fuit sufficienter probatum, quod cancellarius ex officio suo exerceat spiritualia memorata, quum ea potius de iure communi ad archidiaconi spectent officium, repraesentare videlicet ordinandos episcopo, et illos examinare, ponere abbates et abbatissas in sede.

12.) But because the transgressions of superiors ought to be punished with greater severity, since, according to the oracle of the divine law, if the priest—if he is anointed—shall have sinned, he will make the people delinquent, that which you presumed dishonorably concerning the retention of revenues we have annulled by the common counsel of our brethren; and, as a penalty for such presumption, that you may be punished in that wherein you sinned, we have decreed that you be suspended from the collation of a dignity or ecclesiastical benefice which at your bestowal shall first fall vacant in your church. Moreover, because, with Scripture teaching divinely, we have learned that the wise man is better than the strong man, and he who masters his spirit than a conqueror of cities, however much we might have wished or should wish, if we could with justice preserved (against which we do not judge that we can, since we have been set in the seat of justice), to confer the aforesaid chancellorship upon our aforesaid subdeacon, nevertheless we have not found the oft-mentioned H. of Lamp. so culpable that, justice demanding it, we could deprive him of the chancellorship itself, since, although his relatives sinned through simplicity, yet giving nothing for it nor even promising, he himself received the investiture of the chancellorship as a true canon, and one to whom by reason of his canonry no defect could in law be opposed, without any pact or agreement.] Nor [also] was it sufficiently proved that the chancellor, by his office, exercises the aforesaid spirituals, since these rather by common law pertain to the office of the archdeacon, namely to present those to be ordained to the bishop, and to examine them, to set abbots and abbesses in the seat.

[Quae quum probatum sit etc. Dat. Perusii IX. Kal.

[Which things, since they have been proved, etc. Given at Perugia on the 9th day before the Kalends.

Oct. 1198.]

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Archidiaconi in monasteriis iurisdictionem non habent, nisi quantum tribuit eis generalis vel specialis consuetudo.

Archdeacons do not have jurisdiction in monasteries, except insofar as general or special custom grants it to them.

Honorius III. Abbati Arimanensi Trecensis dioecesis, et Archidiacono et Decano S. Stephani Trecensis.

Honorius 3. To the Abbot of Arimanum of the diocese of Troyes, and to the Archdeacon and the Dean of St. Stephen of Troyes.

Dilecto filio (Et infra:) Ad petitionem archidiaconi Senonensis conquerentis, quod abbas et conventus monasterii sancti Petri Vivi Senonensis procurationem annuam et quaedam alia ratione sui archidiaconatus ad ipsum spectantia exhiberi sibi contra iustitiam denegabant, abbati sancti Crispini et collegis eius dedimus in mandatis, ut audirent causam huiusmodi et fine debito terminarent. Coram quibus petiit praedictus archidiaconus, ut, quum idem monasterium infra metas sui archidiaconatus sit situm, praefati abbas et monachi sibi obedirent in his, quae pertinent ad iurisdictionem, correctionem, reconciliationem et visitationem, ad ius, ut dicebat, archidiaconale spectantes, videlicet, ut coram se conquerentibus responderent, ac starent iuri, et iustas eius sententias observarent; citati etiam venirent ad eius praesentiam, et eius mandata honesta et sancta secundum Deum, de correctione excessuum, et aliis, quae archidiaconi solent et possunt rationabiliter iniungere, audituri et salva sua regula et abbatis sui debita obedientia servaturi. Petiit insuper, ne de cetero facerent aliquos de Senonensi baillivia eo praetermisso coram officiali Senonensis archiepiscopi conveniri, asserens, illos prius debere conveniri sub ipso, quam coram officiali praedicto, specialibus ipsius archiepiscopi et hominum, ac familiae suae causis duntaxat exceptis.

To the beloved son (And below:) At the petition of the archdeacon of Sens, complaining that the abbot and convent of the monastery of Saint Peter the Living of Sens were refusing, against justice, to render to him the annual procuration and certain other things which, by reason of his archdeaconry, pertain to him, we gave mandate to the abbot of Saint Crispin and to his colleagues to hear a case of this kind and to bring it to its due conclusion. Before them the aforesaid archdeacon requested that, since that same monastery is situated within the bounds of his archdeaconry, the aforesaid abbot and monks should obey him in those things which pertain to jurisdiction, correction, reconciliation, and visitation, pertaining, as he said, to archidiaconal right, namely, that they answer those complaining before him, submit to the law, and observe his just sentences; that, when cited, they likewise come into his presence, and hear his honest and holy mandates according to God concerning the correction of excesses, and other matters which archdeacons are wont and able reasonably to enjoin, and that they keep their rule and the due obedience owed to their abbot. He further petitioned that they should not henceforth cause any persons of the bailiwick of Sens, he being passed over, to be convened before the official of the archbishop of Sens, asserting that they ought first to be convened under himself rather than before the aforesaid official, with only the special causes of the archbishop and of his men and household excepted.

Lite igitur super praemissis coram praefatis iudicibus legitime contestata, et auditis ab eisdem hinc inde propositis, iidem iudices de utriusque partis assensu causam ipsam ad examen apostolicum remiserunt. Ipsis ergo abbate et archidiacono in nostra praesentia constitutis, nos attendentes, eorum consuetudines esse super archidiaconorum iurisdictione diversas, quum in hoc casu nesciremus consuetudinem, qua in abbatiis Senonensibus ordinis praefati monasterii utitur archidiaconus Senonensis, finalem habere nequivimus in huiusmodi questione processum. Volentes autem, ut eidem quaestioni finis debitus imponatur, causam ipsam vobis de ipsius abbatis et procuratoris alterius partis assensu duximus committendam.

Accordingly, the suit having been lawfully contested before the aforesaid judges concerning the premises, and the allegations on either side having been heard by those same men, those judges, with the assent of both parties, remitted the case itself to the apostolic examination. Therefore, with the abbot and the archdeacon themselves set in our presence, we, considering that their customs are diverse concerning the jurisdiction of archdeacons, since in this case we did not know the custom which in the abbeys of Sens of the order of the aforesaid monastery the archdeacon of Sens employs, were not able to have a final proceeding in a question of this sort. But wishing that a due end be imposed upon that same question, we have deemed the case itself, with the assent of the abbot himself and of the procurator of the other party, to be committed to you.

Ideoque discretioni vestrae mandamus, quatenus per maiores ecclesiae Senonensis canonicos, qui habere debent de huiusmodi consuetudine notitiam pleniorem, super his sollicite veritatem inquiratis, et, nisi vobis infra tres menses post primae citationis edictum constiterit per eosdem, praefatum archidiaconum vel praedecessores ipsius de pacifica sic obtenta consuetudine iurisdictionem aliquam in ipso monasterio, vel in huiusmodi abbatiis hactenus habuisse, praefatum monasterium ab eius impetitione penitus absolvatis, perpetuum super hoc ipsi archidiacono silentium imponentes. Si vero vobis constiterit per canonicos eosdem, ipsum archidiaconum vel eius praedecessores de sic obtenta consuetudine hactenus habuisse iurisdictionem aliquam in ipso monasterio, vel in aliis huiusmodi abbatiis, eandem iurisdictionem duntaxat adiudicantes eidem, in monasterio supradicto quam ipsum vel praedecessores suos in monasterio ipso vel in eisdem abbatiis habuisse constiterit, super aliis perpetuum ei silentium imponatis, in praedictis omnibus sublato appellationis obstaculo processuri.

And therefore we command your discretion, that through the senior canons of the church of Sens, who ought to have fuller knowledge of such a consuetude, you diligently inquire the truth concerning these matters; and, unless within three months after the edict of the first citation it shall have been established to you through those same men that the aforesaid archdeacon or his predecessors, by a consuetude thus peacefully obtained, have hitherto had any jurisdiction in the monastery itself or in abbeys of this kind, you shall wholly absolve the aforesaid monastery from his impetition, imposing perpetual silence upon the archdeacon on this point. But if it shall be established to you through those same canons that the archdeacon himself or his predecessors, by a consuetude thus obtained, have hitherto had some jurisdiction in the monastery itself, or in other abbeys of this kind, adjudging to him that jurisdiction only, in the aforesaid monastery, which it is established that he or his predecessors have had in the monastery itself or in those abbeys, you shall impose perpetual silence upon him concerning the others, proceeding in all the aforesaid with the obstacle of appeal removed.

TITULUS XXIV. DE OFFICIO ARCHIPRESBYTERI.

TITLE 24. ON THE OFFICE OF THE ARCHPRIEST.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Archipresbyter civitatis subest archidiacono, et principaliter praeest presbyteris et presbyteralibus officiis.

The archpresbyter of the city is subject to the archdeacon, and principally presides over the presbyters and presbyteral offices.

Ex concilio Toletano.

From the Council of Toledo.

Ut archipresbyter sciat se subesse archidiacono, et eius praeceptis sicut sui episcopi obedire et, quod specialiter ad eius pertinet ministerium, super omnes presbyteros in ordine presbyterali positos curam agere animarum, et assidue in ecclesia stare, et in episcopi sui absentia ad vicem eius missarum solennia celebret, et collectam dicat, aut cui ipse iniunxerit.

That the archpresbyter know that he is subject to the archdeacon, and obey his precepts as those of his own bishop; and, in what specially pertains to his ministry, exercise the care of souls over all presbyters placed in the presbyteral order, and stand assiduously in the church, and, in the absence of his bishop, in his stead celebrate the solemnities of the masses, and say the collect, either himself or the one whom he has enjoined.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Ad idem.

To the same.

Leo Papa.

Pope Leo.

Ministerium archipresbyteri in eo constituitur, ut diligenti cura provideat ministerium sacerdotum cardinalium, qui solenne debent agere officium in communicatione corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi ita, ut vicissim eos sibimet succurrere faciat, quatenus a sacrosancto die dominico incipiendo, per omnes horas canonicas indeclinabiliter perseverent, ut opus Dei digne et sancte perficiatur ab eo, cui committitur, verens sententiam illius sapientissimi, ubi dicitur: "Maledictus homo, qui negligenter facit opera Dei." § 1. Provideat etiam archipresbyter vitam sacerdotum cardinalium, praeceptis sui obtemperando episcopi, ne aliquando cedant, aut scurrilitate torpeant, sed reminiscantur, quod labia sacerdotum custodiant scientiam, et legem requirunt ex ore eius, qui angelus Domini exercituum est. § 2. Si episcopus defuerit, exceptis his, quae prohibita sunt, archipresbyter provideat cuncta, quae in sacerdotum ministerio perfici debeant, [id est] fontes benedicere, infirmum oleo perungere, poenitentem infirmum, consulto episcopo, reconciliare, poenitentiam cunctis aliis sacerdotibus, quae ad purgationem animarum pertinet, iniungere. § 3. In praecipuis festivitatibus aut ipse celebrationem missae solenniter impleat, aut ad oris sui iussionem, cui committitur, peragat veneranter.

The ministry of the archpresbyter is established in this, that with diligent care he provide for the ministry of the cardinal priests, who ought to perform the solemn office in the communion of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, in such wise that he make them in turn to give succor to one another, to the extent that, beginning from the most holy Lord’s Day, through all the canonical hours they persevere invariably, so that the work of God may be brought to completion worthily and holily by him to whom it is committed, fearing the sentence of that most wise one, where it is said: "Cursed is the man who does the works of God negligently." § 1. Let the archpresbyter also provide for the life of the cardinal priests, by obeying the precepts of his own bishop, lest they ever give way, or grow torpid in scurrility, but let them remember that the lips of priests guard knowledge, and that they seek the law from his mouth, who is the angel of the Lord of hosts. § 2. If the bishop is lacking, with those things excepted which are prohibited, let the archpresbyter provide all things that ought to be accomplished in the ministry of priests, [that is] to bless the fonts, to anoint the sick with oil, to reconcile a penitent who is ill, with the bishop consulted, to enjoin penance upon all the other priests, which pertains to the purgation of souls. § 3. On the principal festivals either he himself shall fulfill the celebration of the mass solemnly, or, at his word of command, let the one to whom it is committed perform it reverently.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Declarat, quod sit officium archipresbyteri civitatensis. Ant. de But.

It declares what the office of the city archpresbyter is. Ant. de But.

Idem.

The same.

Officium archipresbyteri de urbe constat, quando ibi praesul defuerit, vice eius officium inchoare, benedictiones presbyterales in ecclesia dare, missam, quando voluerit, cantare, vel cui de sacerdotibus iusserit. Quando vero episcopus missam canit, debet praecipere sacerdotibus, ut induant se vestibus sacris, et qualiter ad missam procedant. Debet enim praecipere custodi ecclesiae, ut in sacrario eucharistia Christi propter infirmos non desit.

The office of the archpresbyter of the city consists in this: when the prelate is absent there, to begin the office in his stead, to give presbyteral blessings in the church, to sing the Mass whenever he wishes, or to have it sung by whichever of the priests he shall have ordered. But when the bishop sings the Mass, he ought to enjoin the priests to clothe themselves in sacred vestments, and how they are to proceed to the Mass. For he ought to instruct the custodian of the church that in the sacristy the Eucharist of Christ not be lacking on account of the infirm.

Debet infirmis providere, et providendo praecipere sacerdotibus, ne forte sine confessione, vel confirmatione corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi moriantur; confessiones vero peccatorum eorum, qui a foris veniunt, recipere cum omnibus sacerdotibus, et exinde per provisionem pontificis magnam debet illis adhibere curam. Ad Christianos quoque faciendos, et baptizandos infantes, et ad succurrendum, omnia a sacerdotibus per iussionem illius fiant.

He ought to provide for the sick, and, in providing, to command the priests, lest perhaps they die without confession or the confirmation by the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; but the confessions of the sins of those who come from outside he is to receive with all the priests, and thereafter, through the provision of the pontiff, he ought to apply great care to them. Also, for making Christians and baptizing infants, and for bringing succor, let all things be done by the priests at his command.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Archipresbyter ruralis presbyterorum et laicorum plebaniae suae curam gerit: contra decretum tamen episcopi nihil ordinare potest.

The rural archpresbyter bears care of the presbyters and of the laity of his parish: nevertheless, he can ordain nothing against the decree of the bishop.

Idem ex synodo Ravennae habita.

The same from the synod held at Ravenna.

Ut singulae plebes archipresbyterum habeant; propter assiduam erga populum Dei curam, singulis plebibus archipresbyteros praeesse volumus, qui non solum imperiti vulgi sollicitudinem gerant, verum etiam eorum presbyterorum, qui per minores titulos habitant, vitam iugi circumspectione custodiant, et qua unusquisque industria divinum opus exerceat, episcopo suo renunciet. § 1. Nec contendat episcopus, non egere plebem archipresbytero, quasi ipse eam gubernare valeat, quia, etsi valde idoneus sit, decet tamen, ut sua onera partiatur, et sicut ipse matrici ecclesiae praeest, ita archipresbyteri praesint plebibus, ut in nullo titubet ecclesiastica sollicitudo. Cuncta tamen referant ad episcopum, nec aliquid contra eius decretum ordinare praesumant.

So that individual plebes may have an archpresbyter; on account of the assiduous care toward the people of God, we wish archpresbyters to preside over the individual plebes, who should bear the solicitude not only for the unlearned crowd, but also should guard with continual circumspection the life of those presbyters who dwell at the lesser tituli, and with what diligence each one exercises the divine work, let him report to his own bishop. § 1. Nor let the bishop contend that the plebs does not need an archpresbyter, as if he were able to govern it himself, because, even if he be very fit, nevertheless it is fitting that he share his burdens; and as he himself presides over the mother church, so let the archpresbyters preside over the plebes, so that in no respect may ecclesiastical solicitude falter. Yet let them refer all things to the bishop, nor presume to arrange anything against his decree.

TITULUS XXV. DE OFFICIO PRIMICERII.

TITLE 25. ON THE OFFICE OF THE PRIMICERIUS.

CAP. UN.

CHAPTER ONE.

Ponit ea, quae spectant ad officium primicerii. Anton. de Butr.

He sets forth the things which pertain to the office of the primicerius. Anton. de Butr.

Idem ex libro Romani ordinis.

The same from the book of the Roman order.

Ut primicerius sciat, se esse sub archidiacono, sicut et archipresbyter, et ad eius curam specialiter pertinere, ut praesit in docendo diaconis, vel reliquis gradibus ecclesiasticis in ordine positis, ut ipse disciplinae et custodiae insistat, sicut pro animabus eorum coram Deo rationem est redditurus, et ut ipse diaconibus donet lectiones, quae ad nocturna officia clericorum pertinent, et de singulis studium habeat, ut in quacunque re capacem sensum habuerit, absque ulla vacet negligentia [ab eo] aut a quo ipse iusserit, instruantur.

That the primicerius should know that he is under the archdeacon, as also the archpresbyter, and that it pertains specially to his care to preside in teaching the deacons, as well as the remaining ecclesiastical grades set in order; that he himself apply himself to discipline and custody, since he is going to render an account before God for their souls; and that he himself assign to the deacons the readings which pertain to the nocturnal offices of the clerics; and that he have concern for each individual, so that, in whatever matter each has a capable understanding, they may be instructed without any negligence [by him] or by whomever he shall have ordered.

TITULUS XXVI. DE OFFICIO SACRISTAE.

TITLE 26. ON THE OFFICE OF THE SACRISTAN.

CAP. UN.

CHAPTER ONE.

Ex concilio Toletano.

From the Council of Toledo.

Ut sciat se sacrista subiectum archidiacono, et ad eius curam pertinere custodiam sacrorum vasorum, vestimentorum ecclesiasticorum seu totius thesauri ecclesiastici, nec non quae ad luminaria pertinent, sive in cera, sive in oleo, [sive ad distributionem sacri chrismatis.]

That the sacristan know himself subject to the archdeacon, and that to his care pertains the custody of the sacred vessels, of the ecclesiastical vestments or of the whole ecclesiastical treasury, and also the things that pertain to the lights, whether in wax or in oil, [or to the distribution of the sacred chrism.]

TITULUS XXVII. DE OFFICIO CUSTODIS.

TITLE 27. ON THE OFFICE OF THE CUSTODIAN.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Ponit, quae spectant ad officium custodis. H. d.

It sets forth the things which pertain to the office of the custodian. In this Digest.

Ex libro Romani ordinis.

From the book of the Roman Order.

Custos ecclesiae, cui ea, quae ecclesiae competunt, custodienda committuntur, oportet, ut sui archidiaconi iussioni in cunctis obediat, in canonicis horis signa tintinabulorum pulsanda, ipso archidiacono iubente, ab eo pulsentur, pallia vel linteamina altaris, seu cuncta utensilia ecclesiae indesinenter custodiat, lampades et laternas in accendendo, seu in exstinguendo pervigil exsistat, ne aut supra modum lucendo oleum depereat, aut minus lucendo obscurior sit ecclesia; sed omnia cum discretione agantur, quae noscitur omnium virtutum esse mater. § 1. Si vero is, cui ecclesia custodienda traditur, minus idoneus ad hoc peragendum exstiterit, ab archidiacono coerceatur, ut se emendit. Si autem indomitus permanserit, archidiaconus episcopo denunciando provideat, ut indecente eiecto aptus domui Dei constituatur minister, ut omnia in laudem et nomen Dei fiant, qualiter placari possit Deus in ecclesia ab observientibus sibi.

The custodian of the church, to whom those things which pertain to the church are committed to be kept, it is proper that he obey in all things the command of his archdeacon; at the canonical hours let the signals of the tintinnabula (bells), the archdeacon himself giving the order, be sounded by him; let him unremittingly guard the coverings or linens of the altar, and all the utensils of the church; let him be ever-watchful in lighting and in extinguishing the lamps and lanterns, lest by burning beyond measure the oil be wasted, or by burning too little the church grow dim; but let all things be done with discretion, which is known to be the mother of all virtues. § 1. If indeed the one to whom the church is handed over to be kept has proved less fit to carry this out, let him be restrained by the archdeacon, that he may amend himself. But if he remains unruly, let the archdeacon, by denouncing to the bishop, provide that, the improper one being cast out, a minister apt for the house of God be appointed, so that all things may be done to the praise and name of God, in such wise that God may be propitiated in the church by those who obey him.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Ad idem.

To the same.

Ex concilio Toletano.

From the Council of Toledo.

Custos vero sollicitus debet esse de omni ornamento ecclesiae, et luminariis sive incenso, nec non panem et vinum omni tempore praeparatum ad missam habere debet, et per singulas horas canonicas signum ex consensu archidiaconi sonare, et omnes oblationes seu eleemosynas, seu decimas, cum eiusdem tamen consensu absente episcopo, inter fratres dividat. § 1. In his tribus ecclesiae columnis, ut sancta sanxit synodus, consistere debet alma mater ecclesia, ut ad hoc opus tales ordinentur, quales plus meliores et sanctiores esse viderint, ut nulla negligentia in sancta Dei ecclesia esse videatur. Hi tres, archidiaconus, archipresbyter, custos, simul iuncti uno animo provide peragant et perfecte, et non sit invidia neque zelus inter illos.

The custodian, indeed, ought to be solicitous about every ornament of the church, and about the lights or incense, and he ought also to have bread and wine prepared at all times for the mass, and at each canonical hour to sound the bell with the consent of the archdeacon, and all oblations or alms, or tithes, however with his consent when the bishop is absent, he should divide among the brothers. § 1. On these three columns of the church, as the holy synod has sanctioned, the nourishing mother church ought to stand, so that for this work such men may be ordained as they have seen to be the better and holier, so that no negligence may seem to be in the holy church of God. These three, the archdeacon, the archpriest, the custodian, joined together with one mind, may carry things through providently and perfectly, and let there be neither envy nor jealousy among them.

TITULUS XXVIII. DE OFFICIO VICARII.

TITLE 28. ON THE OFFICE OF THE VICAR.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Vicarius, si beneficium curatum postea sit adeptus, vicaria privabitur.

A vicar, if he shall afterwards have obtained a benefice with cure, will be deprived of the vicarage.

Alexander III. Episcopo Norvicensi et G. Archidiacono.

Alexander 3. To the Bishop of Norwich and to G., Archdeacon.

Ad audientiam nostram pervenit, quod G. presbyter monachos de Rameseia et Thomam clericum suum petendo vicariam [suam] ecclesiae de Burnel, a qua viginti annis retrocessit, in diversis postea ecclesiis personatum adeptus, multipliciter vexare ac fatigare praesumit. Quia igitur non est canonicum, ut qui curam animarum in diversis habet ecclesiis vicarius in alienis exsistat, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, rei veritate plenius inquisita, si ita est, praedictum presbyterum a petitione supradictae vicariae desistere appellatione et occasione remotis districtius compellatis, non obstantibus literis si quas tacita veritate per nuntium a nobis impetravit. Exstirpari etenim debent, quae de avaritae radice procedunt, et canonum contraria sunt rationi vel sanctioni.

It has come to our hearing that G., a priest, by seeking the vicarage [his] of the church of Burnel, from which he withdrew 20 years ago, and, afterwards having obtained a personate in various churches, presumes to vex and harass in multiple ways the monks of Rameseia and Thomas his clerk. Therefore, since it is not canonical that he who has the cure of souls in different churches should exist as vicar in others’ churches, we command to your discretion through apostolic writings, with a charge, that, the truth of the matter more fully inquired, if it is so, you more strictly compel the aforesaid priest to desist from his petition for the above‑said vicarage, appeals and pretexts being removed, notwithstanding any letters, if any, which, the truth being kept silent, he obtained from us through a messenger. For those things which proceed from the root of avarice and are contrary to the reason or sanction of the canons ought to be extirpated.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Plures vicarias quis habere non potest.

No one can have multiple vicarages.

Idem Eliensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Ely.

Provideas [autem] attentius, ne in episcopatu tuo patiaris aliquem plures vicarias habere, quia, quum vicarii teneantur personis et ecclesiis deservire, alienum est ab ordine iuris, ut vicariam quis habeat praeter unam.

See to it [however] more attentively that in your episcopate you do not allow anyone to have more than one vicarage, since, as vicars are bound to serve persons and churches, it is alien to the order of law that anyone should hold a vicarage beyond one.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Perpetuus vicarius per episcopum institutus per rectorem removeri, vel portione sua fraudari non potest.

A perpetual vicar, instituted by the bishop, cannot be removed by the rector, or be defrauded of his portion.

Idem Vintoniensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Winchester.

Ad haec si persona alicuius ecclesiae vicario, quem in eadem ecclesia instituit, de assensu et auctoritate dioecesani episcopi certam assignaverit portionem, is, qui persona illa defuncta in personatum illius substituitur ecclesiae, non potest eundem vicarium ab ecclesia removere, vel assignatam sibi minuere portionem, nisi aliquid committat, propter quod per iudicem in vicaria sit vel beneficio condemnandus.

In addition, if the parson of any church, to a vicar whom he has instituted in the same church, with the assent and authority of the diocesan bishop, has assigned a definite portion, he who, that parson having died, is substituted into that church’s personate cannot remove that same vicar from the church, or diminish the portion assigned to him, unless he commit something for which by a judge he ought to be condemned with respect to the vicarage or the benefice.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Vicarius non potest substituere vicarium.

A vicar cannot substitute a vicar.

Idem Norwicensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Norwich.

Clericos [autem vel] in presbyteratu, vel in aliis inferioribus ordinibus constitutos, in vicariis ecclesiarum, quas adepti sunt, alios sibi substituere non permittas, quum id satis sit absonum et absurdum, et omni rationi contrarium.

Do not permit clerics [however or] constituted in the presbyterate, or in other inferior orders, in the vicarages of the churches which they have obtained, to substitute others for themselves, since that is quite out of harmony and absurd, and contrary to all reason.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Vicarius Papae in urbe iurisdictionem habet, non extra urbem.

The Pope’s Vicar has jurisdiction in the city, not outside the city.

Innocentius III. Abbati S. Eugenii et Plebano S. Petri.

Innocent III. To the Abbot of St. Eugenius and the Pleban of St. Peter.

Sua nobis venerabilis frater noster [Wulteranus episcopus fecit insinuatione monstrari, quod, quum clerici plebis de Petiole iurassent sibi praepositum ad laicorum eligere voluntatem, et electione taliter celebrata sibi praesentassent electum, ipse non solum electionem ipsius renuit confirmare, verum etiam tam consules et alios laicos, qui ad hoc impulerant clericos supradictos, quam ipsos clericos, pro his et aliis, in quibus eidem inobedientes exstiterant, excommunicationis vinculo innodavit, et ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum archiepiscopum Pisanum, et Lucanum episcopum destinari obtinuit scripta nostra, ut sententiam, sicut fuerat rationabiliter promulgata, facerent appellatione remota usque ad satisfactionem congruam firmiter observari. Pars autem adversa venerabilis fratris nostri P. Portuensis episcopi vicarii nostri, ad eundem Lucanum episcopum et dilectum filium P. tit. basilicae XII.

Our venerable brother [Wulteranus the bishop] made it be shown to us by insinuation, that, when the clerics of the people of Petiole had sworn to elect for themselves a provost according to the will of the laity, and, the election having been thus celebrated, had presented the elect to him, he not only refused to confirm that election, but also bound with the bond of excommunication both the consuls and other laymen who had impelled the aforesaid clerics to this, and the clerics themselves, for these things and others in which they had stood disobedient to him; and he obtained that our letters be sent to our venerable brother the Archbishop of Pisa and the Bishop of Lucca, that they should cause the sentence, as it had been reasonably promulgated, to be firmly observed, appeal set aside, until suitable satisfaction. But the adverse party of our venerable brother P., the Bishop of Portus, our vicar, [appealed] to that same Bishop of Lucca and to our beloved son P., of the title of the Basilica of the 12.

Apostolorum presbyterum cardinalem literas impetravit, qui occasione illarum dictos laicos et clericos absolverunt, contra memoratum Wulteranum episcopum sententiam promulgantes, a qua idem episcopus, licet ipsam multiplici ratione crediderit esse nullam, ex abundanti tamen nostram audientiam appellavit.] Nos igitur vicarii literas aestimantes per surreptionem obtentas, quoniam iurisdictio vicarii, quem Romanus Pontifex in Urbe reliquit, non extenditur extra illam, nisi ei specialiter sit concessum, praesertim quum ipse moratur in sua provincia speciali, videlicet inter Capuanam provinciam et Pisanam; discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, quicquid occasione literarum actum est, in irritum revocetis, praefatam excommunicationis sententiam sicut rationabiliter lata est, faciatis remoto appellationis obstaculo, firmiter observari.

He obtained letters of the cardinal presbyter of the Apostles, who, on the occasion of those, absolved the said laymen and clerics, promulgating a sentence against the aforesaid Bishop Wulteranus, from which the same bishop, although he believed it to be null for multiple reasons, nevertheless out of abundance appealed to our audience.] We therefore, estimating the vicar’s letters to have been obtained by surreption, since the jurisdiction of the vicar whom the Roman Pontiff left in the City does not extend outside it unless it be specially granted to him, especially since he himself abides in his special province, namely between the Capuan province and the Pisan, command to your discretion by apostolic writings that you revoke into nullity whatever has been done on the occasion of the letters, and that you cause the aforesaid sentence of excommunication, as it was reasonably issued, the obstacle of appeal having been removed, to be firmly observed.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Compelluntur vicarii ordinarii ecclesiis deservire per subtractionem proventuum et vicariarum.

Ordinary vicars are compelled to serve the churches by the subtraction of revenues and of vicarages.

Honorius III. Vigorensi Episcopo.

Honorius 3. To the Bishop of Vigor.

Ex parte tua fuit propositum coram nobis, quod quidam in ecclesiis, quibus perpetuas obtinent vicarias, debitam residentiam facere, ac in presbyteros promoveri contemnunt. Nolentes igitur abusum huiusmodi, sicuti nec debemus, aequanimiter sustinere, fraternitati tuae mandamus, quatenus perpetuos vicarios, ut in ecclesiis, in quibus vicarias obtinent, resideant, ut tenentur, et se in presbyteros, ut eorum cura exigit, faciant promoveri, per subtractionem proventuum vel ipsarum vicariarum appellatione remota compellas.

On your part it was set forth before us, that certain men in the churches in which they hold perpetual vicarages disdain to make due residence and to be promoted into presbyters. Therefore, unwilling, as indeed we ought not, to endure with equanimity an abuse of this kind, we command your fraternity that you compel the perpetual vicars—so that in the churches in which they hold vicarages they reside, as they are bound, and that they have themselves promoted into presbyters, as their cure requires—by subtraction of revenues or of the vicarages themselves, appeal set aside.

TITULUS XXIX. DE OFFICIO ET POTESTATE IUDICIS DELEGATI.

TITLE 29. ON THE OFFICE AND POWER OF THE DELEGATED JUDGE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Delegatus Papae potestatem habet non solum in partes, sed etiam in alios, qui suam iurisdictionem impediunt.

The Pope’s delegate has power not only over the parties, but also over others who impede his jurisdiction.

Alexander III. Londonensi Episcopo.

Alexander 3. To the Bishop of London.

Quia quaesitum est a nobis ex parte tua, quid faciendum sit de potestatibus, quae, quum praecipimus alicui iustitiam exhiberi de his, quos diligunt, aut tueri volunt, minis aut terroribus suis conquerentes silere compellunt, et sic mandatum nostrum eluditur, sic tibi respondemus, quod, sicut agentes et consentientes pari poena scripturae testimonio puniuntur, sic tam eos, qui trahuntur in causam, quam principales eorum fautores, si eos manifeste cognoveris iustitiam impedire, districtione ecclesiastica poteris coercere.

Because it has been asked of us on your part what ought to be done about the authorities who, when we command that justice be exhibited to those whom they love or wish to protect, by their threats or terrors compel the complainants to be silent, and thus our mandate is evaded, thus we answer you: that, just as agents and consenters are punished with equal penalty by the testimony of Scripture, so both those who are drawn into the case and their principal favorers, if you have plainly recognized them to impede justice, you will be able to coerce by ecclesiastical distriction.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Quum diversae literae sub eadem data et forma contraria impetrantur, et praesentantur a diversis ad eosdem iudices, supersedetur utrisque, donec consulatur Papa.

When diverse letters, under the same date and in contrary form, are obtained, and are presented by different parties to the same judges, proceedings are stayed as to both, until the Pope is consulted.

Idem Bononiensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Bologna.

Sane si a nobis super aliqua causa literae prius impetrantur, et aliae postea, non facta mentione priorum literarum, literae opponuntur, si iudicibus innotuerit, donec Romanum Pontificem consulant, et suam exinde cognoscant plenius voluntatem, exsecutioni literarum penitus supersedeant utrarumque, ne pro varietate literarum causarum fines valeant impediri. Item quum etc. [cf. c. 9. de sent.

Indeed, if letters are first obtained from us concerning some cause, and others later, no mention having been made of the prior letters, and the letters are set in opposition, if it has become known to the judges, let them utterly refrain from the execution of the letters of both until they consult the Roman Pontiff and from that learn his will more fully, lest by the variety of letters the ends of causes be able to be impeded. Likewise, when etc. [cf. c. 9. de sent.

et re iud. II. 27.]

and on sentence and res judicata, 2, 27.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Delegatus Papae impeditus subdelegare potest causam, quae sine ipso commode terminari potest.

A delegate of the Pope, if impeded, can subdelegate the cause which can conveniently be terminated without him.

Idem Episcopo Londonensi.

The same to the Bishop of London.

Si pro debilitate tua vel pro qualibet alia gravi causa vel necessitate tractandis causis, quae tibi a sede apostolica committuntur, interesse non poteris, liberum tibi sit personis discretis et idoneis vices tuas committere, ita tamen, quod, si res tanti est, te consulere debeant, nisi forte causae ita graves sint, quod sine praesentia tua non possint commode terminari.

If, on account of your debility or on account of any other grave cause or necessity, you cannot be present for handling the cases which are committed to you by the Apostolic See, let it be free to you to commit your functions to discreet and suitable persons; yet in such a way that, if the matter is of such weight, they ought to consult you, unless perhaps the cases are so grave that they cannot be conveniently terminated without your presence.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Si causa committitur infra certum diem decidenda, nisi partes prorogent, per lapsum diei exspirat iurisdictio. ñ § 1. Ubi certa poena per ius statuta non est, delegatus imponit arbitrariam. Hoc dicit.

If a case is committed to be decided within a certain day, unless the parties prorogue it, jurisdiction expires by the lapse of the day. ñ § 1. Where a definite penalty is not statuted by law, the delegate imposes an arbitrary one. This he says.

Idem V. Carnotensi Electo.

The same to V., the Elect of Chartres.

De causis, quae infra certum terminum decidendae committuntur, hoc tuam volumus cognitionem tenere, quod, nisi dies ab Apostolico praefixus de communi consensu partium prorogetur, eo transacto, mandatum exspirat. § 1. Illis etiam, qui pro causis tibi commissis ad citationem tuam venire, aut tuo super his parere iudicio neglexerint, si tale fuerit negotium, quod certa exinde poena in canonibus exprimatur, eandem infligas; alioquin ipsos pro delicti qualitate et causae secundum tuum arbitrium punire procures.

Concerning causes which are committed to be decided within a certain term, we wish your cognizance to hold this: that unless the day fixed by the Apostolic See be extended by the common consent of the parties, once that has elapsed, the mandate expires. § 1. Also, as for those who, in regard to the causes committed to you, have neglected to come at your citation, or to obey your judgment upon these matters, if the business be such that a definite penalty is expressed for it in the canons, inflict the same; otherwise, see that you punish them, according to your discretion, in proportion to the quality of the offense and of the cause.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Per simplicem commissionem causae potest delegatus citare, contumacem punire, et reliqua facere, quae spectant ad causam.

By a simple commission of the cause, the delegate can cite, punish the contumacious, and do the rest which pertain to the cause.

Idem Archiepiscopo Senonensi.

The same to the Archbishop of Sens.

Praeterea super hoc, quod nos consulere voluisti, utrum liceat iudici delegato non ordinario, sine literis commissoriis cogere contumacem, ut veniat, aut damnare si non veniat? hoc tibi auctoritate praesentium innotescat, quod, postquam ei causa, licet simpliciter, delegatur, satis potest nostra auctoritate partes compellere, et etiam contumaces severitate ecclesiastica coercere, etiamsi literae commissionis id non contineant, aut partes mandatum nostrum non habeant, ut accedant; quia ex eo, quod causa sibi committitur, super his omnibus, quae ad causam ipsam spectare noscuntur, plenariam recipit potestatem.

Moreover, concerning this which you wished to consult us—whether it is permitted to a delegated judge, not the ordinary, without letters of commission, to compel a contumacious party to come, or to condemn him if he does not come—let it be made known to you by the authority of these presents, that after the case, albeit in simple form, is delegated to him, by our authority he is sufficiently able to compel the parties, and even to coerce the contumacious with ecclesiastical severity, even if the letters of commission do not contain this, or the parties do not have our mandate to approach; because from the fact that the case is committed to him, he receives plenary power over all those things which are known to pertain to the case itself.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Si causa pluribus etiam simpliciter est commissa, quilibet subdelegare potest. H. d. et quotidie allegatur.

If a case has been committed to several persons even in simple form, any one of them can subdelegate. On this point it is cited daily.

Idem Vintoniensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Winchester.

Quamvis simus multiplicitate negotiorum impliciti, et gravibus diversisque sollicitudinibus occupati, nos tamen cogit praeter debitum commune tuae fraternitatis caritas et dilectio, qua personam tuam diligimus, tuis consultationibus respondere, ne videamur indiscussa relinquere quae nobis enodanda tua voluit discretio praesentare. Innotescat itaque sollicitudini tuae, quod iudex a nobis delegatus causam sibi commissam potest aliis, [uni vel pluribus,] delegare, aut totam audiendam et terminandam, aut etiam, ut audiant allegationes et rationes et attestationes recipiant, et sententiam sibi servent, vel ut horum aliquid tantummodo faciant iuxta voluntatem et beneplacitum delegantis; quanquam non possit eandem causam alii appellatione postposita delegare, etsi sibi sit appellatione remota commissa. Si vero duobus causa committitur; etiam si non apponatur, ut unus sine altero procedat in ea, nihilominus unus ex ipsis, sive suo coniudici sive alii, vices suas potest committere in hac parte.

Although we are entangled by the multiplicity of affairs, and occupied with grave and diverse solicitudes, nevertheless the charity and affection of your brotherhood, by which we cherish your person, compels us beyond the common due to respond to your consultations, lest we seem to leave un-discussed those things which your discretion willed to present to us for un-knotting. Let it, therefore, become known to your solicitude, that a judge delegated by us can delegate to others, [to one or to more,] the case committed to himself, either the whole to be heard and determined, or even that they hear the allegations and the reasons and receive the attestations, and reserve the sentence to himself, or that they do only some of these according to the will and good-pleasure of the delegating party; although he cannot delegate the same case to another with appeal set aside, even if it has been committed to himself with appeal removed. But if the case is committed to two; even if it is not added that the one proceed in it without the other, nonetheless one of them can commit his functions in this part either to his co-judge or to another.

[Ceterum etc. cf. c. 3. de resc. I. 3.]

[Moreover, etc.; cf. ch. 3, on rescripts, 1. 3.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Delegatus Papae exsequitur sententiam suam, quam exsequi non potest aut non vult is, cui eam commiserat exsequendam.

The Delegate of the Pope executes his own sentence, which the one to whom he had committed it for execution cannot or does not wish to execute.

Idem Norvicensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Norwich.

Significasti nobis per literas tuas, quod interdum a iudice delegato frustra super aliqua causa fertur sententia, quum ordinarius iudex eam ad mandatum ipsius, nolit exsecutioni mandare, aut aliis resistentibus effectui mancipare non possit. Super hoc autem Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod, si iudex ordinarius ad mandatum iudicis delegati a nobis aut non vult, aut non potest aliis resistentibus sententiam ab eo latam effectui mancipare, delegatus iudex eam auctoritate nostra sibi commissam potest exsecutioni mandare, et, si qui sibi restiterint, eos sententia ecclesiastica coercere. [Si quando etc.

You have signified to us through your letters, that sometimes by a delegated judge a sentence is brought in vain concerning some cause, when the ordinary judge, at his mandate, is unwilling to commit it to execution, or, others resisting, cannot deliver it into effect. But upon this we answer your Consultation in such manner, that, if the ordinary judge, at the mandate of the judge delegated by us, either is unwilling, or is not able, others resisting, to deliver into effect the sentence pronounced by him, the delegated judge, by our authority, can commit to execution that which has been entrusted to him, and, if any should resist him, coerce them by an ecclesiastical sentence. [If at any time, etc.

cf. c. sequ.]

cf. the following chapter.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Si ordinarius scit, eum non canonice institutum, quem delegatus Papae mandat in possessionem induci, non resistet violenter, sed precibus instabit, ut differat, donec Papa consulatur.

If the Ordinary knows that the one whom the delegate of the Pope orders to be inducted into possession has not been canonically instituted, he will not resist violently, but will insist with prayers that he defer until the Pope is consulted.

Idem.

The same.

Si quando vero clerici coram iudice delegato praelatos ecclesiarum super ecclesiis, quas tenent, in causam traxerint, et coram eodem iudice transactione vel alio modo ecclesias obtinuerint, in quibus certum sit, eos institutionem canonicam nullatenus habuisse, nec possessionem etiam corporalem, ordinarius iudex non debet iudicis delegati mandato resistere violenter, sed apud ipsum instare debet, ut differat eos in possessionem mittere, donec nobis rei veritas innotescat.

If ever, indeed, clerics shall bring the prelates of churches into suit before a delegated judge concerning the churches which they hold, and before that same judge shall obtain the churches by a transaction or in some other way, in which it is certain that they have in no way had canonical institution, nor even corporal possession, the ordinary judge ought not to resist violently the mandate of the delegated judge, but ought to press with him that he defer to send them into possession, until the truth of the matter become known to us.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Post diffinitivam exsecutioni mandatam exspirat delegati iurisdictio.

After the definitive sentence has been mandated for execution, the jurisdiction of the delegate expires.

Idem Brixiensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Brescia.

In literis, quas tua nobis destinavit fraternitas, quaestiones quasdam inseruisti, super quibus solutionem tibi a nobis postulasti exhiberi, quarum siquidem una est, scilicet usque ad quod tempus iudex delegatus partes suas possit interponere, ut stetur rei iudicatae vel transactioni? Super quo utique Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod ex quo iudex delegatus per se, vel per alium, si potuerit, sententiam exsecutioni mandavit vel mandari praecepit, eius auctoritas et iurisdictio cessat, quia semel est officio suo functus.

In the letters, which your fraternity has directed to us, you inserted certain questions, concerning which you asked that a solution be exhibited to you by us; of which indeed one is, namely: up to what time a delegated judge can interpose his authority, so that one should stand by the res iudicata or the transaction? Upon which we assuredly thus answer to your Consultation: that from the time when the delegated judge, by himself or through another, if he can, has mandated the sentence to execution or has ordered it to be mandated, his authority and jurisdiction cease, because he has once performed his office.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Reo absente non per contumaciam, delegatus datus etiam ad diem, non restituet actorem, licet possessionem et deiectionem probare volentem.

With the defendant absent not through contumacy, the delegate appointed, even with a day set, will not reinstate the plaintiff, although he is willing to prove possession and ejectment.

Idem Abbati sancti Albini.

The same to the Abbot of Saint Albinus.

Consultationibus singalorum ex ministerio susceptae servitutis cogimur respondere, ut, si quid dubietatis vel quaestionis in mente alicuius emerserit, ab ecclesia Romana solvatur, quae inter alias disponente Domino meruit obtinere principatum. Quaesitum est a nobis siquidem, utrum, si aliquis ecclesia vel possessione qualibet se asseverans absque iudicio et causa rationabili spoliatum, et a nobis ad iudices literas obtinuerit, ut infra certum tempus restituatur sibi possessio, si constiterit iudici, eum esse taliter spoliatum, possessio debeat ei restitui, quum is, qui tenet ecclesiam vel possessionem, quam ipse requirit, antequam de literis ipsis aliqua mentio fieret, studiorum vel peregrinationis, vel alia huiusmodi causa se absentaverit, nec infra tempus praefixum iudici possit suam praesentiam exhibere? Super quo utique inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod nec potest, nec debet restitutionem habere, quamvis paratus sit coram iudice delegato testibus idoneis possessionem et deiectionem suam probare, nisi is, qui possidet, se per contumaciam absentasset.

Consultations of individuals, by reason of the ministry of the servitude undertaken, we are compelled to answer, so that, if any dubiety or question should emerge in anyone’s mind, it may be resolved by the Roman Church, which among others, with the Lord disposing, has merited to obtain the principate. It has indeed been asked of us whether, if someone avers himself to have been despoiled without judgment and reasonable cause of a church or any possession, and has obtained letters from us to judges that within a certain time the possession be restored to him, if it be established to the judge that he was so despoiled, the possession ought to be restored to him, when the one who holds the church or possession which he seeks, before any mention was made of those letters, has absented himself for the sake of studies or pilgrimage, or another cause of this kind, and cannot within the prefixed time exhibit his presence to the judge? Upon which inquiry of yours we thus respond: that he neither can nor ought to have restitution, although he is prepared before the delegated judge with suitable witnesses to prove his possession and his ejection, unless the one who possesses had absented himself through contumacy.

Si autem iudex usque ad reditum eius qui possidet, terminum prorogaverit, exspirat iurisdictio sua, quia sine consensu utriusque non licet iudici terminum prorogare aliquatenus praefixum a delegante. [De cetero etc. cf. c. 19. de iure patr.

But if the judge has prorogued the term until the return of the one who possesses, his jurisdiction expires, because without the consent of both it is not permitted for a judge to prorogue in any way the term fixed by the delegating party. [As for the rest, etc. cf. c. 19. on the right of patronage.

III. 38.]

3. 38.]

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Delegatus Papae in causa sibi commissa iurisdictionem habet super ordinarium et quemcunque maiorem.

A delegate of the Pope, in a cause committed to him, has jurisdiction over the ordinary and any superior whatsoever.

Idem Carnotensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Chartres.

Sane quia nos inprimis consulere voluisti, qualiter a nobis iudex delegatus episcopum, qui ei non subest, ad aliquid faciendum vel dandum compellere debeat, quum causam, quae inter episcopum et clericum vel laicum vertitur, de mandato nostro suscipit terminandam, id Tuae quaestioni duximus respondendum, quod iudex a nobis delegatus vices nostras gerit, unde in causa illa superior est, et maior illis, quorum causam suscepit terminandam. Ideoque, si episcopus vel alia persona, quae non sit de iurisdictione illius, in causa, quam ei delegamus, rebellis aut contumax fuerit, secundum qualitatem vel quantitatem facti poterit vel interdicti vel suspensionis sententia a iudice delegato compelli ita, quod iudex, secundum negotii qualitatem temperate procedens, episcopo vel ingressum ecclesiae, vel sacerdotale officium interdicat, aut etiam terram illius, quae ad iurisdictionem suam pertinet specialiter, interdicto supponat. [De testibus etc.

Indeed, because you wished in the first place to consult us,
how a judge delegated by us ought to compel a bishop, who is not subject to him, to do or to give something, when he takes up by our mandate to be terminated a cause which is in dispute between a bishop and a cleric or a layman, we have judged it should be answered to Your question that the judge delegated by us bears our vicariate; whence in that cause he is superior and greater than those whose cause he has undertaken to terminate. And therefore, if a bishop or another person who is not of his jurisdiction shall be rebellious or contumacious in the cause which we delegate to him, according to the quality or quantity of the deed he can be compelled by the sentence either of interdict or of suspension by the delegated judge, such that the judge, proceeding temperately according to the quality of the business, forbids to the bishop either entrance into the church or the sacerdotal office, or even subjects his land, which pertains specially to his jurisdiction, to interdict. [On witnesses etc.

cf. c. 5. de test. cog. (2, 14.) in Comp.

cf. ch. 5 on compelling witnesses (2, 14.) in the Compilation.

I.]

1.]

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Si primus impetravit primam dignitatem in ecclesia vacaturam, secundus impetravit certam dignitatem ipsius ecclesiae, quum vacaret, et illa postmodum vacat, debetur primo, et non secundo. H. d. et est notabilis decisio.

If the first obtained the first dignity in the church that was to become vacant, and the second obtained a certain dignity of that same church, when it should be vacant, and that one afterwards becomes vacant, it is owed to the first and not to the second. Here it is said, and it is a notable decision.

Idem Eboracensi Archiepiscopo et Episcopo Conventrensi.

The same to the Archbishop of York and to the Bishop of Coventry.

Ex parte N. capellani nobis innotuit, quod, quum ad te, frater Conventrensis, nostras literas impetraverit, ut ei archidiaconatum, quem in ecclesia tua primo vacare contingeret, assignares, R. adversarius eius alias ad te, frater Eboracensis, literas, sicut dicitur, impetravit, nulla de prioribus habita mentione, ut, si avunculus suus archidiaconatum, quem habebat in ecclesia eadem, vellet omnino dimittere, ipsum ei faceres assignari. Quoniam igitur, si memores fuissemus, nos pro praedicto N. literas nostras, sicut praediximus, direxisse, pro adversario eius nullatenus scripsissemus, nolentes literas nostras, quas pro eodem N. misimus, occasione hac effectu carere, fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo, mandamus, quatenus praefato N. archidiaconatum ipsius ecclesiae, si vacat, non obstantibus posterioribus literis assignetis.

On the part of N. the chaplain it has become known to us that, when he had obtained from us our letters to you, brother of Coventry, that you should assign to him the archdeaconry which should first happen to be vacant in your church, R., his adversary, is said to have obtained other letters to you, brother of York, no mention having been made of the earlier ones, that, if his uncle should wish wholly to resign the archdeaconry which he held in the same church, you should have it assigned to him. Wherefore, since, if we had remembered that we had directed our letters, as we have said, on behalf of the aforesaid N., we would by no means have written on behalf of his adversary, not wishing our letters, which we sent for that same N., to lack effect on this occasion, we command, enjoining to your fraternity through apostolic writings, that you assign to the aforesaid N. the archdeaconry of that church, if it is vacant, notwithstanding the later letters.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Ubi contraria voluntas Papae non apparet, delegatus iuris formam servare debet, et rationabiles exceptiones admittere. Ioan. Andr.

Where a contrary will of the Pope does not appear, the delegate ought to observe the form of law, and to admit rational exceptions. Ioan. Andr.

Idem Eboracensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of York.

Ex parte tua quaesitum est a nobis, utrum, quum causam aliquam sub certa forma committimus, iudices delegati ita formam sibi commissam debeant sequi, quod rationabiles exceptiones non admittant? Super quo Quaestioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, et si quando iudici delegato expediat formam sibi statutam servare, debet tamen rationabiles exceptiones admittere, et in causa iuxta iuris aequitatem procedere, nisi exprimatur in literis nostris, quod nullae debeant exceptiones admitti. Quod nec nos, nec antecessores nostros credimus unquam expressisse.

On your part it has been asked of us whether, when we commit some case under a certain form, the delegated judges ought so to follow the form committed to them that they do not admit reasonable exceptions? Concerning which we answer your Question thus: that, although at times it may be expedient for a delegated judge to observe the form set for him, nevertheless he ought to admit reasonable exceptions, and to proceed in the case according to the equity of the law, unless it is expressed in our letters that no exceptions ought to be admitted. Which neither we nor our predecessors believe ever to have expressed.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Delegatio facta dignitati, non expresso nomine proprio, transit ad successorem.

Delegation made to a dignity, the proper name not expressed, passes to the successor.

Idem Abbati et Conventui maioris monasterii.

The same to the Abbot and Convent of the major monastery.

Quoniam abbas Leicestriae, qui prius suscepto mandato nostro partibus diem ad agendum praefixit, praehabito consilio prudentum, abbatem Vincestriae de novo substitutum iudici praemortuo, illi mandato nostro porrecto, quia sub expressis nominibus locorum et non personarum commissio literarum a nobis emanavit, sibi socium in causae cognitione adiunxit, ideo nos sententiam illorum, sicut est iusta, ratam et firmam habemus.

Since the abbot of Leicester, who earlier, upon receiving our mandate, fixed a day for the parties to proceed, after taking counsel of prudent men, because the commission of letters issued by us under the expressed names of the places and not of the persons, joined to himself, for the cognizance of the cause, as an associate the abbot of Winchester, newly substituted for the judge who had predeceased, our mandate having been presented to him, therefore we hold their sentence, inasmuch as it is just, ratified and firm.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Si quaestionem de iure praesentandi Papa delegat appellatione remota, et sub ea forma, ut delegatus ad praesentationem eius, ad quem viderit pertinere, ordinet ecclesiam, per hoc non habet instituere, sed pronunciare, et is, ad quem pertinet, instituet; et si iuri suo detrahitur, licite appellat.

If the Pope delegates the question concerning the right of presentation, appeal removed, and under this form, that the delegate shall order the church upon the presentation of him to whom he shall have seen it to pertain, by this he does not have to institute, but to pronounce; and he to whom it pertains will institute; and if a detraction is made from his right, he lawfully appeals.

Idem.

The same.

Super eo vero, quod subiungere voluisti, si, de praesentatione presbyteri inter aliquos quaestione suborta, causam contigerit delegari alicui sub hac forma, ut, si constiterit ius, de quo agitur, ad partem alterutram pertinere, ad praesentationem eiusdem de persona idonea ordinet ecclesiam appellatione remota, an liceat delegato iudici, inscio dioecesano episcopo, vel archidiacono vel archipresbytero reclamante, praesentatum sibi clericum in possessionem ecclesiae mittere, praesertim si ignotus fuerit praesentatus, aut minus idoneus, et an, si archipresbyter, vel archidiaconus, vel episcopus, ad quem institutio pertinet, appellaverit, eorum sit appellationibus deferendum, hoc tuam volumus discretionem tenere, quod, licet quaestionem, quae de praesentatione vertitur, appellatione remota committamus alicui terminandam, non tamen est nostrae intentionis dioecesano episcopo, archidiacono vel archipresbytero, praeiudicium generare. Ideoque praesentandus est illi, qui instituendus fuerit. Et tenebit eorum appellatio, si videntes iuri suo detrahi duxerint appellandum, quia non illis, sed partibus, inter quas causa commissa est, appellationis remedium est sublatum.

Concerning that, moreover, which you wished to subjoin: if, a question having arisen between certain persons about the presentation of a presbyter, it should happen that the case is delegated to someone under this form, that, if it shall be established that the right at issue belongs to the one party or the other, he is to order that the church be provided, upon the presentation of that same party of a suitable person, with appeal removed—whether it is permitted to the delegated judge, the diocesan bishop being unaware, or the archdeacon or archpriest protesting, to send the cleric presented to him into possession of the church, especially if the one presented should be unknown or less suitable; and whether, if the archpriest, or archdeacon, or bishop, to whom institution pertains, shall have appealed, deference is to be given to their appeals—this we wish your discretion to hold: that, although we entrust to someone, with appeal removed, the question which turns on presentation, to be terminated, nevertheless it is not our intention to generate prejudice to the diocesan bishop, archdeacon, or archpriest. And therefore the person to be presented is to be presented to him who is to institute. And their appeal will hold, if, seeing that detriment is being done to their right, they shall deem it proper to appeal, because the remedy of appeal has been taken away not from them, but from the parties between whom the case has been committed.

[Ecclesiis autem etc. cf. c. 9. de cens. III.

[But as for churches, etc.; cf. ch. 9, on censuses, 3.]

39.]

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Si causa simpliciter est delegata duobus, sententia unius non tenet.

If a cause is simply delegated to two, the sentence of one does not hold.

Idem.

The same.

Causam matrimonii, quae inter I. mulierem, et Blanchacium agitari dignoscitur, venerabilibus fratribus nostris Furolienensi et Vapicenensi episcopis nos meminimus commisisse, quibus utique in unum convenientibus et eam mulierem, sicut accepimus, viro restitui mandantibus, vir mulierem cruciatibus et flagellis adeo affecit, quod invita et coacta inter se et virum suum confessa est parentelam. Sicque factum est, quod ad iudicium unius eorum dimisit eandem, quae quinque filios ex eo dicitur genuisse, et XIV. annis secum sine aliqua quaestione permansisse.

The cause of matrimony, which is discerned to be litigated between I. the woman and Blanchacius, we remember to have committed to our venerable brethren, the bishops of Furolien and Vapicen, who indeed, coming together as one and, as we have received, mandating that that woman be restored to her husband; the husband so afflicted the woman with torments and scourges that, unwilling and coerced, she confessed consanguinity between herself and her husband. And thus it came about that he sent the same woman to the judgment of one of them, who is said to have borne five sons from him, and to have remained with him for 14 years without any question.

Unde quoniam matrimonium in ecclesia Dei adeo magnum sacramentum comprobatur, quod sine rationabili et evidenti causa dissolvi non debet, praesertim quum non ab homine, sed a Deo sit institutam, Discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus huius rei veritatem diligenter et subtiliter inquiratis, et, si inveneritis, quod praefatus B. dictam I. ad iudicium solummodo alterius praedictorum episcoporum a se separasset, quia, quum causa duobus committitur, sententia unius non tenet, ipsum, ut eandem mulierem sicut uxorem suam appellatione remota benigne recipiat et maritali affectione pertractet, monitione praemissa cogatis. Quod si facere forte contempserit, eum et superinductam appellatione cessante excommunicationis vinculo adstringatis. Si qui tamen apparuerint, qui, postquam ab eo recepta fuerit, matrimonium ipsorum velint et legitime possint impetere, partibus ante vos convocatis causam audiatis, et eam appellatione remota fine canonico terminetis, illa maturitate et circumspectione adhibita, quae in toto negotio convenit adhiberi.

Whence, since matrimony in the Church of God is approved as so great a sacrament that it ought not to be dissolved without a reasonable and evident cause, especially since it has been instituted not by man but by God, we command to your Discretion by apostolic writings that you diligently and subtly inquire the truth of this matter; and, if you find that the aforesaid B. separated the said I. from himself to the judgment of only one of the aforesaid bishops—because, when a cause is committed to two, the sentence of one does not hold—you shall, with monition premised, compel him to receive the same woman kindly as his wife, appeal set aside, and to treat her with marital affection. But if perchance he should contemn to do this, bind him and the woman superinduced, appeal ceasing, with the bond of excommunication. If, however, there should appear any who, after she has been received back by him, wish and can lawfully impugn their matrimony, with the parties convoked before you hear the cause, and, appeal removed, terminate it with a canonical end, that maturity and circumspection being applied which it is fitting to apply in the whole business.

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Delegatus, qui est dominus impetrantis, recusari potest.

A delegate who is the lord of the petitioner can be recused.

Idem Oxonensi et Vintoniensi Episcopis et Abbati Herfordensi.

The same, to the Bishops of Oxford and Winchester and to the Abbot of Hereford.

Causam, quae inter nobiles viros F. et R. de Ardenna, quondam filium Agathae, de nativitate Agathae vertitur, vobis, fratres episcopi, et venerabili fratri nostro Londonensi episcopo sub certa forma commisimus terminandam. Verum quoniam idem F. de Ardenna praefatum Londonensem episcopum omnino habebat suspectum, pro eo, quod dominus est praedicti R., ispsum amovendum, et te, fili abbas, loco ipsius duximus subrogandum. Per apostolica itaque scripta vobis mandamus atque praecipimus, quatenus de nativitate praedictae A. rei veritatem subtiliter inquiratis, et si etc.

The cause, which is in dispute between the noble men F. and R. of Arden, formerly the son of Agatha, concerning the nativity of Agatha, we have committed to you, brothers the bishops, and to our venerable brother, the bishop of London, to be terminated under a certain form. But since that same F. of Arden held the aforesaid bishop of London altogether suspect, on the ground that he is the lord of the aforesaid R., we have judged that he be removed, and you, son abbot, be substituted in his place. Through apostolic writings, therefore, we mandate and we enjoin you, that you inquire minutely into the truth of the matter concerning the nativity of the aforesaid A., and if etc.

[cf. c. 4. qui filii IV. 17., c. 3. de dol. et cont. II. 14.]

[cf. ch. 4. which sons 4. 17., ch. 3. on fraud and contumacy 2. 14.]

CAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER 18.

A subdelegato delegati Papae, qui subdelegavit non in totum, non ad Papam, sed ad ipsum delegatum appellari debet.

From the subdelegate of the Pope’s delegate, who has subdelegated not in whole, one must appeal not to the Pope, but to the delegate himself.

Idem.

The same.

Quum te consulente postulas edoceri, utrum ad te pertineat, sententiam in causis, quam iudices in tua provincia delegati a nobis protulerunt, confirmare, licet de causis [ipsis] nil in tua praesentia sit tractatum, consultationi tuae praesentibus literis respondemus, quod sententiam ipsam non teneris, nisi volueris, confirmare; sed id tibi ex officii debito noveris imminere, ut, si ad mandatum illorum iudicum sententia non possit exsecutioni mandari, eis praestes auxilium et favorem, et ipsam, si noveris eam rationabiliter latam, poteris confirmare. Item Si super causa, quae tibi ex nostra delegatione committitur, a personis ecclesiasticis, una vel pluribus, quibus ut [interim] parcas laboribus partium et expensis, cognitionem ipsius causae et testium examinationem sententia tibi reservata committis, appellatio fuerit interposita, huiusmodi appellationis intuitu causam ipsam indiffinitam relinquere non teneris.

When, seeking counsel, you ask to be instructed whether it pertains to you to confirm the sentence in causes which judges delegated by us in your province have pronounced, although concerning the causes [themselves] nothing has been handled in your presence, we answer to your consultation by these present letters that you are not bound to confirm the sentence itself, unless you should wish; but know that this is incumbent on you by the debt of your office, that, if at the mandate of those judges the sentence cannot be put into execution, you render them aid and favor; and you can confirm it itself, if you know it to have been reasonably delivered. Likewise, If concerning a cause which is committed to you by our delegation, to ecclesiastical persons, one or more, to whom, that you may [in the meantime] spare the labors of the parties and expenses, you entrust the cognition of the cause itself and the examination of witnesses, with the sentence reserved to yourself, an appeal shall have been interposed, you are not bound, in view of an appeal of this kind, to leave the cause itself indeterminate.

CAP. XIX.

CHAPTER 19.

Morte delegantis non exspirat iurisdictio delegati, coram quo lis erat contestata.

The jurisdiction of the delegate does not expire upon the death of the delegator, before whom the suit had been joined.

Lucius III. Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.

Lucius 3. To the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Suffragans.

Relatum est [ex parte vestra, quod licet in commissionibus a sanctae recordationis Alexandro P. III. praedecessore nostro factis fuerit appellationis remedium remotum, altera tamen partium, sive lis fuerit contestata sive non, exspirasse mandatum morte mandatoris allegat, ideoque negotiis omnibus postpositis in suspenso mandatum apostolicum exspectatis.] Nos itaque consultationi vestrae [praesentium auctoritate] respondemus, quod, si lis fuerit ante praedecessoris nostri obitum contestata, mandatum morte mandatoris nullatenus exspiravit. Si vero ante litis contestationem decessit, non est in eo casu a iudicibus, quos delegaverat, ex delegatione huiusmodi procedendum.

It has been reported [on your part, that although in the commissions made by Alexander, of holy memory, Pope 3, our predecessor, the remedy of appeal had been removed, yet the other party, whether the suit had been contested or not, alleges that the mandate has expired by the death of the mandator, and therefore, with all business set aside, you are awaiting in suspense the apostolic mandate.] We therefore reply to your consultation [by the authority of these presents], that, if the suit had been contested before the death of our predecessor, the mandate has by no means expired by the death of the mandator. But if he died before the contestation of the suit, in that case it is not to be proceeded with by the judges whom he had delegated, on the basis of such a delegation.

Poterit ergo in eo casu appellatione cessante procedi, in quo ante mortem mandatoris lis fuerit per narrationem et responsionem contestata. Ubi autem mors mandatoris litis contestationem praecessit, penitus subsistat, sive fuerit, sive non fuerit appellationis obstaculum interiectum. Datum Veronae VI. Kal.

Therefore, in that case, with the appeal ceasing, one may proceed, in which before the death of the mandator the lawsuit has been contested by narration and response. But where the death of the mandator has preceded the contestation of the lawsuit, let it entirely be stayed, whether an obstacle of appeal has been interposed or not. Given at Verona 6 Kal.

Iul.

Jul.

CAP. XX.

CHAPTER 20.

Si delegatus citavit ante mortem delegantis, perpetuata est eius iurisdictio. Et appellationi renunciat qui coram iudice, a quo appellavit, litem prosequitur.

If the delegate cited before the death of the delegator, his jurisdiction is perpetuated. And he renounces the appeal who prosecutes the suit before the judge from whom he appealed.

Urban III.

Urban 3.

Gratum gerimus et acceptum, quod in negotiis vestrae discretioni commissis debitam curam impenditis, et in his, quae dubitationem faciunt, pro gravitate vestri officii censuram sedis apostolicae postulatis. Sane consuluit nos devotio vestra, an ante obitum delegantis, proposito citationis edicto, lite vero post mortem [delegantis] contestata, nihilominus debeat in causa procedere iudex delegatus; et utrum is intelligatur appellationi renunciasse, qui ea interposita ad producendos testes inducias postulavit, et demum productioni et allegationi renuncians, attestationes petiit solenniter publicari, sicut hoc totum circa decessum bonae memoriae praedecessoris nostri Lucii Papae, qui vos iudices delegaverat, sub examine vestro asseritis contigisse. Nos autem inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum in casu priori citatione facta negotium sit quasi coeptum, et maxime, si delegatus non sit certus de obitu delegantis, potest et debet in causa procedi, tenebitque quod iustitia fuerit praevia iudiciali tramite diffinitum.

We take it as pleasing and acceptable, that in the affairs committed to your discretion you expend the due care, and that, in those things which create doubt, you request, in keeping with the gravity of your office, the censure of the Apostolic See. Truly your devotion has consulted us whether, before the death of the delegating party, the edict of citation having been published, but the suit after the death [of the delegating party] having been joined, the delegated judge ought nonetheless to proceed in the cause; and whether he is to be understood to have renounced the appeal who, it having been interposed, asked adjournments for producing witnesses, and finally, renouncing production and allegation, requested that the attestations be solemnly published—just as you assert that all this, in connection with the decease of our predecessor of good memory Pope Lucius, who had delegated you as judges, occurred under your examination. We, however, reply to your inquiry in such wise, that, since in the prior case, with the citation made, the business is as it were begun, and especially if the delegate is not certain of the death of the delegator, one can and ought to proceed in the cause, and that will stand which justice, the judicial course having been previously observed, shall have defined.

In secundo vero casu videtur ab appellatione recessum, si secundum ea, quae praemissa sunt, eum, qui appellaverit, constiterit processisse.

But in the second case it seems there has been a withdrawal from the appeal, if, according to what has been premised, it has been established that the one who appealed has proceeded.

CAP. XXI.

CHAPTER 21.

Si causa committitur tribus delegatis cum clausula: "quod si non omnes etc.," priusquam appareat de impotentia tertii, duo procedere non possunt, et, si procedunt, nihil agunt. Hoc dicit, usque ad § Adiicimus. ñ § 1. Clausula: "si non omnes poteritis," sub impotentia includit voluntatem quoad purificandam iurisdictionem coniudicum.

If a cause is committed to three delegates with the clause: "but if not all etc.," before it appears concerning the inability of the third, the two cannot proceed, and, if they proceed, they do nothing. He says this, up to § We add. ñ § 1. The clause: "if not all of you will be able," under inability includes the will with respect to purifying the jurisdiction of the co-judges.

Idem in duobus datis cum clausula: "quod si ambo." H. d. usque ad § Sexta. ñ § 2. Si reus coram delegato obiicit excommunicationem actori, quam non probat infra tempus debitum, auditur actor. Si vero probat, delegatus absolvet actorem, si excommunicatus est propter causam sibi commissam.

The same in the case of two appointed with the clause: "that if both." This says up to § Sixth. ñ § 2. If the defendant before the delegate objects excommunication to the plaintiff, which he does not prove within the due time, the plaintiff is heard. But if he does prove it, the delegate will absolve the plaintiff, if he is excommunicated on account of the cause committed to himself.

Si propter aliam, ad excommunicatorem suum illum remittet. Qui si non vult eum absolvere, delegatus Papae eum absolvet, nisi sit de casibus Papae reservatis. Hoc dicit.

If on account of another cause, he will remit him to his own excommunicator. If that one does not wish to absolve him, the Pope’s delegate will absolve him, unless it be among the cases reserved to the Pope. This he says.

ñ § 3. Absolutus a delegato super causa, pro qua fuerat excommunicatus, coram excommunicatore parebit, seu respondebit super illa causa, nisi sit alteri delegata, et, si excommunicator malitiose distulerit, delegatus, qui absolvit, cognoscet. Hoc dic.

ñ § 3. Absolved by the delegate with respect to the cause for which he had been excommunicated, he will appear before the excommunicator, or will answer upon that cause, unless it has been delegated to another, and, if the excommunicator has maliciously delayed, the delegate who absolved will take cognizance. This he says.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine III.

Prudentiam tuam: (Et infra: [cf. c. un. de mut. pet. II. 4.]) Quinto insuper loco supplicas informari, utrum, quum tribus vel pluribus causa committitur ita, quod si omnes interesse nequiverint, duo eam nihilominus exsequantur, si reus a duobus tantum fuerit convocatus, venire necessario teneatur; et si citatus fuerit a duobus tantum seu a pluribus, [et] coram duobus comparuerit, tertio aut ulteriori nec veniente per se, vel per literas, ut solet fieri excusante, an duo praesentes in causa possint procedere, et eam definire et sententiae calculo terminare?

Your Prudence: (And below: [cf. c. un. de mut. pet. 2. 4.]) In the fifth place you furthermore supplicate to be informed, whether, when a cause is committed to three or more in such wise that, if all have not been able to be present, two nevertheless may execute it, if the defendant has been summoned by only two, he is necessarily bound to come; and if he has been cited by only two or by more, [and] has appeared before two, the third or any further one neither coming in person nor excusing himself by letters, as is wont to be done, whether the two present can proceed in the cause, and define it and terminate it by the tally of the sentence?

In hoc casu taliter respondemus, quod, quum aliquis delegatorum iudicium per certum nuncium vel excusatorem literatorie destinatum non ostenderit, se interesse non posse, vel alias de eodem canonice constare non poterit, residui procedere ad causae cognitionem non debent. Quodsi processerint, nihil reputabuntur egisse; illa quippe fuit antiqua sedis apostolicae provisio, ut huiusmodi causarum recognitiones [et decisiones] duobus quam uni, tribus quam duobus libentius delegaret, quum, sicut sacri canones attestantur, integrum sit iudicium, quod plurimorum sententiis confirmatur. Mandati siquidem excedere fines probaretur, si quis citra formam rescripti accepti praesumeret iudicare.

In this case we answer thus: that, when any one of the delegates has not shown, through a certain messenger or an excuser sent by letter, that he cannot be present, or otherwise it cannot canonically be established concerning the same, the remaining ought not to proceed to the cognizance of the cause. But if they shall have proceeded, they will be reckoned to have done nothing; for that indeed was the ancient provision of the apostolic see, that the recognitions [and decisions] of cases of this kind it would more willingly delegate to two than to one, to three than to two, since, as the sacred canons attest, that judgment is integral which is confirmed by the sentences of more persons. Indeed it would be proved to exceed the bounds of the mandate, if anyone should presume to judge apart from the form of the rescript received.

§ 1. Adiicimus etiam, quod, ubi fuerit in commissione appositum, ut, si omnes interesse nequiverint, duo eam nihilominus exsequantur, et si aliquis ex ipsis, quum possit, noluerit interesse, duo nihilominus in causa procedant, licet ille tertius gravissime sit arguendus pro eo, quod mandatum apostolicum exsequi subterfugiat aut contemnat. Idem quoque per omnia dicimus observandum in causa, quae committitur duobus, eo apposito, ut, si ambo interesse nequiverint, alter nihilominus exsequatur. § 2. Sexta nobis proposita ex parte tua quaestio continebat, quod, quum aliquibus iudicibus causa committitur, et quandoque contingit, quod reus actori obiicit, quod stare non potest in iudicio, utpote vinculo excommunicationis adstrictus, si reus non velit statim eum probare excommunicatum, sive non possit, an actor nihilominus audiri debeat, donec super eo, quod obiicitur, rei veritas fuerit patefacta et enodata?

§ 1. We add also that, where it has been appended in the commission that, if all cannot be present, nevertheless two shall carry it out, and that if any one of them, when he can, is unwilling to be present, nevertheless two shall proceed in the cause, although that third is most gravely to be arraigned for the fact that he shirks or contemns the apostolic mandate to execute it. We say likewise that the same is in all respects to be observed in a cause that is committed to two, with this appended: that, if both cannot be present, nevertheless the other shall carry it out. § 2. The sixth question proposed to us on your part contained this: that, when a cause is committed to certain judges, and it sometimes happens that the defendant objects to the plaintiff that he cannot stand in judgment, as being bound by the bond of excommunication, if the defendant is unwilling immediately to prove him excommunicated, or cannot, is the plaintiff nonetheless to be heard until, concerning that which is objected, the truth of the matter shall have been laid open and unraveled?

Hanc dubitationem taliter removemus, quod, si ille, qui tale quid obiicit, statim vel infra terminum competentem non probaverit legitime quod intendit, actor permitti debet, ut sine offendiculo quolibet audiatur. Ceterum, si vel ex confessione actoris, vel alio quolibet modo legitime constiterit esse actorem vinculo excommunicationis adstrictum, a iudicibus delegatis legitime secundum formam ecclesiae valet absolvi, ita [tamen] ut, si propter aliam iustam causam et evidentem ab ordinario iudice vel delegato excommunicatus fuerit, ad excommunicatorem debet absolvendus remitti. Qui si malitiam adhibuerit, delegati iudices id ritu ecclesiastico libere exsequantur, dummodo non sit tale genus excommunicationis illius [criminis] cuius duntaxat absolutio sedi apostolicae reservetur; explorati quidem iuris exsistit, ut delegatis iudicibus, quibus principale committitur, et accessorium committatur.

We remove this doubt thus: if he who objects such a thing does not immediately or within a competent term lawfully prove what he intends, the actor (plaintiff) must be permitted to be heard without any impediment whatsoever. Moreover, if either from the confession of the actor, or by any other lawful mode, it has been established that the actor is bound by the bond of excommunication, he can be lawfully absolved by the delegated judges according to the form of the Church, provided [however] that, if he has been excommunicated for another just and evident cause by the ordinary judge or a delegate, he must be remitted to the excommunicator to be absolved. If he shall have employed malice, let the delegated judges freely carry this out according to ecclesiastical rite, provided it is not such a kind of excommunication of that [crime] whose absolution alone is reserved to the Apostolic See; indeed it stands as settled law that to the delegated judges, to whom the principal is committed, the accessory also is committed.

§ 3. Si vero ab his fuerit, praestito scilicet iuramento, quod stabit mandato ecclesiae, absolutus, rursus interrogas [edoceri] an coram eisdem delegatis iudicibus, vel coram ordinano, a quo excommunicatus exstitit, teneatur super eadem causa, pro qua excommunicatus fuerat, respondere, et quorum debeat iudicio vel mandato stare? In quo quidem casu taliter respondemus, quod coram ipsis excommunicatoribus super illa causa, pro qua fuerat excommunicatus, stare debet, et eorum servare mandatum, nisi specialiter fuerit illud negotium aliis iudicibus a sede apostolica delegatum. Quod si excommunicatores malitiose distulerint, tunc delegati eandem iurisdictionem, quam in principali, et in accessorio exercebunt.

§ 3. But if by these he shall have been absolved, the oath namely having been given that he will stand by the mandate of the Church, again you ask [to be instructed] whether before the same delegated judges, or before the ordinary, by whom he had been excommunicated, he is held to respond concerning the same cause for which he had been excommunicated, and to whose judgment or mandate he ought to stand? In which case indeed we answer thus: that before those very excommunicators he ought to stand concerning that cause for which he was excommunicated, and to observe their mandate, unless that business shall have been specially delegated by the Apostolic See to other judges. But if the excommunicators shall have maliciously delayed, then the delegates will exercise the same jurisdiction as in the principal, also in the accessory.

[Dat. Lat. XV. Kal.

[Given at the Lateran, 15 days before the Kalends.

Iul. Pont. nost.

July. Of our pontificate.

Ao. III. 1193.]

Year 3, 1193.]

CAP. XXII.

CHAPTER 22.

Si causa simpliciter delegatur tribus, duo sine subdelegatione tertii procedere non possunt. Quod si fecerint, ab eis poterit appellari. Idem, si sunt dati cum clausula: "quod si non omnes." Non enim valet processus duorum tertio inconsulto.

If a cause is simply delegated to three, two cannot proceed without the subdelegation of the third. But if they do, an appeal can be taken from them. The same holds if they are appointed with the clause: "but if not all." For the process of two is not valid without the third having been consulted.

Hoc dicit comprehendendo utrumque intellectum.

He says this, comprehending both senses.

Innocentius III. Rheginensi Archiepiscopo et Episcopo Cephadulensi.

Innocent III. To the Archbishop of Reggio and the Bishop of Cefalù.

Quum causa, quae vertitur inter venerabiles fratres nostros Montis regalis et Rossanensem archiepiscopos super quibusdam decimis, venerabilibus fratribus nostris Panormitano et Capuano archiepiscopis, et tibi, frater Rheginensis, commissa fuisset a nobis fine debito terminanda, praedictus archiepiscopus Montis regalis, sicut ex literis eius accepimus, ad primam praedictorum Panormitani et Capuani archiepiscoporum citationem accessit. In quorum praesentia constitutus excipiendo proposuit, quod pro duabus causis eorum non deberet stare iudicio, tum videlicet, quia ipsa causa tribus fuerat iudicibus delegata, et idem ab illis duobus tantum, te, frater Rheginensis, praesente inconsulto et inscio, nec vices tuas eis super hoc committente, ad iudicium fuerat evocatus, tum etiam, quia ante ipsorum citationem et notitiam literarum, pro eadem causa nuncium suum ad apostolicam sedem transmiserat, in quo decretalem felicis memoriae Alexandri Papae III. praedecessoris nostri sibi affirmabat apertius suffragari.

When the case, which is being contested between our venerable brothers the archbishops of Montis Regalis and Rossano concerning certain tithes, had been committed by us to our venerable brothers the Panormitan and Capuan archbishops, and to you, brother of Reggio, to be terminated with its due end, the aforesaid archbishop of Montis Regalis, as we have received from his letters, came at the first summons of the aforesaid Panormitan and Capuan archbishops. Having appeared in their presence, by way of exception he alleged that for two causes he ought not to stand to their judgment: first, namely, because the case itself had been delegated to three judges, and he had been called to judgment by those two only, you, brother of Reggio, being present yet unconsulted and unaware, nor having committed your powers in this matter to them; and also because, before their summons and the knowledge of the letters, for the same cause he had sent his envoy to the apostolic see, in which he affirmed that the decretal of Pope Alexander 3, of happy memory, our predecessor, more plainly supported him.

At vero iidem archiepiscopi exceptiones ipsius nolentes admittere, contra eum, ut responderet, interlocutoriam sententiam protulerunt, propter quod idem archiepiscopus, sentiens se gravari, ad sedem apostolicam appellavit. Nos igitur praedictorum inquisitionem et decisionem canonicam vestrae discretionis examini committentes, Fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, vocatis ad praesentiam vestram, qui fuerint evocandi, et inquisita super praemissis diligentius veritate, si vobis constiterit, praedictos archiepiscopos exceptiones praedictas nullatenus admisisse, non obstante eo, quod per ipsos factum est, decimas ipsas, quibus praedictus Montis regalis archiepiscopus se, postquam nuncius suus propter hoc ad sedem apostolicam accesserat, asserit spoliatum, praecipue quum easdem tam sibi, quam ecclesiae suae a sede apostolica fuisse asserat confirmatas, sive per laicalem potentiam, sive etiam per eosdem iudices factum sit, cum fructibus inde perceptis sublato cuiuslibet contradictionis et appellationis obstaculo restitui faciatis, audientes postmodum, quantum de iure poteritis, quicquid fuerit quaestionis, et appellatione remota fine debito decidentes. [Dat.

But indeed those same archbishops, unwilling to admit his exceptions, pronounced an interlocutory sentence against him that he should respond; wherefore the same archbishop, feeling himself aggrieved, appealed to the Apostolic See. We therefore, committing the inquest and canonical decision of the aforesaid matters to the examination of your discretion, command to your Fraternity by apostolic writings that, having called to your presence those who ought to be summoned, and the truth concerning the premises having been more diligently inquired into, if it shall be evident to you that the aforesaid archbishops in no wise admitted the aforesaid exceptions, notwithstanding what was done by them, you cause the tithes themselves, of which the aforesaid archbishop of Monreale asserts himself to have been despoiled after his envoy had for this cause come to the Apostolic See—especially since he asserts that these same were confirmed both to himself and to his church by the Apostolic See—whether it was done through laical power or even through the same judges, together with the fruits therefrom received, to be restored, the obstacle of any contradiction and appeal having been removed; thereafter hearing, as far as you shall be able by law, whatever there shall be of the question, and, the appeal set aside, deciding with the due end. [Given.

Lat. Kal. Nov.

Lateran, on the Kalends of November.

1198.]

CAP. XXIII.

CHAPTER 23.

Si duo sunt delegati cum clausula: "quod si ambo etc.," uno recusato alter solus procedere potest, nec tenet processus, si cum recusato procedat.

If there are two delegates with the clause: "that if both, etc.," one being recused, the other can proceed alone; nor does the proceeding hold, if he proceeds with the recused one.

Idem Conventui de Conchis.

The same to the Convent of Conches.

Quum super abbatia monasterii vestri inter vos et S. quondam abbatem vestrum fuisset quaestio diutius agitata, [partibus tandem ad nostram praesentiam accedentibus dilectum filium nostrum H. sancti Eustachii diaconum cardinalem dedimus auditorem, in cuius praesentia pro ipso S. taliter fuit allegatum, quod, quum dilectus filius noster I. tit. S. Pudentianae presbyter cardinalis, tunc apostolicae sedis legatus, intrasset Normanniam, et super statu ipsius abbatiae cum abbate ac fratribus inquisitionem habuerit diligentem, nihil reprehensione dignum invenit ibidem; sicut ex literis bonae memoriae C. Papae praedecessoris nostri evidenter apparet, quibus ipsius cardinalis confessio est inserta. Eo vero postmodum ab ipso monasterio recedente, literae ipsius ad dilectos filios Troarnensem abbatem et priorem S. Barbarae fraudulenter obtentae fuerunt super inquisitione abbatis et totius monasterii facienda, nulla data inquisitoribus potestate in abbatem aliquid statuendi, quemadmodum ex testimonio eiusdem cardinalis colligitur evidenter.

When, concerning the abbacy of your monastery, a question had been for a longer time agitated between you and S., your former abbot, [the parties at length approaching our presence, we appointed as auditor our beloved son H., the cardinal deacon of St. Eustachius, in whose presence it was thus alleged on behalf of that S., that, when our beloved son I., cardinal priest of the title of St. Pudentiana, then legate of the apostolic see, had entered Normandy, and had held a diligent inquisition with the abbot and the brothers concerning the state of that abbacy, he found nothing there worthy of censure; as plainly appears from the letters of Pope C. of happy memory, our predecessor, in which the confession of that cardinal is inserted. But after he thereafter departed from that monastery, his letters to our beloved sons, the abbot of Troarn and the prior of St. Barbara, were fraudulently obtained concerning an inquisition to be made of the abbot and of the whole monastery, no power having been given to the inquisitors to establish anything against the abbot, as is plainly gathered from the testimony of that same cardinal.

Praedictis ergo inquisitoribus accedentibus ad monasterium memoratum, et volentibus fines mandati excedere in facienda inquisitione iuris ordine non servato, idem abbas, antequam inquisitio sortiretur effectum, sedem apostolicam appellavit, et quamvis iter arripuisset ad Romanam ecclesiam veniendi, dicti tamen inquisitores, nec appellationi rationabiliter interpositae, neque ipsius absentiae vel excusationibus aliquibus deferentes, destitutionis in eum sententiam contra iuris ordinem promulgarunt, licet non pronunciandi potestas eis esset concessa, sicut ex multorum praelatorum literis liquido declaratur. Memorato igitur abbate ad dicti praedecessoris nostri praesentiam accedente, postquam de inordinata destitutione sua eum reddidit certiorem, omnibus irritatis quae contra iuris ordinem a dictis inquisitoribus fuerant ordinata, eundem abbatem sententia sua restituit, exsecutione sola venerabili fratri nostro episcopo et dilectis filiis L. et H. archidiaconis Ebroicensibus demandata. Die vero a solo episcopo partibus assignata, et ad terminum utraque partium veniente, quum exspectaret abbas restitutionem fieri sibi secundum apostolici mandati tenorem, eam non potuit obtinere; quin potius precibus, minis et terroribus eum episcopus inducere laboravit, ut in ipsum, non super restitutione facienda, quod erat principale negotium, compromitteret, sed super exsecutione tantummodo differenda.

Therefore when the aforesaid inquisitors approached the said monastery and wished to exceed the limits of their mandate in making the inquisition, the order of law not being observed, the same abbot, before the inquisition could take effect, appealed to the Apostolic See; and although he had taken the road to come to the Roman church, yet the said inquisitors, paying regard neither to the reasonably interposed appeal nor to his absence or to any excuses, promulgated against him a sentence of destitution contrary to the order of law, although the power of pronouncing had not been granted to them, as is clearly declared by the letters of many prelates. Accordingly, when the aforesaid abbot came into the presence of our said predecessor, after he informed him of his irregular destitution, all the things that had been arranged by the said inquisitors contrary to the order of law having been annulled, he restored the same abbot by his sentence, the execution alone being committed to our venerable brother the bishop and to our beloved sons L. and H., archdeacons of Evreux. But when a day had been assigned to the parties by the bishop alone, and both parties came to the term, when the abbot expected that restitution would be made to him according to the tenor of the apostolic mandate, he could not obtain it; nay rather, by entreaties, threats, and terrors the bishop labored to induce him to compromise to himself, not upon the making of restitution, which was the principal business, but only upon the deferring of the execution.

Et quoniam pars adversa cum armis illuc accesserat et multitudine armatorum, factum est, quod in dictum episcopum, sicut praemissum est, compromisit, fide in manu ipsius praestita, et restitutionis literis depositis apud eum, non tradendis parti adversae, sed diligenter servandis, et restituendis sibi tempore opportuno. Ipse vero episcopus contra id, quod promiserat, venire non metuens, adversariis abbatis literas restituit memoratas, sicque compromisso ex parte ipsius episcopi et adversariorum pariter violato, monachi bonae memoriae Melioris tit. SS. Iohannis et Pauli presbyteri cardinalis, tunc apostolicae sedis legati, praesentiam adeuntes, ad I. quondam Rothomagensem decanum super gravamine compromissi commissionis literas impetrarunt, ad cuius primam citationem monachus a dicto abbate transmissus captus fuit ab adversariis, et vinculis ferreis mancipatus; ad secundam vero citationem idem abbas accedens, per impressionem coactus fuit compromittere in decanum, non super abbatia, de qua sub eo nulla quaestio vertebatur, sed pro quibusdam bladi reditibus minuendis.

And since the opposing party had come there with arms and with a multitude of armed men, it came about that, as aforesaid, he entered into a compromise to the said bishop, faith having been pledged into his hand, and the letters of restitution having been deposited with him, not to be handed over to the opposing party, but to be carefully kept, and to be restored to him at an opportune time. But the bishop himself, not fearing to go against what he had promised, returned the aforesaid letters to the abbot’s adversaries; and thus, with the compromise violated equally on the part of the bishop himself and of the adversaries, the monks, approaching the presence of Melior of good memory, presbyter cardinal of the title of SS. John and Paul, then legate of the apostolic see, obtained letters of commission to I., formerly the dean of Rouen, concerning the grievance of the compromise; at whose first citation a monk sent by the said abbot was seized by the adversaries and consigned to iron chains; but at the second citation the same abbot appearing, by pressure he was forced to compromise to the dean, not about the abbacy, about which under him no question was being contested, but for the diminishing of certain revenues of grain.

Parte autem altera super compromisso servando fidem, sicut convenerat, non servante, dictum S. iterum oportuit ad sedem apostolicam laborare, ubi a nobis tam super principali quam incidenti etiam quaestione] demum super ea ad Lesionensem episcopum et abbatem de Becco nostrae fuerant literae destinatae, [ut super his, quae nobis fuerant intimata, studerent elicere veritatem, et statuerent quod secundum Deum viderent rationabiliter statuendum, iuris ordine per omnia observato, ita quod alter sine altero adesse nolente vel etiam non valente mandatum apostolicum adimpleret, mentione facta in literis ipsis de fide violenter, sicut idem S. asserebat, extorta, et non super monasterio abiurando, sed restitutione, ut dictum est, tantummodo differenda: ne, his omissis, tacita veritate commissio videretur obtenta. Partibus vero coram delegatis iudicibus constitutis, pars illius, quem dixit intrusum, praefatum episcopum duabus de causis sibi dixit esse suspectum; tum quia super ecclesia quandam causam habebat cum monasterio memorato; tum etiam, quia ipsum a Romana curia redeuntem ad pacis osculum non admisit, unde neque coram illis, neque coram illorum altero iuri stare voluit, quamvis nihil diceret in abbatem, sed appellans frustratonrie se contumaciter absentavi. Verum dicti exsecutores appellationi, quae nulla fuerat, minime deferentes, habito multorum prudentium virorum consilio, sententiam a dicto praedecessore nostro prolatam exsecutioni mandarunt, restituentes praedicto S. abbatiam, et praefato intruso perpetuum silentium imponentes.

But since the other party did not keep faith regarding the compromise being observed, as had been agreed, it was necessary for the said S. again to labor to the Apostolic See, where by us both on the principal and also on the incidental question] at length over these matters our letters had been directed to the Bishop of Lisieux and the Abbot of Bec, [that, concerning those things which had been intimated to us, they should strive to elicit the truth, and should establish what they saw ought reasonably to be established according to God, with the order of law observed in all things, in such wise that, if the one were unwilling or even unable to be present without the other, he should fulfill the apostolic mandate, mention being made in the letters themselves of the faith, as the same S. asserted, violently extorted, and not about abjuring the monastery, but only, as has been said, about deferring the restitution: lest, these things omitted and the truth left unspoken, the commission might seem to have been obtained.] But when the parties had appeared before the delegated judges, the party of him whom he said was an intruder declared the aforesaid bishop to be suspect to him for two causes; first, because he had a case concerning a church with the aforesaid monastery; second, because he did not admit him, returning from the Roman Curia, to the kiss of peace; whence he was unwilling to stand to law either before them or before either of them, although he said nothing against the abbot, but, appealing in a frustratory manner, he contumaciously absented himself. But the said executors, paying not at all any deference to the appeal, which had been none, after taking counsel of many prudent men, put into execution the sentence pronounced by our said predecessor, restoring to the aforesaid S. the abbacy, and imposing perpetual silence upon the aforesaid intruder.

Quumque ad eorum ex parte apostolica iussionem dioecesanus episcopus saepius requisitus ipsum S. in corporalem possessionem inducere recusaret, id exsequendum quibusdam diaconibus mundaverunt, qui nedum quod admissi fuerunt, verum per monachos et fautores eorum afflicti verberibus, carcerali sunt custodiae mancipati. Quapropter in intrusum, monachos et fautores eorum a delegatis fuit secundum apostolici mandati tenorem excommunicationis sententia promulgata. Sed ob hoc intrusus et monachi non dimiserunt divina officia celebrare; qui etiam ipso intruso defuncto alium excommunicatum eligere praesumpserunt, sicut ex delegatorum literis perpenditur evidenter.

And when, at their behest on the part of the Apostolic See, the diocesan bishop, though often required, refused to induct that S. into corporal possession, they entrusted the execution of this to certain deacons, who, far from being admitted, were in fact by the monks and their supporters afflicted with blows and consigned to carceral custody. Wherefore, against the intruder, the monks, and their supporters, the sentence of excommunication was promulgated by the delegates according to the tenor of the apostolic mandate. But for all this the intruder and the monks did not cease to celebrate the divine offices; who even, the intruder himself having died, presumed to elect another excommunicate, as is plainly perceived from the delegates’ letters.

Quumque nec sic possent ad frugem melioris vitae reduci, saepedictus S. iter arripuit ad sedem apostolicam veniendi. Sed praevenientes eum nuncii monachorum, de benedictionis munere illi quem elegerant impendendo fraudulenter literas impetrarunt, quas ad partes suas miserunt festinantius quam deberent. Petebat itaque dictus S. monachos ipsos (qui cuidam praedecessorum suorum amputare linguam et oculos eruere praesumpserunt, in alium sedentem ad mensam cum gladiis et fustibus impetum facientes, alium solum in ecclesia dimittentes missam celebrare paratum) animadversione condigna puniri, et possessionem abbatiae plenarie sibi restitui, sicut a dicto praedecessore nostro statutum fuerat et a delegatis postea iudicibus ordinatum, intruso, qui post latam in eum sententiam excommunicationis assumptus fuerat, per silentium perpetuum condemnato.

And when not even thus could they be brought back to the fruit of a better life, the oft-said S. took up the journey to come to the Apostolic See. But anticipating him, the messengers of the monks fraudulently procured letters concerning the conferring of the gift of benediction upon him whom they had elected, which they sent to their parts more hastily than they ought. Therefore the said S. sought that the monks themselves (who presumed to cut off the tongue of a certain one of their predecessors and to tear out his eyes, making an attack with swords and clubs upon another as he sat at table, leaving another alone in the church, prepared to celebrate Mass) be punished with condign animadversion, and that possession of the abbey be fully restored to himself, as had been established by our aforesaid predecessor and afterward ordered by the delegated judges, with the intruder, who had been assumed after a sentence of excommunication had been pronounced against him, condemned to perpetual silence.

Ceterum pro vobis ita fuit propositum ex adverso, quod, quum praefatus I. cardinalis in partibus illis legationis officio fungeretur, et causam ipsam super dilapidatione ipsius S. et incontinentia pariter praefatis abbati Troarnensi et priori sanctae Barbarae commiserit terminandam, ipsi cognita veritate, et ordine iuris per omnia observato, in eum depositionis sententiam protulerunt, quae a dicto praedecessore nostro fuit postea confirmata. Ipse autem S. eidem praedecessori nostro, quod abbatia ipsa iniuste spoliatus fuerit, intimavit; praefato cardinali etiam asserente, non fuisse intentionis suae, quod ad depositionem abbatis procederent iudices delegati, quamvis et hoc esset eis commissum, sicut in eorundem literis reperitur. Unde saepedictus praedecessor noster eum non restituit altera parte absente, sed restituendum mandavit episcopo et archidiacono memoratis, quia tacitum eis fuerat, quod praefatus cardinalis dictis abbati et priori deponendi etiam concesserit facultatem.

Moreover, on your behalf it was thus put forward on the opposite side, that, when the aforesaid Cardinal I. was discharging the office of legation in those parts, and had entrusted that very case, concerning the dilapidation by that same S. and likewise incontinence, to the aforesaid abbot of Troarn and the prior of Saint Barbara to be brought to an end, they, the truth having been ascertained and the order of law in all respects observed, pronounced against him the sentence of deposition, which was afterward confirmed by our said predecessor. But S. intimated to that same our predecessor that he had been unjustly despoiled of the abbacy; the aforesaid cardinal also asserting that it had not been his intention that the delegated judges proceed to the deposition of the abbot, although this too had been committed to them, as is found in their letters. Wherefore our oft-mentioned predecessor did not restore him with the other party absent, but commanded that he be restored by the bishop and archdeacon aforesaid, because it had been kept silent from them that the aforesaid cardinal had also granted to the said abbot and prior the faculty of deposing.

Convenientibus igitur partibus ad diem et locum sibi a delegatis sedis apostolicae assignatum, dictus S. in manu episcopi, quod eius super causa ipsa staret arbitrio, fide data firmavit, qui partes ipsas, ut ad ea, quae pacis sunt, intenderent, monuit diligenter; inter quas talis compositio intercessit, ut dictus S. in perpetuum cederet abbatiae. Quam cessionem ratam delegati iudices habuerunt, et idem S. (sicut in delegatorum literis continetur) iuramento firmavit, se illam firmiter servaturum. Et quum super restitutione sua duplices literas eiusdem prorsus continentiae impetrasset, facta compositione, quam saepedictus praedecessor noster postea confirmavit, alteras resignavit, alteras retinuit fraudulenter.

Accordingly, when the parties had convened on the day and at the place assigned to them by the delegates of the Apostolic See, the said S., in the hand of the bishop, with faith pledged, confirmed that the matter itself would stand by his arbitration; and he diligently admonished the parties themselves to aim at those things which are of peace; between whom such a composition intervened, that the said S. would cede the abbacy in perpetuity. The delegate judges held that cession as ratified, and the same S. (as is contained in the letters of the delegates) confirmed by oath that he would firmly observe it. And when he had obtained duplicate letters regarding his restitution, of entirely the same tenor, after the composition had been made—which our aforesaid predecessor afterwards confirmed—he surrendered the one and fraudulently retained the other.

Processu vero temporis compositione ab eo aliquamdiu observata, per iam dictum Meliorem cardinalem quondam Rothomagensi decano eandem fecit causam committi, fuitque in eius praesentia et venerabilis fratris nostri Rothomagensis archiepiscopi prima compositio innovata, ubi praefatus S. abbatiam denuo abiuravit, et quod compositionem ipsam deinceps observaret, corporaliter praestitit iuramentum, sicut in ipsius Rothomagensis archiepiscopi literis continetur, et multis posset testibus approbari. Fuerunt autem ista coram Rothomagensi facta ea praecipue ratione, quoniam prioratus, quem ipse S. debuit obtinere, in Rothomagensi erat dioecesi constitutus, quem quum per biennium detinens, inhoneste vivendo fere omnia consumpsisset, ad alia bona monasterii se violenter extendit. Et tandem ad praesentiam nostram accedens, et quaedam de praemissis exprimens, alia vero reticens, ad praefatos Lexoviensem episcopum et abbatem Vallis Richerii nostras literas reportavit, ut diligenter inquirerent de omnibus veritatem, et statuerent quod iustitia postularet.

With the passage of time, the composition being for some while observed by him, through the already-mentioned Melior, cardinal, formerly dean of Rouen, he caused the same case to be committed; and in his presence and in that of our venerable brother, the archbishop of Rouen, the first composition was renewed, where the aforesaid S. abjured the abbacy anew, and that he would henceforth observe the composition he bodily rendered an oath, as is contained in the letters of the archbishop of Rouen, and could be approved by many witnesses. Now these things were done before the prelate of Rouen chiefly for this reason, that the priory which that S. ought to obtain was established in the diocese of Rouen; which, while holding for two years, by living dishonorably he had almost consumed entirely, and he violently extended himself to other goods of the monastery. And at length, coming into our presence, and expressing certain of the aforesaid but keeping silent others, he carried back our letters to the aforesaid bishop of Lisieux and the abbot of Val-Richer, that they might diligently inquire the truth concerning all things and establish what justice should demand.

Ipsi vero partibus ad se citatis, quamvis episcopos pro memoratis causis, et quoniam R. abbati respondit, quod, si posset, sibi noceret, esset alteri parti suspectus, et ab eo fuerit recusatus, velletque coram coniudice, qui suspectus non erat, vel coram arbitris electis a partibus id probare, dicto abbate Vallis Richerii admittere hoc nolente, ante ingressum causae fuit ab illis duobus postmodum appellatum, ipsi nihilominus eundem S. restituendum sententialiter decreverunt, adversario eius super abbatia perpetuum silentium imponentes. Quum igitur quae praemissa sunt et alia quaedam praedictus cardinalis nobis et fratribus nostris prudenter et fideliter retulisset, quia constitit nobis per literas iudicum praedictorum episcopi et archidiaconi Ebroicensis, quibus super restitutione ipsius S. a dicto praedecessore nostro fuerat causa commissa, de utriusque partis assensu compositionem sub eo tenore factam fuisse, quod prioratus S. Stephani cum omnibus pertinentiis suis et alia quaedam sibi concessa fuerunt, dum viveret, possidenda, et ipse a lite spontanea voluntate recessit, et instrumenta sua fracto sigillo, quo usus fuerat, in manibus eorundem iudicum resignavit, et quod abbatiam abiuraverit memoratam, ex literis iam dicti Rothomagensis archiepiscopi perpendimus evidenter: nolentes per nos, qui punimus periuria, viam periuriis aperiri, quum et ipse recipiendo compositionem huiusmodi renunciaverit abbatiae, communicato fratrum nostrorum consilio ab impetitione ipsius S. vos et monasterium vestrum absolvimus, perpetuum ei super quaestione ipsa silentium imponentes; non obstante quod factum est ab ultimis delegatis, quum ex his appareat evidenter, ipsos, (ut de aliis taceamus) si eis de praemissis constitit, minus legitime processisse, restituentes illum, qui non habebat ius aliquod repetendi. Et] Quamvis solus abbas, antequam appellaretur ab eo, iuxta formam literarum nostrarum procedere potuisset, quia tamen pro eo, quod cum ipso episcopo interlocutus est, appellationem prius ab eodem episcopo interpositam non tenuisse, de iure sine ipso, quum posset et nollet negotio interesse, per consequentiam confessus est, se non posse mandatum apostolicum adimplere, nec suae intentionis exstitit, ut sine coniudice suo aliquid diffiniret, et cum eo, qui iam iudex esse desierat, aliquid super praedicto negotio rite disponere non valebat, voluntate ac potestate sibi mutuo adversantibus, quum noluerit quod potuerit, et quod voluerit adimplere nequiverit, quod a duobus factum fuerat effectum non potuit de iure obtinere.

They themselves, however, the parties having been cited before them, although the bishops, for the aforesaid causes, and because R. answered the abbot that, if he could, he would harm him, were suspect to the other party and were recusated by him, and he wished to prove this before a co‑judge who was not suspect, or before arbiters chosen by the parties, the said abbot of Val Richer being unwilling to admit this, before the entrance into the case he was afterwards appealed from by those two; nevertheless they decreed by sentence that the same S. must be restored, imposing perpetual silence upon his adversary concerning the abbacy. Therefore, since the aforesaid cardinal had prudently and faithfully reported to us and to our brothers what has been set forth and certain other things, because it was established for us through the letters of the aforesaid judges, the bishop and the archdeacon of Évreux, to whom by our said predecessor the cause had been committed regarding his restitution, that, by the assent of both parties, a composition had been made under this tenor: that the priory of St Stephen with all its appurtenances and certain other things were granted to him to be possessed while he lived, and he withdrew from the suit of his own spontaneous will, and he resigned his instruments, his seal, which he had used, having been broken, into the hands of those same judges, and that he had abjured the aforesaid abbacy, we clearly perceived from the letters of the already‑said archbishop of Rouen: not willing that by us, who punish perjuries, a way be opened to perjuries, since he also, by receiving such a composition, renounced the abbacy, having taken counsel with our brothers we absolve you and your monastery from the impetition of that S., imposing perpetual silence upon him over the question itself; notwithstanding what was done by the latest delegates, since from these things it appears clearly that they (to say nothing of other matters), if they were established concerning the aforesaid, proceeded less lawfully, restoring one who had no right of repetition. And] Although the abbot alone, before he was appealed from by him, could have proceeded according to the form of our letters, yet because, in that he engaged in interlocution with the bishop himself, he did not uphold the appeal previously interposed by that same bishop, in law without him—since he could and would not take part in the business—he by consequence confessed that he could not fulfill the apostolic mandate; nor was it his intention to define anything without his co‑judge; and with him who had already ceased to be a judge he was not able rightly to dispose anything concerning the aforesaid business, will and power mutually opposing each other for him, since he would not do what he could, and what he wished he was unable to fulfill, that which had been done by two he could not obtain in effect by law.

Nulli ergo etc. Dat. Lat.

Therefore to no one, etc. Given at the Lateran.

Id. Apr. [1199.]

Ides of April. [1199.]

CAP. XXIV.

CHAPTER 24.

Si iurisdictio delegati exspirat in termino peremptorio, quem partibus assignavit, post congruam horam peremptorii iudex non exspectabit contumacem. Si non exspirat, potest exspectare in diem alteram, et iterum citare, si vult.

If the jurisdiction of the delegate expires at the peremptory term which he assigned to the parties, after the fitting hour of the peremptory term the judge will not await the contumacious party. If it does not expire, he can wait to the next day, and summon again, if he wishes.

Idem Archiepiscopo Toletano.

The same to the Archbishop of Toledo.

Consuluit nos tua fraternitas, utrum, quum ad recipiendos testes depositiones publicandas eorum, vel sententiam proferendam peremptorie citas partes, et earum altera se absentat contumaciter die data, an circa ultimam saltem partem diei tibi sit in negotio procedendum, vel in diem exspectandum potius subsequentem; et, si exspectaveris, utrum contumax iterum sit citandus, quum non fuerit die partibus assignata processum? Nos autem credimus, distinguendum, utrum iurisdictio duret post terminum peremptorium, an exspiret in illo. Si durat, in diem alteram aequitate suadente poteris exspectare, nec erit pars contumax peremptorio elapso citanda, nisi gratiam fecerit ei benignitas iudicantis.

Your fraternity has consulted us, whether, when for receiving the witnesses, for publishing their depositions, or for pronouncing sentence you peremptorily cite the parties, and one of them absents itself contumaciously on the day given, you should at least around the last part of the day proceed in the matter, or rather wait for the subsequent day; and, if you wait, whether the contumacious party must be cited again, since on the day assigned to the parties no proceeding was had? We, however, believe a distinction must be made, whether jurisdiction endures after the peremptory term, or expires in it. If it endures, with equity persuading you may wait to the next day, nor will the contumacious party, the peremptory having elapsed, have to be cited, unless the benignity of the judge shall have shown him favor.

Si autem exspiret, nisi partes, maxime quum id noverint, se tibi praesentaverint ea hora, qua congrue possis procedere ad exsequendum id, propter quod eis legitime terminum peremptorium assignasti, ex tunc exsequi poteris quod intendis, ne frustra iudicialis instantia evanescat. Ne vero iudicium ecclesiasticum exerceatur in tenebris, quia iuxta testimonium Veritatis qui male agit odit lucem, licet etiam secundum consuetudinem et constitutiones legitimas more Romano dies a medietate noctis incipiat, et in medio noctis desinat subsequentis, unde quod in duabus dimidiatis noctibus agitur, perinde sanxit habendum legalis auctoritas, ac si qualibet parte lucis agatur, nos tamen eam procedendi horam congruam intelligimus, ex qua possis ante noctis tenebras perficere, quod incumbit. Porro discretus iudex in assignatione peremptorii non debet iurisdictionem suam nisi necessitas exigat, adeo coarctare.

But if it should expire, unless the parties—especially since they know this—present themselves to you at that hour at which you may suitably proceed to execute that for which you have lawfully assigned them the peremptory term, from that point you will be able to carry out what you intend, lest the judicial proceeding vanish in vain. And lest ecclesiastical judgment be exercised in the dark—for, according to the testimony of the Truth, he who does ill hates the light—although, also according to custom and legitimate constitutions in the Roman manner, the day begins from the middle of the night and ends in the middle of the following night, whence legal authority has sanctioned that what is transacted in the two half-nights is to be held just the same as if it were transacted in any part of the daylight, nevertheless we understand that hour of proceeding to be suitable, from which you can, before the darkness of night, complete what is incumbent. Furthermore, a discreet judge, in the assignment of the peremptory term, ought not, unless necessity demands it, to constrict his jurisdiction to such a degree.

CAP. XXV.

CHAPTER 25.

Ex nova causa removetur delegatus, etiam post litem contestatam, et alius subrogatur.

From a new cause the delegate is removed, even after the suit has been contested, and another is subrogated.

Idem Abbati de Bordellia et Priori sancti Sepulcri.

The same to the Abbot of Bordellia and to the Prior of the Holy Sepulchre.

Insinuante dilecto filio R. rectore ecclesiae sancti Saldati ad audientiam nostram pervenit, quod, quum olim causam, quae super iure parochiali inter ipsum et T. rectorem capellae sancti Ioannis de Glovernia Vigorniensis dioecesis vertebatur, venerabili fratri nostro Vigoriensi episcopo et coniudicibus suis a nobis obtinuerit delegari, postmodum, licet fuerit in eadem quaestione processum, tractu temporis ante, quam ad diffinitivae sententiae calculum veniretur, idem episcopus dictum R. in suum, familiarem admisit, sine quo alii coniudices, secundum quod in nostris literis mandabatur, in causa procedere non valebant, et alter ipsorum coniudicum officialis est episcopi supradicti, propter quod adversae parti poterat suspectus haberi. Unde, quum ex causa huiusmodi tam episcopus quam officialis praedictus, utpote quos idem R. in iudices postularat, et ipse familiaris eorum postmodum est effectus, ab adversa parte possent merito recusari, decisionem ipsius causae vestrae petiit discretioni committi. Quocirca discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, nisi postquam familiaris eius est effectus, litigare consenserit coram illo, in causa ipsa, secundum priorum continentiam literarum, ratione praevia, remoto appellationis obstaculo procedatis; alioquin partes ad priorum iudicum revertantur examen.

At the insinuation of our beloved son R., rector of the church of Saint Saldat, it came to our hearing that, whereas formerly he had obtained from us that the cause which was being litigated concerning parochial right between himself and T., rector of the chapel of Saint John of Gloucester of the Worcester diocese, be delegated to our venerable brother the bishop of Worcester and his co-judges, afterwards, although there had been progress in the same question, with the passage of time, before it came to the reckoning of a definitive sentence, the same bishop received the said R. into his household as his familiar; without whom the other co-judges, according to what was mandated in our letters, were not able to proceed in the cause; and another of those co-judges is the official of the aforesaid bishop, on account of which he could be held suspect by the adverse party. Wherefore, since for a cause of this kind both the bishop and the aforesaid official—inasmuch as the same R. had petitioned them as judges and he afterwards became their familiar—could deservedly be recused by the adverse party, he sought that the decision of the cause be committed to your discretion. Therefore by apostolic writings we command your discretion that, if it is so, unless after he became his familiar he consented to litigate before him, you proceed in the cause itself, according to the tenor of the earlier letters, with reason premised and the obstacle of appeal removed; otherwise let the parties return to the examination of the prior judges.

[Quodsi non omnes etc. Dat. VI. Kal.

[But if not all etc. Dated on the 6th day before the Kalends.

Febr. 1206.]

February 1206.]

CAP. XXVI.

CHAPTER 26.

Delegatus Papae sententiam suam exsequi potest usque ad integrum annum. H. d. et est casus singularis.

A delegate of the Pope can execute his sentence up to a full year. Here it is said, moreover, that it is a singular case.

Idem Priori sancti Fridiani.

The same to the Prior of Saint Fridianus.

Quaerenti quid per censuram ecclesiasticam (Et infra: [cf. c. 20. de verb. sign. V. 40.]) Si vero delegatus a nobis excommunicet illum, qui rei iudicatae parere contemnit, licet aliquibus videatur, quod suo sit functus officio, ut ulterius non habeat ex delegata sibi iurisdictione processum, alii autem dicant, quod iurisdictio eius duret donec sententiae pareatur, ut interim absolvere possit parere volentem: nos tamen per aequitatis semitam incedentes praesentium auctoritate statuimus, ut delegatus a nobis non solum usque ad quadrimestre tempus, quod ad solvendum debitum a lege reo conceditur, sed usque ad integrum annum iurisdictionem sibi commissam ad exsequendum sententiam valeat exercere, sicut observatur in illo, qui ante litis contestationem contumax invenitur.

To one asking what by ecclesiastical censure (And below: [cf. c. 20. on the meanings of words, 5. 40.])—If indeed a delegate appointed by us should excommunicate him who scorns to obey the res judicata, although to some it seems that he has discharged his office, so that he has no further proceeding from the jurisdiction delegated to him, while others say that his jurisdiction lasts until the sentence is obeyed, so that in the meantime he can absolve one willing to obey: nevertheless, treading the path of equity, by the authority of these presents we decree that a delegate appointed by us may exercise the jurisdiction committed to him for executing the sentence not only up to the four‑month period which by law is granted to the defendant for paying the debt, but up to a full year, just as is observed in the case of one who is found contumacious before the contestation of the suit.

CAP. XXVII.

CHAPTER 27.

Delegatus Papae potest principium, medium et finem causae coniunctim et divisim subdelegare. H. d. usque ad § Verum. ñ § 1. A subdelegato cum iurisdictione appellari potest; secus si sine iurisdictione, nisi modum excedat.

The Pope’s delegate can subdelegate the beginning, middle, and end of the case, jointly and separately. H. d. up to § Verum. ñ § 1. An appeal can be taken from a subdelegate with jurisdiction; otherwise, if without jurisdiction, unless he exceeds the limit.

Tunc enim potest recusari, nisi datus sit de partium consensu. Abbas. ñ § 2. A subdelegato non in totum appellatur ad subdelegantem, non autem ad primum delegantem; secus si in totum.

Then indeed he can be recused, unless he was appointed by the consent of the parties. Abbot. ñ § 2. From a subdelegate, if not as to the whole, one appeals to the subdelegator, not however to the first delegator; otherwise, if as to the whole.

H. d. usque ad § Quem vero. ñ § 3. Auditor datus sine partium consensu, recusari potest ut suspectus, non tamen sine causa. Abbas.

Here, up to § "But as for him who." ñ § 3. An auditor appointed without the consent of the parties can be recused as suspect, yet not, however, without cause. Abbas.

ñ § 4. Si unus ex duobus delegatis principis cum clausula: "appellatione remota" subdelegat alteri acceptanti, non potest acceptans subdelegare, nec appellatione remota procedere, quod tamen ante acceptationem poterat. Et si ab isto fuerit appellandum, appellabitur ad Papam; etiamsi fuerit subdelegatus non in totum. Hoc dicit secundum veriorem intellectum.

ñ § 4. If one of the two delegates of the prince, with the clause: "appeal removed," subdelegates to another who accepts, the acceptor cannot subdelegate, nor proceed with appeal removed, which, however, he could do before acceptance. And if from this one an appeal must be made, one will appeal to the Pope; even if he had been subdelegated not for the whole (not in toto). He says this according to the truer understanding.

ñ § 5. Si delegatus Papae subdelegat non in totum, pars a subdelegato non poterit appellare, ex eo, quod datus sit sine suo consensu; potest tamen recusari in ostendendo causam iustam coram delegato, et tunc delegatus diffiniet; a quo, etiamsi voluerit recusationem admittere, appellatur ad Papam. H. d.

ñ § 5. If a delegate of the Pope subdelegates not in toto, the party will not be able to appeal from the subdelegate, on the ground that he was appointed without its consent; nevertheless the subdelegate can be recused by showing a just cause before the delegate, and then the delegate will determine; from whom, even if he should wish to admit the recusation, appeal is made to the Pope. H. d.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Super quaestionum articulis, de quibus nos consulere voluisti fraternitati tuae taliter respondemus, quod per constitutionem nostram consultationi bonae memoriae Alexandri Papae III. praedecessoris nostri nullatenus derogatur, sed illa per istam exponitur, immo in ista verius quae in illa fuerant praetermissa supplentur. Ipse namque respondit, quod, si super causa, quae alicui ex apostolica delegatione committitur, a personis ecclesiasticis una vel pluribus, quibus delegatus, ut parcat laboribus partium et expensis, causae cognitionem ipsius et testium examinationes sententia sibi reservata committit, appellatio fuerit interposita, huiusmodi appellationis intuitu causam indefinitam relinquere non tenetur.

On the articles of the questions, about which you wished to consult us, we thus answer your fraternity, that by our constitution the consultation of Pope Alexander 3 of good memory, our predecessor, is in no way derogated from, but that one is expounded by this one; nay rather, in this the things which had been omitted in that are more truly supplied. For he himself answered that, if concerning a cause which is committed to someone by apostolic delegation, to one or more ecclesiastical persons— to whom the delegate, in order to spare the labors and expenses of the parties, commits the cognition of the cause itself and the examinations of the witnesses, with the sentence reserved to himself— an appeal should be interposed, he is not bound, in view of such an appeal, to leave the cause indefinite.

Nos autem statuimus, quod, licet is, cui causa committitur remota appellatione, non possit eam aliis sine provocationis obstaculo delegare, si tamen delegatus a nobis vel iudex quicunque non tam cognitorem, quam exsecutorem ad aliquem certum articulum quempiam deputaverit, ab eo, nisi modum excedat, non liceat appellari, dummodo de partium deputetur vel recipiatur assensu. Quod si delegatus a nobis vel litis exordium, vel causae finem, nedum totum negotium ei duxerit committendum, ab ipso tanquam a iudice licite provocetur, quum et lis ante iudicem debeat contestari, et causa per iudicem diffiniri. Intentionis igitur nostrae fuit, sicut et tenore constitutionis praemissae potest liquido deprehendi, quod et, ut iudicialis auctoritas liberius valeat exerceri, delegatus a nobis licite possit et principium, et finem, et medium causae sibi commissae, non solum coniunctim, sed etiam divisim alii delegare, non obstante, quod dicitur, quod iudex debet cognoscere per se ipsum in principio, et in medio, et in fine, quum ante, quam ferat sententiam, universa, quae acta sunt in iudicio, investigare debeat diligenter.

We, however, do decree that, although he to whom a cause is committed with appeal removed cannot delegate it to others so as to exclude the obstacle of provocation, yet if a delegate from us, or any judge whatsoever, shall have deputed not so much a cognitor as an executor to some certain article, it is not permitted to appeal from him, unless he exceeds the measure, provided that he is deputed by, or received with, the assent of the parties. But if the delegate from us shall have judged that either the outset of the suit, or the end of the cause—nay, the whole business—is to be committed to him, one may lawfully appeal from him as from a judge, since both the suit ought to be contested before a judge and the cause to be defined by a judge. Our intention therefore was, as can plainly be perceived also from the tenor of the aforesaid constitution, that also, in order that judicial authority may be exercised the more freely, a delegate from us may lawfully delegate both the beginning and the end and the middle of the cause committed to him, not only conjunctly but also separately, to another, notwithstanding what is said, that a judge ought to take cognizance by himself in the beginning, and in the middle, and in the end, since before he pronounces sentence he ought diligently to investigate all the things which have been done in the trial.

§ 1. Verum quum totam causam committit alicui, vel principium aut finem ipsius, ab eo tanquam a iudice potest licite provocari. Quum autem alicui medium tantum committit, ab ipso tanquam ab auditore provocari non potest, nisi mandati fines excedat, vel merito sit suspectus. Unde ne valeat recusari, provide statuimus, ut de partium detur vel recipiatur assensu.

§ 1. But when he commits the whole cause to someone, or its beginning or its end, one may lawfully appeal from him as from a judge. But when he commits only the middle to someone, one cannot appeal from him as from an auditor, unless he exceeds the bounds of the mandate, or is for good cause suspected. Whence, lest he be able to be recuséd, we have providently decreed that it be given or received with the assent of the parties.

§ 2. Porro quum delegatus a nobis iurisdictionem suam in alium transfert totam, si fuerit appellandum, non ad eum, sed ad nos appellari debebit. Quum autem sibi aliquid de iurisdictione reservat, si causa sit ei appellatione remota commissa, non ad nos, sed ad eum poterit de iure appellari. Unde si forsan appellaretur ab eo, cui medium causae committitur, sive cognitor aut exsecutor dicatur, vel, quod melius est, auditor, pro eo, quod vel mandati fines excedat, vel merito sit suspectus, nihilominus tamen delegatus a nobis iuxta consultationem praemissam causam poterit diffinire, ut parcatur laboribus partium et expensis.

§ 2. Moreover, when a delegate by us transfers all his jurisdiction into another, if there is to be an appeal, it ought to be appealed not to him, but to us. But when he reserves something of the jurisdiction to himself, if the case has been committed to him with appeal removed, one may by right appeal not to us, but to him. Whence, if perchance appeal should be made from him to whom the middle of the cause is committed, whether he be called a cognitor or an executor, or, what is better, an auditor, on the ground that he either exceeds the limits of the mandate or is deservedly suspected, nonetheless the delegate by us, according to the aforesaid consultation, will be able to define/decide the cause, that the labors and expenses of the parties may be spared.

§ 3. Eum vero, Quem delegatus a nobis deputaverit auditorem, neutra partium poterit recusare, nisi coram eo iustam recusationis causam ostendat. § 4. Si vero duo sunt a principe delegati, et unus committit vices suas alteri, ille non potest, nec debet appellatione remota procedere, nec causam alii delegare, quamvis in commissione facta duobus contineatur expressim, ut appellatione remota alter possit procedere sine reliquo, si non possunt ambo pariter interesse, quia, quod potest ex sola iurisdictione sibi a principe delegata, non potest cum iurisdictione sibi a condelegato commissa. Unde si ab eo fuerit appellatum licet aliquibus visum fuerit, quod ad condelegatum etiam valeat appellari, nobis tamen videtur, quod ad primum duntaxat appellandum est delegantem, propter rationem superius assignatam.

§ 3. But the one whom the delegate appointed by us shall have deputed as auditor, neither party can recuse, unless he shows before him a just cause of recusation. § 4. But if two are delegated by the prince, and one commits his vicarious functions to the other, that one cannot, nor ought he, to proceed with appeal removed, nor to delegate the case to another, although in the commission made to the two it is expressly contained that, with appeal removed, the one may proceed without the remainder if both cannot be present together; because what he can do by virtue of the sole jurisdiction delegated to him by the prince, he cannot do with the jurisdiction committed to him by the co-delegate. Whence, if appeal should be taken from him—although it has seemed to some that one may validly appeal also to the co-delegate—nevertheless it seems to us that appeal must be made only to the first delegating authority, for the reason assigned above.

§ 5. Eius ergo appellatio, de quo tua fraternitas nobis scripsit, si nostrae constitutionis occasione ad nostram audientiam appellavit, pro eo, quod delegatus a nobis, reservata sibi diffinitiva sententia, audientiam causae commisit quibusdam, qui de partium assensu nec dati sunt nec recepti, nisi contra eos iustam recusationis causam ostenderit, vel paratus fuerit ostendere coram iudice delegato, non debuit impedire, quo minus procederent auditores. Qui etiam si tanquam suspecti fuissent merito recusati, delegatus tamen a nobis nihilominus potuisset, sublato appellationis diffugio, causam ipsam iudicialiter expedire. Quod si iustam recusationis causam noluit admittere delegatus, sed coram suspectis eum litigare cogebat, a tali gravamine licite potuit ad nostram audientiam appellare, quodque post appellationem huiusmodi est praesumptum iudicari debet irritum et inane.

§ 5. Therefore, the appeal of him about whom your fraternity wrote to us—if on the occasion of our constitution he appealed to our audience, for the reason that the delegate from us, the definitive sentence being reserved to himself, committed the hearing of the cause to certain persons who neither were given nor received by the assent of the parties—unless he showed, or was prepared to show before the delegated judge, a just cause of recusation against them, ought not to have impeded the auditors from proceeding. And even if they had been rightly recusated as suspected, nevertheless the delegate from us could, with the evasion of appeal removed, judicially expedite the cause itself. But if the delegate was unwilling to admit a just cause of recusation, and was compelling him to litigate before the suspected persons, from such a grievance he could lawfully appeal to our audience; and whatever after an appeal of this sort has been presumed is to be judged null and void.

[Dat. Lat. VI. Kal.

[Given at the Lateran, 6th day before the Kalends.

Apr. 1204.]

CAP. XXVIII.

CHAPTER 28.

Delegatus Papae, nisi malitiose se exoneret, subdelegatum compellit ad suscipiendam subdelegationem; in coactione tamen deferet suae dignitati et personae. H. d. usque ad § Item quum totum. ñ § 1. Delegatus Papae, sicut potest committere totam causam, ita potest citationem, et punire contemnentem acceptare.

A delegate of the Pope, unless he maliciously excuses himself, compels the subdelegate to undertake the subdelegation; yet in the compulsion he will defer to his dignity and person. H. d. usque ad § Item quum totum. ñ § 1. A delegate of the Pope, just as he can commit the whole case, so he can entrust the citation, and accept for punishment the one who shows contempt.

Hoc dicit Abbas. ñ § 2. Si Papa scienter commisit appellationem interpositam a suo delegato dato cum clausula: "appellatione remota," iurisdictio primi delegati est interim suspensa quoad exsecutionem. Hoc dicit secundum verum intellectum.

This is what the Abbot says. ñ § 2. If the Pope knowingly assigned the appeal interposed by his appointed delegate with the clause: "appeal removed," the jurisdiction of the first delegate is meanwhile suspended as to execution. This he says according to the true understanding.

ñ § 3. Ordinarius ad mandatum delegati exsequitur sententiam, etiamsi sciat eam iniustam. Abbas. ñ § 4. Delegatus, qui impeditur die statuta procedere, partem hoc procurantem puniet, et quantum ad diem illam causam committet appellatione remota, in odium procurantis, nisi partes negotium prorogent.

ñ § 3. The Ordinary, at the mandate of the delegate, executes the sentence, even if he knows it to be unjust. Abbot. ñ § 4. A delegate who is impeded from proceeding on the appointed day will punish the party procuring this, and, as to that day, will commit the cause with the appeal removed, to the prejudice of the procuring party, unless the parties prorogue the business.

Abbas Sicul.

The Sicilian Abbot.

Idem Episcopo Heliensi.

The same to the Bishop of Ely.

Pastoralis officii diligentia et sollicitudo, quam geris circa exsecutionem mandatorum nostrorum, et zelus tuae rectitudinis nos invitant, ut, quamvis simus multiplicibus negotiorum occupationibus praepediti, eis tamen ad horam subtrahamus nos ipsos, in qua tuis intendamus consultationibus responsuri. Consuluit etenim nos tuae fraternitatis discretio, utrum, si delegatus a principe causam sibi commissam alii delegare voluerit, nolentem delegationem suscipere ad ipsam suscipiendam valeat coarctare. Consultationi tuae de fratrum nostrorum consilio taliter duximus respondendum, quod, quum delegato a principe iurisdictio dandi iudicem sit a lege concessa, dummodo ipse exonerare se ipsum malitiose non quaerat, potest compellere renitentem, eo, quod iurisdictio illa nullius videretur esse momenti, si coercitionem aliquam non haberet.

The diligence and solicitude of the pastoral office which you bear concerning the execution of our mandates, and the zeal of your rectitude, invite us, so that, although we are hampered by manifold occupations of business, nevertheless we may withdraw ourselves from them for a moment, in which we may direct ourselves to your consultations to give an answer. For the discretion of your fraternity has consulted us whether, if someone delegated by the prince should wish to delegate to another the case committed to him, he may be able to constrain one unwilling to accept the delegation to accept it. To your consultation, on the counsel of our brothers, we have judged that one must reply thus: that, since to one delegated by the prince the jurisdiction of appointing a judge is granted by law, provided that he does not seek maliciously to unload himself, he can compel the resisting party, for that jurisdiction would seem to be of no moment if it had no coercive power.

Delegatus praedictus tamen debet sollicite providere, ut, si personis superioribus, exigente necessitate, negotium duxerit delegandum, in coactionibus inferendis dignitati deferat et personae. § 1. Item Subsequenter etiam quaesivisti, utrum cui voluerit delegatus, quum viderit expedire, possit iniungere, ut ad suam praesentiam citet partes, et eis, si obedire contempserint, poenam infligere pro contemptu. Ad quod tuae fraternitati breviter respondemus, quod, quum totum negotium alii possit committere delegatus, sicut superius est expressum, citationis officium potest cuilibet discretione praevia demandare, ac punire merito contemptorem.

The aforesaid delegate ought nevertheless to provide solicitously that, if, necessity requiring, he shall have judged the business to be delegated to superior persons, in imposing coercions he defer to the dignity and to the person. § 1. Likewise Subsequently you also asked whether the delegate, to whom he will wish, when he has seen it to be expedient, can enjoin that he summon the parties to his presence, and, if they shall have scorned to obey, inflict upon them a penalty for contempt. To which we briefly answer your fraternity, that, since the delegate can commit the whole business to another, as is expressed above, he can, with prior discretion, entrust the office of citation to anyone, and deservedly punish the contemner.

[Ex parte tua etc. (cf. c. 11. de off. iud.

[On your part etc. (cf. ch. 11 on the office of a judge.

ord. I. 31.)] (Et infra:) § 2. Praeterea postulasti per sedem apostolicam edoceri, si, quum a sententia lata auctoritate literarum nostrarum, in quibus appellatio est inhibita, fuerit appellatum, et literae post appellationem ad iudices alios emanaverint, an ad mandatum posteriorum iudicum exsecutio sententiae, a prioribus delegata, debeat retardari, ut priores iudices ipsam neque per se, neque per alios exsequantur? Nos autem inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum nos appellationis causam ex certa scientia iudicibus aliis committimus cognoscendam, appellationem videmur recipere, ac iurisdictionem priorum iudicum revocare, ut interim executio sententiae suspendatur, donec appellationis merita plenius sint discussa.

ord. 1. 31.)] (And below:) § 2. Furthermore you asked to be instructed by the apostolic see, whether, when from a sentence rendered by authority of our letters, in which an appeal is inhibited, an appeal has been made, and letters after the appeal have emanated to other judges, whether at the mandate of the later judges the execution of the sentence, delegated to the former, ought to be retarded, so that the prior judges execute it neither by themselves nor through others? We, however, respond to your inquiry thus, that, when we commit the cause of the appeal, out of certain knowledge, to other judges to be cognized, we are deemed to receive the appeal and to revoke the jurisdiction of the prior judges, so that in the meantime the execution of the sentence is suspended, until the merits of the appeal have been more fully discussed.

[Praeterea etc. (cf. c. 14. de rescr. I. 3.)] (Et infra:) § 3. Quia vero saepe contingit, quod exsecutio sententiae ordinario demandatur, quaesivisti, an si ordinarius ipsam iniustam esse cognoverit, debeat eam exsecutioni mandare, an sit ei potius subsistendum?

[Moreover etc. (cf. ch. 14 on rescripts 1. 3.)] (And below:) § 3. Because indeed it often happens that the execution of a sentence is entrusted to the Ordinary, you have asked whether, if the Ordinary has recognized it to be unjust, he ought to commit it to execution, or rather it should be stayed by him?

Attendentes itaque, quod non cognitio, sed exsecutio tantum demandatur eidem, inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum ordinarius teneatur obsequi delegato, etsi sciat sententiam illam iniustam, exsequi nihilominus tenetur eandem, nisi apud eum efficere possit, ut ab hoc onere ipsum absolvat. [Edoceri etc. (cf. c. 11. de off.

Attending, therefore, that not cognition, but execution only is entrusted to the same, we answer your inquiry thus: since the ordinary is bound to obey the delegate, even if he knows that sentence to be unjust, he is nonetheless bound to execute the same, unless he can bring it about with him that he absolve him from this burden. [To be instructed etc. (cf. c. 11. on the office

iud. ord. I. 31.)] (Et infra:) § 4. Quum autem saepe contingat, ad diem, quem iudex delegatus a nobis partibus assignavit, earum altera procurante, ut negotium prorogetur, iudicem ipsum a rege vel archiepiscopo evocari: nos, perversorum volentes malignitatibus obviare, decernimus, ut, si delegato constiterit, hoc fuisse alicuius partis malitia procuratum, ipsam puniat animadversione condigna, et, ne aliquod lucrum ex huiusmodi fraude reportet, personae neutri parti suspectae, quantum ad diem illum, committat ipsum negotium audiendum, quae in ipso appellatione remota procedat, nisi forte partes consenserint negotium prorogari.

iud. ord. 1. 31.)] (And below:) § 4. Since it often happens that, on the day which the judge delegated by us has assigned to the parties, with one of them procuring that the business be prorogated, the judge himself is summoned by the king or the archbishop: we, wishing to obviate the malignities of the perverse, decree that, if it is established for the delegate that this was procured by the malice of one of the parties, he shall punish that party with condign animadversion, and, lest it carry off any profit from fraud of this kind, he shall commit the very business to be heard, as far as concerns that day, to a person suspected by neither party, who shall proceed therein with appeal removed, unless perhaps the parties have consented that the business be prorogated.

[Praeterea etc. (cf. c. 1. de sacr. non it. I. 16.) Dat.

[Moreover etc. (cf. ch. 1. on the sacrament not being repeated 1. 16.) Given.

Rom. ap. S. Petr. XIV.

Rome, at St. Peter’s, 14.

Kal. Ian. 1204.]

Kalends of January 1204.]

CAP. XXIX.

CHAPTER 29.

Subdelegatus a delegato Papae iurisdictionent non habente potest coercere impedientem. Hoc dicit comprehendendo utrumque intellectum.

A subdelegate from a delegate of the Pope, not having jurisdiction, can coerce the one impeding. This is said, comprehending both understandings.

Idem Abbati sancti Hilarii et Magistro G. Canonico Trevisino.

The same to the Abbot of St. Hilary and to Master G., Canon of Treviso.

Ex literis venerabilis fratris nostri patriarchae Grandensis accepimus, quod, quum dilecti filii Grandensis primicerius et plebanus S. Sophiae de Venetiis, quibus causa, quae inter clericos sanctae Iustinae ac Albertum presbyterum super eo, quod idem presbyter clericum se ipsius ecclesiae asserebat, agitari dignoscitur, a nobis fuerat delegata, mandassent eisdem, ut memoratos clericos, qui per archipresbyterum Paduanum, ad quem fuerat super eodem negotio quoddam a nobis rescriptum obtentum, in quo, sicut asseritur, de prioribus literis mentio non fiebat, denunciati fuerant excommunicationis sententiae subiacere, nisi dictum presbyterum in socium reciperent et in fratrem, idem patriarcha denunciaret anathematis vinculo non ligatos: ipse nolens eisdem iudicibus in hac parte parere, qui nostra fungebantur auctoritate, maxime quum venerabilis frater noster Castellanensis episcopus ipsis super hoc parendum non duxerit requisitus, clericis sanctae Mariae formosae mandatum supradictorum iudicum per suas literas nunciavit, quas dilectus filius archidiaconus Castellanensis, plebanus eiusdem ecclesiae, legi publice coram populo non permisit. [Quumque super hoc paucis diebus elapsis apud S. Nicolai monasterium ab eodem patriarcha benigne fuisset idem archidiaconus requisitus, in iram subito concitatus eundem patriarcham gravibus verborum iniuriis multis praesentibus lacessivit.] Qui considerans, archidiaconum ipsum per tantum iniuriarum excessum non se tantummodo, sed etiam Gradensem ecclesiam, immo nos ipsos graviter offendisse, tam ipsum archidiaconum, quam praedictam ecclesiam ecclesiastico supposuit interdicto, [ea praecipue ratione, quoniam ex antiqua consuetudine, sicut dicitur, est obtentum, ut literae, quae per patriarchatum Gradensem a patriarchis Gradensibus diriguntur, indifferenter ab omnibus admittantur. Verum ad instantiam clericorum et parochianorum ecclesiae supradictae quoad ipsam ecclesiam patriarcha interdicti sententiam relaxavit, sub excommunicationis poena clericis eisdem iniungens, ne archidiacono participare praesumerent in divinis.

From the letters of our venerable brother, the Patriarch of Grado, we have learned that, when the beloved sons, the primicerius of Grado and the plebanus of St. Sophia of Venice, to whom the case—which is recognized to be in litigation between the clerics of St. Justina and Albert the priest, on the matter that the same priest was asserting himself to be a cleric of that church—had been delegated by us, had instructed that the said patriarch should declare that the aforesaid clerics, who had been denounced by the Archpriest of Padua (to whom, on that same business, a certain rescript had been obtained from us, in which, as it is asserted, no mention was made of the prior letters) to be subject to the sentence of excommunication unless they received the said priest as associate and brother, were not bound by the bond of anathema: he himself, not wishing to obey in this part the same judges, who were discharging our authority—especially since our venerable brother the Bishop of Castello, when requested, had not judged that it should be obeyed by them in this matter—made known by his letters to the clerics of Santa Maria Formosa the mandate of the aforesaid judges, which the beloved son, the Archdeacon of Castello, the plebanus of that same church, did not permit to be read publicly before the people. [And when, a few days having elapsed, on this matter at the monastery of St. Nicholas, the same archdeacon had been kindly requested by the same patriarch, suddenly roused to anger he assailed that same patriarch with grave injuries of words in the presence of many.] He, considering that that archdeacon, by so great an excess of injuries, had gravely offended not himself only, but also the Church of Grado, nay even ourselves, subjected both the archdeacon himself and the aforesaid church to ecclesiastical interdict, [for this reason especially, because by ancient custom, as it is said, it has been obtained that letters which, through the Patriarchate of Grado, are directed by the Patriarchs of Grado are to be admitted by all without distinction. But at the instance of the clerics and parishioners of the aforesaid church, as regards the church itself the patriarch relaxed the sentence of interdict, enjoining upon the same clerics under penalty of excommunication not to presume to participate with the archdeacon in divine things.

Quum autem patriarcha iam dictus cum praefato episcopo ad monasterium S. Crucis pro celebrandis cuiusdam exsequiis accessisset, et archidiaconus se vellet divinis officiis immiscere, patriarcha pro vitando scandalo secessit in partem; propter quod archidiaconus ipsum coepit gravibus verborum iniuriis aggravare. Idem quoque archidiaconus licet a divinis per unius diei spatium cessavisset, postmodum tamen celebrare publice non erubuit interdictus. Ad haec de saepe dicto episcopo patriarcha gravem deposuit quaestionem, quod, quum sibi et Gradensi ecclesiae obedientiam teneatur et reverentiam exhibere, quanquam ei mandaverit, ut praefatum archidiaconum pro interdicto, et clericos S. Mariae pro excommunicatis haberet, et faceret excommunicationis et interdicti sententias ab ipso prolatas per Castellanensem dioecesim inviolabiliter observari, idem episcopus in iniuriam patriarchae permittens archidiaconum in ecclesia Castellanensi libere ministrare, clericis suae dioecesis sub fidelitatis poena praecipiendo mandavit, ut per ecclesias suas archidiaconum et clericos supradictos nec interdicti nec excommunicationis sententiae subiacere publice nunciarent.

When, moreover, the already-mentioned patriarch had gone with the aforesaid bishop to the monastery of the Holy Cross for the celebrating of a certain person’s obsequies, and the archdeacon wished to intrude himself into the divine offices, the patriarch, for the avoiding of scandal, withdrew aside; wherefore the archdeacon began to assail him with grievous insults of words. The same archdeacon also, although he had ceased from the divine offices for the space of one day, nevertheless afterward, though under interdict, did not blush to celebrate publicly. To these matters, concerning the oft-mentioned bishop, the patriarch lodged a grave complaint, that, although he is bound to exhibit obedience and reverence to himself and to the Church of Grado, although he had mandated to him that he should hold the aforesaid archdeacon as under interdict and the clerics of St. Mary as excommunicated, and should cause the sentences of excommunication and interdict pronounced by himself to be inviolably observed through the diocese of Castello, the same bishop, to the injury of the patriarch, permitting the archdeacon to minister freely in the church of Castello, by commanding the clerics of his diocese under pain of fealty ordered that through their churches they should publicly announce that neither the archdeacon nor the aforesaid clerics were subject to the sentence of interdict or of excommunication.

Unde idem patriarcha nobis humiliter supplicavit, ut tantam iniuriam et excessum, nec non in ipsum, sed potius contra sedem apostolicam tam ab episcopo quam archidiacono attentatum castigare taliter curaremus, ut resecaretur in aliis materia similia committendi. Dictus vero episcopus per suas nobis literas intimavit, quod quum patriarcha denunciasset clericos S. Iustinae anathematis vinculo non teneri, quos idem episcopus prius excommunicatos denunciaverat, de mandato archipresbyteri Paduani, a nobis, sicut asseritur, iudicis delegati, occasione huiusmodi inter patriarcham et archidiaconum contentione suborta, patriarcha ex commotione quadam archidiaconum interdixit, quo ad appellationis beneficium convolante, patriarcha in saepedictam ecclesiam interdicti sententiam promulgavit, nec satisfactionem oblatam ab archidiacono super hoc recipere voluit, nisi archidiaconus, ut ipsius pareret mandatis, interposito iuramento firmaret. Adiecit etiam idem episcopus, quod ipse timens, ne prorumperet ad aliquid patriarcha, quod ad ipsius episcopi vel ecclesiae seu clericorum suorum praeiudicium cederet vel gravamen, ad sedem apostolicam appellavit, nobis sollicite supplicando, ut patriarcham a sui et ecclesiae suae ac clericorum et ecclesiarum suae dioecesis molestatione indebita compescere curaremus.] Quum igitur super praemissis et aliis inter utriusque partis procuratores fuisset coram dilecto filio tit.

Whence the same patriarch humbly supplicated us to take care to chastise in such a way so great an injury and excess, attempted not only against himself but rather against the Apostolic See by both the bishop and the archdeacon, that the matter for committing similar things by others would be cut off. The said bishop indeed made known to us by his letters that, when the patriarch had declared that the clerics of St. Justina were not held by the bond of anathema—whom the same bishop had previously declared excommunicated, by mandate of the Paduan archpriest, appointed by us, as is asserted, as judge-delegate—on the occasion of a contention of this sort arising between the patriarch and the archdeacon, the patriarch, from a certain commotion, interdicted the archdeacon; whereupon, resorting to the benefit of appeal, the patriarch promulgated a sentence of interdict upon the oft-said church, nor was he willing to receive the satisfaction offered by the archdeacon on this matter, unless the archdeacon should confirm by an oath interposed that he would obey his mandates. He added also that he himself, fearing lest the patriarch should break out into something which would redound to the prejudice or burden of the same bishop or of his church or his clerics, appealed to the Apostolic See, earnestly supplicating us to take care to restrain the patriarch from undue molestation of himself and of his church and of the clerics and churches of his diocese.] Therefore, when concerning the aforesaid and other things it had been (treated) before our beloved son, the cardinal-priest of the title…

SS. Cosmae et Damiani diacono cardinali, quem auditorem dederamus eisdem, aliquamdiu litigatum, et ipse nobis quae audierat fideliter retulisset, quia nobis constare non potuit, an per literas, quae ad Paduanum archipresbyterum impetratae dicuntur, quum nobis ostensae non fuerint, revocatae fuerint literae ad praedictos primicerium et plebanum obtentae, causam ipsam vestro examini duximus committendam, per apostolica scripta Mandamus, quatenus, inquisita super praemissis plenius veritate, nisi vobis constiterit, quod literae, quae secundo loco ad praedictum archipresbyterum Paduanum impetratae dicuntur, de prioribus literis ad saepe dictos primicerium Grandensem et plebanum sanctae Sophiae obtentis expressam fecerint mentionem, ut per secundas primae appareant literae revocatae, quum primos iudices auctoritate literarum nostrarum iurisdictionem non sit dubium habuisse, quam potuerunt postmodum patriarchae quoad exsecutionem suae sententiae demandare, ex qua coercitionem etiam idem patriarcha receperat, quum huiusmodi demandata iurisdictio delusoria videretur, si subdelegatus huiusmodi coercitionem aliquam non haberet, interdicti sententiam ab eodem patriarcha in Castellanensem archidiaconum promulgatam, pro eo, quod ipse eiusdem patriarchae exsecutionem impediens, eius literas, quibus mandatum praedictorum iudicum nunciabat, legi in publicum non permisit, tamdiu faciatis sublato appellationis obstaculo inviolabiliter observari, donec eidem patriarchae de iniuriis irrogatis sufficienter fuerit satisfactum. Si vero constiterit primas literas per secundas legitime revocatas, quum appareat, primos iudices iurisdictionem nullam penitus habuisse, et ita constet per consequentiam, patriarcham ipsum non recepisse iurisdictionem vel coercitionem aliquam ab eisdem, praedictam interdicti sententiam ab eodem patriarcha prolatam denuncietis irritam et inanem. [Nihilominus etc.

To the cardinal deacon of SS. Cosmas and Damian, whom we had given to the same parties as auditor, the matter having been litigated for some time, and he himself having faithfully reported back to us the things he had heard, because it could not be established to us whether, by the letters which are said to have been obtained to the Paduan archpriest—since they were not shown to us—the letters obtained to the aforesaid primicerius and plebanus had been revoked, we have judged the case itself to be committed to your examination; through apostolic writings we command that, the truth having been more fully inquired concerning the aforesaid, unless it be established to you that the letters which are said to have been obtained in the second place to the aforesaid archpriest of Padua made express mention of the prior letters obtained to the oft-said primicerius of Grado and plebanus of Saint Sophia, so that by the second the first letters appear revoked—since it is not doubtful that the first judges had jurisdiction by the authority of our letters, which they could afterwards delegate to the patriarch as to the execution of his sentence, from which the same patriarch had also received coercive power, since such delegated jurisdiction would seem delusory if the subdelegate had not some such coercion—you are to cause the sentence of interdict, promulgated by the same patriarch against the archdeacon of Castellano, for this reason, that he, impeding the execution of the same patriarch, did not permit his letters, by which he announced the mandate of the aforesaid judges, to be read in public, to be inviolably observed, the obstacle of appeal having been removed, so long until sufficient satisfaction shall have been made to the same patriarch for the injuries inflicted. But if it be established that the first letters were legitimately revoked by the second, since it appears that the first judges had no jurisdiction at all, and thus it is established by consequence that the patriarch himself did not receive any jurisdiction or coercion from them, you shall declare the aforesaid sentence of interdict pronounced by the same patriarch null and void. [Nevertheless etc.

Dat. Rom. ap. S. Petr.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s.

XI. Kal. Ian. Ao. X. 1207.]

22 December, in the 10th year, 1207.]

CAP. XXX.

CHAPTER 30.

Iurisdictio delegati re integra morte mandantis exspirat.

The jurisdiction of a delegate, the matter being intact, expires upon the death of the mandator.

Idem Episcopo Pictaviensi.

The same to the Bishop of Poitiers.

Licet undique confluentium negotiorum multiplicitas copiosa nostrum animum ad varias curas impellere non desistat, fraternitas tamen tua, quam sincera complectimur in Domino caritate, sollicitudinem ad tempus deponere compulit, quam in exsequendis aliis ex debito pastoralis officii gerebamus, atque tuam dubitationem apostolico certificare responso. Quum igitur a nobis duxeris requirendum, si causam aliquam tribus iudicibus delegamus, apponi in literis nostris illam clausulam facientes: "quod si non omnes his exsequendis poteritis interesse, duo vestrum nihilominus eam exsequantur," et unus, postquam commiserit cuidam ex aliis vices suas, de medio sit sublatus, tertius ut suspectus merito recusetur, an collega superstes suo nomine ac defuncti possit negotium definire: inquisitioni tuae taliter respondemus, quod, si iurisdictione a suo sibi collega delegata eo vivente uti non coeperit, quia mandatum huiusmodi re integra morte mandatoris exspiravit, non habet solus officium iudicandi; si vero ante mortem illius iurisdictione uti coeperit taliter demandata, vices suas et illius poterit adimplere.

Although on every side the copious multiplicity of matters flowing together does not cease to impel our mind to various cares, nevertheless your fraternity, whom we embrace in the Lord with sincere charity, has compelled us for a time to lay aside the solicitude which we were carrying in executing other things by the debt of the pastoral office, and to certify your doubt with an apostolic answer. Since therefore you have judged it should be inquired of us, that if we delegate some cause to three judges, adding in our letters that clause to this effect: "but if you are not all able to be present for executing these things, nevertheless two of you should carry it out," and one, after he has committed his vicarious functions to one of the others, has been removed from the midst, the third, as rightly suspect, is recused, whether the surviving colleague can define the business in his own name and that of the deceased: to your inquiry we thus respond, that, if he has not begun to use the jurisdiction delegated to him by his colleague while the latter was living, because a mandate of this sort, with the matter intact (re integra), expired by the death of the mandator, he alone does not have the office of judging; but if, before that one’s death, he began to use the jurisdiction so entrusted, he will be able to fulfill his own and that man’s vicarious functions.

CAP. XXXI.

CHAPTER 31.

Non creditur quis delegatus, nisi delegationem probet.

No one is believed to be a delegate, unless he proves the delegation.

Idem Episcopo Baiocensi.

The same to the Bishop of Bayeux.

Quum in iure peritus (Et infra: [cf. c. 33. de elect. I. 6.]) Praeterea quaesivisti, quum tibi ab aliquo sub hac forma mandatur: "auctoritate, qua fungor, iniungo, ut talem denuncies excommunicationis sententiae subiacere," ac tibi super mandato apostolico haesitanti ab aliquo non sit facta fides, an mandatum huiusmodi exsequi tenearis? Super quo tibi huiusmodi damus responsum, quod, nisi de mandato sedis apostolicae certus exstiteris, exsequi non cogeris quod mandatur.

When one skilled in law (And below: [cf. c. 33. on election 1. 6.]) Moreover, you asked, when it is mandated to you by someone in this form: "by the authority which I exercise, I enjoin that you denounce such a one to be subject to the sentence of excommunication," and, as you are hesitating concerning the apostolic mandate, no credence has been given you by anyone, whether you are bound to execute a mandate of this sort? Upon which we give you this kind of response: that, unless you have become certain regarding a mandate of the Apostolic See, you are not compelled to execute what is mandated.

[Contingit etc. Dat. Lat.

[It happens, etc. Given at the Lateran.

X. Kal. Sept. Pont.

10th day before the Kalends of September. Pontificate.

nostr. Ao. XI. 1208.]

of our pontificate, year 11, 1208.]

CAP. XXXII.

CHAPTER 32.

Per procuratorem non habentem mandatum de re ad rem iurisdictio prorogari non potest.

Through a procurator not having a mandate, jurisdiction cannot be prorogated from one matter to another.

Idem Parisiensi et Trecensi Episcopis et Abbati sanctae Genovefae.

The same to the Bishops of Paris and Troyes and to the Abbot of Saint Genevieve.

Quum olim dilectus filius abbas et conventus Vergiliacensis sua nobis conquestione monstrassent, quod nobilis vir Petrus comes Altissiodorensis quoddam stagnum, molendinum et domum in terra eorum construere nitebatur in ipsorum praeiudicium et gravamen, venerabili fratri nostro episcopo et dilecto filio thesaurario Nivernensi commisimus causam ipsam. Per quorum literas accepimus, quod lite super petitionibus ecclesiae contestata, receptis utrinque testibus, et attestationibus publicatis, quum super dictis testium inter partes fuisset postmodum disputatum, tandem pars comitis proposuit coram eis, quod de damnis in nemoribus et rebus aliis datis, super quibus testes deponere videbantur, cognoscere non debebant, quum in rescripto nostro nulla de damnis mentio haberetur, [adiiciens, quod res illae, super quibus quaestio agebatur, de feudo erant nobilis viri ducis Burgundiae, sicut idem dux in patentibus literis fatebatur, et ideo super illis ad dominum feudi potius quam ad dictos fuerat iudices recurrendum.] Ad quod fuit ex adverso responsum, quod, [si non expresse, tacite tamen de damnis datis in nostris literis mentio habebatur, quum nomen gravaminis esset literis ipsis insertum. Propter quod de ipsis cognoscere poterant saltem tanquam de accessoriis seu appendiciis negotii principalis.

When formerly the beloved son the abbot and the convent of Vergiliacum had shown to us by their complaint that the noble man Peter, count of Auxerre, was striving to construct a certain pond, mill, and house on their land, to their prejudice and gravamen, we committed the case itself to our venerable brother the bishop and our beloved son the treasurer of Nevers. By whose letters we received that, the suit having been joined upon the petitions of the church, witnesses on both sides having been received, and the attestations published, when afterwards it had been disputed between the parties concerning the statements of the witnesses aforesaid, at length the count’s party proposed before them that they ought not to take cognizance concerning the damages done in the woods and other things, upon which the witnesses seemed to depose, since in our rescript no mention of damages was had, [adding that those things, about which the question was being litigated, were of the fief of the noble man the duke of Burgundy, just as the same duke acknowledged in his patent letters, and therefore concerning those things recourse ought rather to be had to the lord of the fief than to the said judges.] To which it was answered on the opposing side, that, [if not expressly, yet tacitly mention was had in our letters of the damages done, since the name of grievance was inserted in the letters themselves. Wherefore they were able to take cognizance of them at least as accessories or appendages of the principal business.

Item,] quum super omnibus articulis, de quibus testes deposuerant, lis fuisset solenniter contestata, de ipsis cognoscere ac pronunciare iudices tenebantur. [Sed et super exceptione feudi sero nimis, utpote post testium publicationem obiecta, audiendum non esse comitem asserebat.] Ad haec pars comitis replicavit, quod, etsi super damnis a procuratore suo lis fuerit contestata, ei tamen ex hoc non poterat praeiudicium generari, quum ad hoc procurator datus non fuerit, sed ad illam duntaxat causam, quae fuerat in literis commissionis expressa, super castro videlicet, stagno et molendino; ad hoc parte altera respondente, quod procuratoris factum comes ulterius impugnare non poterat, quod usque post publicationem testium minime duxerat revocandum. Iudices autem, super hinc inde propositis habito consilio discretorum, interlocuti sunt, quod super damnis datis a comite ad eos cognitio pertinebat.

Likewise,] since over all the articles about which the witnesses had deposed the suit had been solemnly contested, the judges were bound to take cognizance of them and to pronounce. [But also, as to the exception of the fief, objected too late, namely after the publication of the witnesses, he asserted that the count was not to be heard.] To these things the count’s party replied that, even if as to the damages the suit had been contested by his procurator, nevertheless from this no prejudice could be generated to him, since the procurator had not been appointed for this, but only for that cause which had been expressed in the letters of commission, namely concerning the castle, the pond, and the mill; to this the other party responding that the count could no longer impugn the act of the procurator, which he had by no means deemed to be revoked until after the publication of the witnesses. The judges, moreover, having held counsel of discreet men on the proposals on both sides, interlocuted that as to the damages inflicted by the count, cognizance belonged to them.

Quo audito comes ad appellationis beneficium convolavit. Unde ipsum iudices evocatum, et nec per se, nec per responsalem idoneum comparentem, excommunicationis vinculo adstrinxerunt, [eo tamen in contumacia perdurante, causam eandem cum attestationibus fideliter consignatis ad nostram praesentiam remiserunt. Porro procuratoribus utriusque partis propter hoc apud sedem apostolicam constitutis, procurator monasterii proposuit coram nobis, quod, quum villa de Vetenedo Virziliacensi et S. Germani Antissiodorensis monasteriis sit communis, ita quod terragium, spanagium, albergariam, censum, tertias, laudas, vendas et retentionem habeant in eadem, praedictus comes; qui nihil aliud quam duos denarios annuatim a quolibet rustico custodiae seu salvamenti nomine percipere consuevit, nunc in ipsa iurisdictionem sibi contra iustitiam usurpando, ab unoquoque villano V. solidos extorquet, in quodam loco eiusdem villae post inhibitionem tam sibi quam Hospitalariis factam, qui locum ipsum in censiva monasterii obtinebant, ab eis per commutationem recepto, castrum, stagnum et molendinum aedificando in ipsorum praeiudicium et gravamen, in nemoribus, lapidibus et rebus aliis gravibus damnis datis.

On hearing this, the count flew to the benefit of appeal. Whence the judges, having summoned him, and he appearing neither in person nor by a suitable representative, bound him with the bond of excommunication, [he nevertheless persisting in contumacy, they sent back the same cause, with the attestations faithfully consigned, to our presence. Furthermore, the proctors of each party having for this reason been established at the Apostolic See, the proctor of the monastery set forth before us that, whereas the villa of Vetenedo is common to the Virziliacensis and St. German of Auxerre monasteries, such that they have in it terrage, spanage, albergary, census, tertias, lauds, sales, and retention, the aforesaid count—who was accustomed to receive nothing other than 2 denarii annually from each rustic in the name of custody or safeguard—now, usurping jurisdiction therein to himself against justice, extorts from each villein 5 solidi; and that, in a certain place of the same villa, after an inhibition had been issued both to himself and to the Hospitallers, who held that place in the monastery’s censive, having received it from them by exchange, he is building a castle, a pond, and a mill, to their prejudice and burden, heavy damages being inflicted in the woods, stones, and other things.]

Propter quod aedificia supradicta, utpote post inhibitionem et nunciationem exstructa, idem procurator petiit demoliri, et compelli comitem supradictum a Virziliacensis monasterii super hoc molestatione cessare, super damnis datis eidem compensationem congruam exhibendo. Procurator vero comitis allegavit, quod, quum in praedicto loco de Vetenedo suae iurisdictioni subiecto perpetrarentur saepissime homicidia et rapinae, ipse volens tot et tantis obviare periculis, quandam domum in solo, quod ab Hospitalariis per commutationem acceperat, ubi domum fortem olim exstitisse didicerat, ad transeuntium securitatem construxit, quodam stagno et molendino ad opus custodum ipsius domus aedificatis ibidem. Verum abbas et conventus praedicti falso dicentes se super hoc praegravari, literas ad praedictos iudices impetrarunt, et, quum ipsis in praesentia iudicum obtulerit dictus comes, quod, si qua damna probarent se ob illa aedificia pertulisse, non solum in simplum, sed duplum ipsis damna eadem resarciret, ipsi tam hoc verbum quam etiam alias pacis species penitus respuerunt.

On account of which the aforesaid buildings, as having been constructed after inhibition and notification, the same procurator sought to have demolished, and to compel the aforesaid count to cease from molestation of the monastery of Virziliacum in this matter, by providing suitable compensation for the damages inflicted upon it. But the procurator of the count alleged that, since in the aforesaid place of Vetenedo, subject to his jurisdiction, homicides and rapines were very often being perpetrated, he, wishing to obviate so many and such perils, built a certain house on the soil which he had received from the Hospitallers by commutation, where he had learned a strong house had formerly existed, for the security of those passing through, with a certain pond and a mill constructed there for the use of the guards of that house. In truth, the aforesaid abbot and convent, falsely saying that they were excessively aggrieved over this, obtained letters to the aforesaid judges; and, when in the presence of the judges the said count offered that, if they should prove that they had suffered any damages on account of those buildings, he would make good the same damages to them not only in simple but in double, they utterly rejected both this proposal and also other forms of peace.

Quum autem per iudices fuerit in eadem causa usque ad testium publicationem processum, quoniam attestationibus publicatis apparuit, eos super multis deposuisse articulis, super quibus lis contestata non fuerat, pars comitis allegavit, quod iudices super illis cognoscere non valebant. Unde, iudicibus se de damnis datis cognoscere ac pronunciare posse interloquentibus, ad nostram fuit audientiam provocatum. Nos autem auditis iis et aliis, quae procuratores proponere curaverunt, et attestationibus utriusque partis diligenter inspectis, intelleximus pro monasterio esse probatum, in supradicta villa terragium, spanagium, albergariam, census, tertias, laudas, vendas ac retentiones ad praedicta monasteria pertinere, ac stagnum et calceria supradicta partim in proprietate Virziliacensis coenobii, et partim in ipsius et S. Germani censiva fuisse constructa.

But when in the same cause it had been proceeded by the judges up to the publication of the witnesses, since, the attestations having been published, it appeared that they had deposed upon many articles upon which the suit had not been contested, the party of the count alleged that the judges were not able to take cognizance concerning those. Whence, the judges interlocuting that they could take cognizance and pronounce concerning the damages given, an appeal was made to our hearing. But we, having heard these and other things which the procurators took care to propose, and the attestations of each party diligently inspected, understood it to have been proved for the monastery that in the aforesaid villa terragium, spanagium, albergaria, censuses, thirds, laudas, vendas, and retentions pertain to the aforesaid monasteries, and that the aforesaid pond and lime-kilns were constructed partly on the property of the Virziliacensis coenobium and partly on the censiva of it and of St. Germanus.

Item, quod Hospitalariis, qui pro praedicto loco annuum censum monasteriis exsolvebant, ne locum ipsum, censivam videlicet monasteriorum, transferrent in comitem, et comiti, ne censivam ipsam reciperet, prohibitio facta fuit. Pro parte vero comitis videbatur esse probatum, quod iustitia nemoris super fortalitia est ipsius, et quod absque cuiusquam iniuria dictus comes ad albergagium hominum ipsius villae potest concedere nemus ipsum, quodque comes ipse iustitiam habet in villa, et pro salvamento de qualibet domo villae duos denarios recipere consuevit. Item, quod in pratis Hospitalariorum est fortalitia ipsa fundata, et quod quicunque aliquid habet ad censum, illud salvo censu potest concedere cui vult.

Likewise, a prohibition was made to the Hospitallers, who were paying to the monasteries an annual rent (census) for the aforesaid place, that they not transfer the place itself—namely the censive of the monasteries—to the count, and to the count, that he not receive that censive. On the part of the count, however, it seemed to have been proven that the jurisdiction of the forest over the stronghold is his, and that, without injury to anyone, the said count can grant the wood for the albergage (billeting) of the men of his town; and that the count himself has jurisdiction in the town, and for safeguard he is accustomed to receive from each house of the town two denarii. Likewise, that the stronghold itself is founded in the meadows of the Hospitallers, and that whoever has anything ad censum may, the cens being saved, grant it to whom he wishes.

Rursus, quod in eadem villa olim fuerat dormis fortis clausa palitiis et fossatis.] Quia vero super damnis datis, antequam lis fuerit contestata, nequaquam ad dictos iudices cognitio pertinebat, quum in rescripto nulla de illis mentio haberetur, nec ad ipsos potuerit iurisdictio prorogari, quum procurator ad illa solummodo intelligatur constitutus, quae in commissionis literis inveniuntur expressa, et, postquam comes publicatis attestationibus intellexit, super his fuisse depositum, protinus contradixit, nos eosdem iudices [protinus] pronunciavimus minus iuste interlocutos fuisse, ac saepedictum comitem, qui ob hoc ad appellationis beneficium convolavit, excommunicationis sententia non fuisse ligatum. [Ceterum etc. Dat.

Again, that in the same villa there once had been a stronghouse closed with palisades and ditches.] Because indeed concerning the damages inflicted, before the suit had been contested, cognizance by the said judges by no means pertained, since in the rescript no mention of them was had, nor could jurisdiction be prorogated to them, since the procurator is understood to have been constituted only for those things which are found expressed in the letters of commission; and, after the count, when the attestations had been published, understood that deposition had been made concerning these, he forthwith objected, we pronounced those same judges [forthwith] to have interlocuted less justly, and that the oft-said count, who on this account resorted to the benefit of appeal, had not been bound by the sentence of excommunication. [Moreover etc. Given.

Later. Ao. XI. 1209.]

Lateran. Year 11. 1209.]

CAP. XXXIII.

CHAPTER 33.

Qui acta causae relationis iudicum delegatorum sigilla violando aperuit, non auditur postmodum contra illa.

He who, by violating the seals, opened the records (acta) of the cause of the relatio of the delegated judges is not thereafter heard against them.

Idem Senonensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Sens.

Quum olim ad nostram audientiam pervenisset, quod dilecti filii magister S. et B. archidiaconatum et praeposituram adinvicem commutassent [(Et infra:) [cf. c. 7. de rer. permut. III.

When once it had come to our hearing that the beloved sons, Master S. and B., had exchanged with each other the archdeaconry and the provostship [(And below:) [cf. ch. 7. on the exchange of things 3.

19.] Quia ergo super facto ipsius B. nobis non poterat de veritate constare, causam super hoc venerabilibus fratribus nostris Lingonensi et Cabilonensi episcopis sub certa forma duximus committendam. Ipsi ergo in mandati nostri exsecutione procedere cupientes, partibus ad suam praesentiam convocatis, receperunt testes utrinque productos, audierunt confessiones partium et depositiones testium publicarunt. Quumque propter quendam articulum, qui eis dubitabilis videbatur, causam ad nos remittere proposuissent instructam, gesta omnia redigentes in scriptis sub sigillis propriis incluserunt, et assignarunt partibus nobis fideliter praesentanda.] Verum supra dictus B. delegatis nostris non deferens, immo verius deleganti, sigilla violavit illorum, et scripta, quae nobis fuerant praesentanda, non erubuit aperire.

19.] Since, therefore, concerning the deed of B. himself it could not be established to us as to the truth, we judged that the case on this matter should be committed under a certain form to our venerable brothers, the bishops of Langres and of Chalon. They, therefore, wishing to proceed in the execution of our mandate, the parties having been summoned to their presence, received witnesses produced on both sides, heard the confessions of the parties, and published the depositions of the witnesses. And when, on account of a certain article which seemed doubtful to them, they had proposed to remit the case to us, instructed, reducing all the acts to writing, they enclosed them under their own seals, and assigned them to the parties to be faithfully presented to us.] But the aforesaid B., not deferring to our delegates—nay, more truly, to the delegating party—violated their seals, and did not blush to open the writings which were to be presented to us.

Qui postmodum in nostra praesentia constitutus, adversario suo praesente, in excusationem suam proposuit coram nobis, quod iudices perperam processerant contra ipsum, quum acta in scriptis minus fideliter redegissent. Unde timens, ne literas portaret Uriae, illorum scripta aperuit, et quod suspicatus fuerat adinvenit. Sane, si, quod expediret, melius notavisset, vel non recepisset scripta suspecta, vel recepta nobis fideliter praesentasset, et ostendisset causam suspicionis propositae coram nobis, praeterea quum non conquereretur de iudice, quem ei proprio motu concessimus, sed de illo potius, quem ipse duxerat eligendum, et iudices suas nobis per eum literas destinassent, de ipso pariter conquerentes, verbis ipsius fidem non duximus adhibendam; sed ut in eo saltem puniretur, in quo peccaverat, contra acta iudicum, quae temere violarat, ipsum, sicut nec debuimus, noluimus exaudire, ne videretur dolus suus ei patrocinium attulisse.

He, afterwards set in our presence, his adversary being present, put forward in his excuse before us that the judges had proceeded amiss against him, since they had rendered the acts into writings less faithfully. Wherefore, fearing lest he should carry the letters of Uriah, he opened their writings, and found what he had suspected. Truly, if he had more wisely noted what was expedient, either he would not have received the suspect writings, or, having received them, he would have faithfully presented them to us, and would have shown the cause of the suspicion proposed before us; furthermore, since he did not complain of the judge whom by our own motion we had granted to him, but rather of that one whom he himself had judged ought to be chosen, and the judges had dispatched their letters to us through him, likewise complaining of him, we did not deem his words to deserve credence; but, in order that he might at least be punished in that wherein he had sinned, we were unwilling, as indeed we ought not, to hear him against the acts of the judges, which he had rashly violated, lest his guile should seem to have brought him a patronage.

[Quum etc. (c. 7. de rer. permut.

[When etc. (ch. 7. on the exchange of things.

III. 19.) Dat. Lat.

3. 19.) Given at the Lateran.

Id. Ian. Ao. V. 1203.]

On the Ides of January, in the year 5, 1203.]

CAP. XXXIV.

CHAPTER 34.

Delegatus non tenetur admittere collegam sibi adiunctum per literas subreptitias, nec ipsius subdelegatum. Hoc dicit secundum unum intellectum. Vel sic: Delegatus subdelegatum collegae impediti non tenetur admittere, si in rescripto est clausula: "quod si ambo, etc." Hoc dicit secundum alium intellectum.

A delegate is not bound to admit a colleague joined to him by surreptitious letters, nor his subdelegate. This he says according to one understanding. Or thus: A delegate is not bound to admit the subdelegate of an impeded colleague, if in the rescript there is a clause: "but if both, etc." This he says according to another understanding.

Idem Abbati et Capellano sanctae Mariae Bononiensis.

The same to the Abbot and the Chaplain of Saint Mary of Bologna.

Coram dilecto filio nostro M. sancti Theodori diacono cardinali, quem tibi et dilecto filio H. nuncio, et clerico sanctae Agathae adversario tuo, qui cum instrumentis eiusdem ecclesiae, sed absque literis de ratihabitione, ad apostolicam sedem accesserat, sed de rato caverat sub fideiussoria cautione, concessimus auditorem, constitutus proponere curavisti, quod, quum olim quidam in parochia sanctae Mariae, post appellationem interpositam ad apostolicam sedem, in honorem beatae Agathae domum et ecclesiam construxisset, bonae memoriae Alexander Papa praedecessor noster causam super hoc T. abbati sancti Stephani, et T. priori sancti Victoris commisit fine debito terminandam; qui auditis quae fuerant hinc inde proposita, et rationibus partium diligenter inspectis, pro ecclesia S. Mariae diffinitivam sententiam protulerunt, quae per felicis recordationis Lucium, Gregorium et Clementem praedecessores nostros fuit postmodum confirmata. Verum capellanus sanctae Agathae sententiae parere contempsit, et parochianos sanctae Mariae ad ecclesiastica sacramenta recepit, et suspensus divina praesumpsit officia celebrare. Quumque super eadem causa coram venerabili fratre nostro H. Ferrariensi episcopo fere per annum disceptatum fuisset a partibus, productis testibus coram eo, pars ecclesiae sanctae Agathae, horum veritate suppressa, dilectum filium magistrum L. Bononiensem canonicum obtinuit eidem episcopo in causae decisione adiungi.

Before our beloved son M., deacon cardinal of Saint Theodore, whom we granted as auditor to you and to our beloved son H., nuncio, and to the cleric of Saint Agatha, your adversary—who had approached the apostolic see with the instruments of the same church, but without letters of ratihabition, yet had provided surety de rato under fidejussory caution—you, having appeared, took care to propose that, when once a certain man in the parish of Saint Mary, after an appeal had been interposed to the apostolic see, had constructed, in honor of blessed Agatha, a house and a church, Alexander of good memory, our predecessor the Pope, committed the cause concerning this to T., abbot of Saint Stephen, and T., prior of Saint Victor, to be brought to a due conclusion; who, after hearing what had been set forth on both sides and diligently inspecting the reasons of the parties, rendered a definitive sentence for the church of Saint Mary, which was afterward confirmed by our predecessors of happy memory Lucius, Gregory, and Clement. But the chaplain of Saint Agatha disdained to obey the sentence, and received the parishioners of Saint Mary to the ecclesiastical sacraments, and, though suspended, presumed to celebrate the divine offices. And when concerning the same cause before our venerable brother H., bishop of Ferrara, it had been litigated by the parties for nearly a year, witnesses having been produced before him, the party of the church of Saint Agatha, the truth of these being suppressed, obtained that our beloved son Master L., a Bolognese canon, be adjoined to the same bishop in the decision of the cause.

Qui quum causae interesse non posset, praedictus episcopus, cui per sequentes literas impetratas tertio mandabatur, ut, si ambo interesse non possent mandatis apostolicis exsequendis, ea ipse nihilominus adimpleret, attestationibus publicatis et rationibus plenius intellectis sententiam praedictam confirmavit, capellano S. Agathae sub poena excommunicationis iniungens, ut nullum parochianorum tuorum infra certos terminos commorantium ad officia divina vel ecclesiastica reciperet sacramenta. Ad hoc dictus Hugolinus ex adverso respondit, quod olim archipresbyter de Pastino a praedicto Alexandro praedecessore nostro indulgentiam impetravit, ut in vico Castellionis, in quo superexcreverat populi multitudo, ecclesiam de novo fundaret. Unde tunc Bononiensis episcopus de mandato eiusdem praedecessoris nostri et locum signavit, et primarium lapidem benedixit, et in fundamento secundum consuetudinem collocavit, et sic capellam in eodem loco constructam cum tota parochia, quam usque hodie habet ecclesia de Pastino, per XX. annos iuste possedit, quam felicis recordationis Coelestinus Papa praedecessor noster eis suis literis confirmavit, et nos sub nostra protectione recepimus constitutam nobis ab eodem archipresbytero censualem.

And since he could not be present to the cause, the aforesaid bishop— to whom by subsequent letters obtained it had for the third time been mandated that, if both could not be present for carrying out the apostolic mandates, he nonetheless should himself fulfill them— the attestations having been published and the reasons more fully understood, confirmed the aforesaid sentence, enjoining the chaplain of St. Agatha, under penalty of excommunication, that he should receive none of your parishioners dwelling within certain bounds to the divine offices or to receive the ecclesiastical sacraments. To this the said Hugolinus on the opposing side responded, that once the archpresbyter of Pastino obtained an indulgence from the aforesaid Alexander our predecessor, to found anew a church in the quarter of Castellionis, in which the multitude of the people had grown overmuch. Whereupon then the bishop of Bologna, by mandate of the same predecessor of ours, both marked out the place, and blessed the first stone, and placed it in the foundation according to custom, and thus the chapel constructed in the same place, with the whole parish, which the church of Pastino holds to this day, it justly possessed for 20 years, which Pope Celestine of happy memory, our predecessor, confirmed to them by his letters, and we received under our protection, it having been constituted to us as censual by the same archpresbyter.

Unde olim quidam canonicus regularis ab archipresbytero de Pastino, ut divina in eadem celebraret officia deputatus, praeter auctoritatem archipresbyteri et capituli de Pastino coram praedicto abbate S. Stephani et priore S. Victoris ab illis citatus apparuit, sed coram eis iudicium non subivit. Immo ab ipsis tanquam de ratione suspectis, quia praedictam sibi voluerant parochiam vindicare, ad nostram duxit audientiam appellandum. Iidem autem iudices non dubitantes mandati fines excedere, tam super novo quam veteri populo sententiam protulerunt, quum secundum tenorem literarum directarum ad eos non potuissent nisi de veteri iudicare.

Whence formerly a certain canon regular, by the archpriest of Pastinum deputed to celebrate the divine offices in the same, appeared, having been cited by them before the aforesaid abbot of St. Stephen and prior of St. Victor, beyond the authority of the archpriest and the chapter of Pastinum, but he did not undergo judgment before them. Nay rather, regarding them as suspected in the matter, because they had wished to vindicate the aforesaid parish for themselves, he resolved to appeal to our audience. The same judges, however, not doubting to exceed the limits of their mandate, pronounced sentence both concerning the new and the old populace, whereas according to the tenor of the letters directed to them they could have judged only regarding the old.

Postmodum vero memoratus canonicus contra voluntatem, immo prohibitionem archipresbyteri sui coram Ferrariensi episcopo comparens, sub eo aliquantulum litigavit; sed tandem comperto, quod universi familiares eius ei essent adversi, praedictum magistrum ei fecit adiungi. Nuncius vero ecclesiae sanctae Agathae inter alia proposuit, quod, quum dictus magister L. vices suas alii delegasset, episcopus admittere noluit subdelegatum; sed post appellationem ad nos legitime interpositam solus in causae cognitione processit. Unde contra primam sententiam allegabat, quod de commissione ad primos iudices impetrata ad archipresbyteri notitiam nil pervenit, quod iudices post appellationem legitime interpositam processerunt, et quia fines mandati fuerunt in processu transgressi.

Afterwards indeed the aforesaid canon, against the will—nay, the prohibition—of his archpriest, appearing before the Bishop of Ferrara, litigated under him for a little; but at length, upon its being discovered that all his familiars were adverse to him, he caused the aforesaid master to be joined to him. But the nuncio of the church of Saint Agatha, among other things, put forward that, when the said Master L. had delegated his functions to another, the bishop was unwilling to admit the subdelegate; but, after an appeal had been lawfully interposed to us, he alone proceeded in the cognition of the cause. Whence he alleged against the first sentence that nothing of the commission obtained to the first judges came to the archpriest’s knowledge, that the judges proceeded after an appeal had been lawfully interposed, and that the bounds of the mandate were transgressed in the process.

Contra secundam vero similiter proponebant, quod canonicus regularis, qui coram Ferrariensi episcopo litigavit, non solum non fuerat procurator datus ad eam, sed etiam contra prohibitionem archipresbyteri liti se praesumpserat immiscere; quod Ferrariensis episcopus solus processerat, quum non ei soli causa fuerat delegata, et collega eius, etsi causae nequiverit interesse, alii tamen commiserit vices suas, et post appellationem etiam ad nos interpositam idem Ferrariensis pro ecclesia S. Mariae sententiam promulgavit. Ad haec autem pars altera replicabat, quod praedicta stare non poterant, quum credi non debeat, quod a iudicibus illis pars appellaverit adversa, ad quos nec sciverat, nec audierat commissionis literas emanasse. Praeterea quum in literis commissionis appellationis fuisset obstaculum partibus interclusum, appellationi postmodum interpositae non fuerat deferendum.

Against the second, likewise, they alleged that the canon regular, who litigated before the Bishop of Ferrara, had not only not been appointed as procurator for that cause, but had even presumed to mix himself in the suit against the prohibition of the archpresbyter; that the Bishop of Ferrara proceeded alone, whereas the cause had not been delegated to him alone, and his colleague, although he was not able to be present to the cause, had nevertheless committed his vicarious functions to another; and that even after an appeal to us had been interposed, that same Bishop of Ferrara promulgated sentence for the church of St. Mary. To these things, however, the other party replied that the aforesaid could not stand, since it ought not to be believed that the opposing party had appealed from those judges to whom it had neither known nor heard that letters of commission had issued. Moreover, since in the letters of commission an obstacle to appeal had been intercluded to the parties, deference was not to be paid to the appeal afterwards interposed.

Insuper, quum, sicut adversarius fuit in iure confessus, et si pars eius, qui, ut prosequeretur appellationem, literas impetraret, non tamen illis fuerit usa, pro eodem haberi debebat, ac si non fuerit prosecuta. Unde sententia iam transierat in rei iudicatae auctoritatem, etiamsi contra ius litigantis prolata fuisset. Quum autem nec literae commissionis ad iudices primos obtentae praesententur in iure, nec aliter legitime demonstretur formam mandati iudices excessisse, pro sententia potius est praesumendum.

Moreover, since, as the adversary confessed in court, even if his party, which had impetrated letters in order to prosecute the appeal, nevertheless did not use them, it ought to be held the same as if it had not been prosecuted. Whence the sentence had already passed into the authority of res judicata, even if it had been pronounced against the right of the litigant. Since, however, neither are the letters of commission obtained to the first judges produced in law, nor is it otherwise lawfully shown that the judges exceeded the form of the mandate, a presumption rather is to be made in favor of the sentence.

Quod dicitur ex adverso, quod canonicus ille non fuerit procurator, non nocet, quum ipse litem coram Ferrariensi episcopo contestando factus fuerit dominus litis, qui generalis ab ipsius fundatione ecclesiae procurator fuerat, et sic agebat et contrahebat, ac si vere capellae dominus exstitisset, praesertim quum in causam non tam ecclesiae nomine, quam proprio traheretur, utpote qui parochianos adiudicatos ecclesiae S. Mariae ad divina recipiebat officia, et exhibebat eis ecclesiastica sacramenta. Praeterea, quum ad archipresbyteri notitiam pervenisset, causam ipsam fuisse Ferrariensi episcopo delegatam, si per canonicum illum nolebat subire iudicium, ad causam agendam debuerat alium destinare. Quod quum non fecerit, eius est negligentiae imputandum, immo malitiae potius, qui sic commissionem nostram nisus fuerit enervare.

What is said on the opposing side, that that canon was not a procurator, does not harm, since he himself, by contesting the suit before the bishop of Ferrara, had been made lord of the suit, who had been general procurator of the church from its very foundation, and thus he acted and transacted as if he had truly been lord of the chapel, especially since he was drawn into the case not so much in the church’s name as in his own, inasmuch as he was receiving for the divine offices the parishioners adjudged to the church of St. Mary, and was administering to them the ecclesiastical sacraments. Moreover, when it had come to the archpriest’s knowledge that the case itself had been delegated to the bishop of Ferrara, if he did not wish to undergo judgment through that canon, he ought to have designated another to conduct the case. Since he did not do this, it is to be imputed to his negligence—nay rather, to malice—that he thus strove to enervate our commission.

Sed econtra fuit responsum, quod Ferrariensis episcopus solus procedere potuit, quum primum coram eo lis fuerit contestata et testes ad causam producti, et in ultimae commissionis literis fuisset insertum, quod, si ambo interesse non possent exsequendis mandatis apostolicis, praedictus episcopus ea nihilominus exsequi procuraret. Quod non intelligitur, ut, si per se, vel per alios interesse non possent, quia id raro vel nunquam contingeret, sed si non posset personaliter interesse. Appellationi ergo interpositae ob causas praedictas, quum causae sufficientes non essent, aliquatenus non erat deferendum.

But on the contrary it was responded that the Bishop of Ferrara could proceed alone, since first the suit had been joined before him and witnesses produced for the cause, and in the letters of the latest commission it had been inserted that, if both could not be present for executing the apostolic mandates, the aforesaid bishop should nevertheless take care to execute them. This is not to be understood as meaning that they could not be present either by themselves or through others—for that would rarely or never occur—but that he could not be present personally. Therefore, to the appeal interposed for the aforesaid reasons, since the causes were not sufficient, there was not to be deferred in any measure.

Idem igitur cardinalis, auditis his et aliis, quae fuerunt hinc inde proposita, latam ab eodem Ferrariensi episcopo sententiam de mandato apostolico confirmavit, et adversae parti super hoc perpetuum silentium duxit imponendum. Nos ergo quod ab eo factum est auctoritate apostolica confirmamus, et praesentis scripti patrocinio communimus.

The same Cardinal therefore, having heard these and other things which were proposed on both sides, confirmed the sentence delivered by that same Bishop of Ferrara by apostolic mandate, and held that perpetual silence should be imposed upon the adverse party on this point. We therefore confirm by apostolic authority what was done by him, and we strengthen it with the patronage of this present writing.

CAP. XXXV.

CHAPTER 35.

Locus, ad quem reus secure accedere non potest, et canonicus in causa concanonici delegatus, recusari poterit.

A place to which the defendant cannot safely approach, and a canon delegated in the case of a fellow-canon, may be recused.

Idem Praeposito S. Dominici Subdiacono nostro.

The same to the Provost of St. Dominic, our Subdeacon.

Quum R. canonicus Ianuensis causam pecuniariam, quae inter ipsum ex una parte, ac P. civem Ianuensem ex altera vertitur, tibi obtinuerit delegari, et idem civis, propter multas et graves inimicitias civitatis suae in tua nequeat praesentia comparere, sicut ex ipsius et dilectorum filiorum consulum Ianuensium insinuatione nobis innotuit: discretioni tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus supradicto R. huiusmodi optionem relinquas, ut exceptis canonicis Ianuensibus, quos, quum sint eius socii, merito habet pars adversa suspectos, in civitate vel dioecesi Ianuensi, in qua sunt multi, sicut pro certo tenemus, viri providi, iudicem eligat, coram quo quaestio terminetur, cui auctoritate nostra districte praecipias, ut eandem causam iuxta rescripti a te obtenti tenorem appellatione remota fine debito terminare procuret.

Since R., a Genoese canon, has obtained that a pecuniary cause, which is pending between himself on the one side and P., a Genoese citizen, on the other, be delegated to you; and since that same citizen, on account of the many and grave enmities of his city, cannot appear in your presence, as has become known to us from the intimation of himself and of the beloved sons, the consuls of Genoa: we command to your discretion by apostolic writings that you leave to the aforesaid R. an option of this kind, namely, that—excepting the Genoese canons, whom, since they are his associates, the opposing party rightly holds as suspect—he may choose in the city or diocese of Genoa, in which there are many, as we hold for certain, prudent men, a judge before whom the question may be terminated; to whom you shall by our authority strictly enjoin that he procure to bring the same cause to its due end, with appeal removed, according to the tenor of the rescript obtained by you.

CAP. XXXVI.

CHAPTER 36.

Si mandatur iudici delegato, ut illum absolvat, qui dicit se iniuste excommunicatum, ante probationem illum absolvere debet. Si autem dicat excommunicationem nullam, probationem nullitatis ante pronunciationem admittet.

If it is mandated to a delegated judge that he absolve one who says he has been unjustly excommunicated, he ought to absolve him before proof. But if he says the excommunication is null, he will admit proof of nullity before pronouncement.

Idem Rothomagensi Archiepiscopo.

The same. To the Archbishop of Rouen.

Quum contingat interdum, quod laici (Et infra: cf. c. 24. de rescr. I. 3.) Insuper requisiti sumus, quum quis conqueritur in se a suo episcopo post appellationem ad nos legitime interpositam, vel alias iniuste excommunicationis sententiam promulgatam, et nos iudicibus damus nostris literis in mandatis, ut, si est ita, vel iuxta formam ecclesiae absolutionis beneficium illi impendant, vel eandem sententiam denuncient esse nullam, ac episcopus paratus sit probare, se in illum, antequam vocem appellationis emitteret, vel alias iuste huiusmodi sententiam protulisse, an probationibus non admissis liceat iudicibus excommunicatum absolvere, vel denunciare sententiam esse nullam? Ad quod tibi taliter respondemus, quod super iam dicto casu non consuevimus, si bene meminimus, sub praescripta forma iudicibus scribere, sed sub ista, ut videlicet, si excommunicationis sententiam post appellationem ad nos legitime interpositam invenerint esse latam, ipsam denunciantes penitus nullam esse, audiant, si quid fuerit quaestionis; alioquin recepta iuxta formam ecclesiae cautione impendant absolutionis beneficium conquerenti, et iniuncto sibi quod de iure fuerit iniungendum, audiant causam, et eandem fine debito terminare procurent.

Since it happens sometimes that laymen (And below: cf. ch. 24 on rescripts, 1. 3.) Moreover we have been asked, when someone complains that his own bishop, after an appeal to us has been lawfully interposed, or otherwise unjustly, has promulgated a sentence of excommunication, and we give judges by our letters a mandate that, if it is so, they should either bestow upon him the benefice of absolution according to the form of the church, or denounce that sentence as null; and the bishop is prepared to prove that against him, before he uttered the word of appeal, or otherwise justly, he had brought forth such a sentence—whether, with the proofs not yet admitted, it is licit for the judges to absolve the excommunicate, or to denounce the sentence as null? To which we thus answer you, that in the already said case we are not accustomed, if we remember well, to write to judges under the prescribed form, but under this: namely, that if they find that the sentence of excommunication was carried after an appeal to us had been lawfully interposed, declaring it to be altogether null, let them hear, if there shall be anything of question; otherwise, a caution having been received according to the form of the church, let them bestow the benefice of absolution upon the complainant, and, with that enjoined upon him which by law ought to be enjoined, let them hear the cause, and take care to terminate the same with its due end.

Sed si forsan appareat, nos in iam dicto casu sub praenotata quandoque forma scripsisse, in altero utique casuum praedictorum, quum quis videlicet conqueritur, se post appellationem ad nos legitime interpositam excommunicatione fuisse innodatum, semper utriusque partis probationes sunt admittendae, antequam ad decernendum super hoc aliquid procedatur, per quas denique apparebit, an absolutione indigeat conquerens, vel denunciandus sit potius non ligatus. In eo vero casu, quum videlicet excommunicatum quis se asserit iniuste, vix vel nunquam est eius, antequam absolutus fuerit, probatio admittenda, nisi tunc tantum, quum asserit in excommunicationis sententia intolerabilem errorem fuisse patenter expressum, ad quod probandum admittitur antequam absolutionis gratiam consequatur. Verum si proponat, se simpliciter excommunicatum iniuste, ac episcopus ad probandum, quod iuste ipsum excommunicavit, suas postulet probationes admitti, non est ante absolutionem ipsius aliquatenus audiendus, quum, etsi pro certo constaret, rationabiliter in illum excommunicationis sententiam promulgatam, nihilominus esset ei absolutio secundum formam ecclesiae impendenda humiliter postulanti.

But if perhaps it should appear that we have sometimes written, in the already-mentioned case, under the aforesaid form, then in the other of the aforesaid cases—namely, when someone complains that, after an appellation to us has been lawfully interposed, he was entangled by excommunication—the proofs of both parties must always be admitted before proceeding to decree anything on this matter; through which it will finally appear whether the complainant needs absolution, or rather ought to be denounced as not bound. In that case, however, when someone asserts that he has been unjustly excommunicated, scarcely or never is his proof to be admitted before he has been absolved, except only when he asserts that in the sentence of excommunication an intolerable error was openly expressed; to prove which he is admitted before he obtains the grace of absolution. But if he alleges that he has simply been unjustly excommunicated, and the bishop, in order to prove that he justly excommunicated him, requests that his proofs be admitted, he is not at all to be heard before the other’s absolution, since, even if it were certainly established that the sentence of excommunication had been reasonably promulgated against him, nonetheless absolution, according to the form of the Church, would have to be bestowed upon him when he humbly requests it.

Et ideo in hoc casu illum credimus iuxta formam ecclesiae protinus absolvendum, ut sic demum, probationibus utriusque partis admissis, utrum iuste vel iniuste ligatus fuerit, decernatur. [Dat. Lat.

And therefore in this case we believe that he ought forthwith to be absolved according to the form of the Church, so that only then, with the proofs of both parties admitted, it may be decreed whether he was bound justly or unjustly. [Given at Lat.

Kal. Sept. Ao. XIII.

Kalends of September, in the year 13.

1210.]

CAP. XXXVII.

CHAPTER 37.

Si subdelegatus delegati Papae iurisdictione uti coeperit, a delegato removeri non potest; et si fecerit contra mandatum, sive excesserit formam rescripti, processus est nullus.

If a subdelegate shall have begun to use the jurisdiction of a delegate of the Pope, he cannot be removed by the delegate; and if he should act against the mandate, or exceed the form of the rescript, the proceeding is null.

Honorius III. Messanensi et Reginensi Archiepiscopis.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishops of Messina and Reggio.

Venerabili fratri nostro archiepiscopo Cusentino nostris dedimus literis in mandatis, ut venerabilem fratrem nostrum Cephaludensem episcopum restitui faceret ad episcopatum, et ad alia, quibus fuerat indebite spoliatus; quo restituto plenarie, et corporalem ac pacificam possessionem adepto, si videret, quod idem, episcopus merito esset, prout nobis suggestum fuerat, de dilapidatione suspectus, virum providum et honestum provideret coadiutorem eidem adiungere, sine cuius consilio nihil eorum faceret, quae ad administrationem pertinent temporalem, quoadusque veritate comperta duceremus aliter providendum, interim omne alienationis genus eorum utrique auctoritate nostra districtius interdicens. Porro idem archiepiscopus corporis infirmitate gravatus, commisit in huiusmodi negotio vices suas primo abbati sancti Spiritus de Panormo, ac demum thesaurario Cusentino. Quorum processus nobis exhibitos de fratrum nostrorum consilio cassavimus iustitia exigente, quia videlicet abbas contra mandati nostri tenorem ad inquirendum, utrum de dilapidatione suspectus esset episcopus, eo non restituto processit, et archiepiscopus ipse, quum iam suo functus esset officio dicto abbati committendo in integrum vices suas, huiusmodi negotium dicto thesaurario non potuit demandare.

To our venerable brother the archbishop of Cosenza we gave by our letters in mandate, that he should cause our venerable brother the bishop of Cefalù to be restored to the bishopric, and to the other things of which he had been unduly despoiled; and, he being restored in full, and having obtained corporal and pacific possession, if he should see that the same bishop was, as had been suggested to us, deservedly suspected of dilapidation, he should provide to join to him a coadjutor, a prudent and honest man, without whose counsel he should do nothing of those things which pertain to temporal administration, until, the truth having been ascertained, we should judge that provision ought otherwise to be made, in the meantime most strictly forbidding by our authority to both any kind of alienation of those things. Furthermore, the same archbishop, burdened by infirmity of body, committed in a matter of this kind his functions first to the abbot of the Holy Spirit of Palermo, and finally to the treasurer of Cosenza. The processes of whom, exhibited to us, we, by the counsel of our brethren, annulled, justice requiring, because namely the abbot, against the tenor of our mandate, proceeded to inquire whether the bishop were suspected of dilapidation, he not having been restored; and the archbishop himself, since he had already discharged his office by committing in entirety his functions to the said abbot, could not entrust a matter of this kind to the said treasurer.

CAP. XXXVIII.

CHAPTER 38.

Si delegatus pronunciaverit, se iurisdictionem non habere, ipsam etiam de consensu partium non reassumit.

If a delegate shall have pronounced that he does not have jurisdiction, he does not reassume it even by the consent of the parties.

Gregorius IX. S. Praecentori et Magistro N. canonico Ambianensibus.

Gregory IX. To the Precentor and to Master N., canon of Amiens.

Significantibus M. muliere et F. nato eius nos noveritis accepisse, quod, quum nobilis mulier I. vidua, mentiens se pauperem, contra eos super terris et rebus aliis ad iudices nostras literas impetrasset, iidem coram eis excipiendo proponere curaverunt, quod, quum dictae literae suggesto mendacio impetratae fuissent, quum praedicta Iuliana, quae nobilis est et dives, pauperem se dixisset in eis, coram ipsis, nisi requisito prius domino, sub cuius iurisdictione ipsi consistunt, et coram quo parati erant eidem exhibere iustitiae complementum, non debebant de iure per tales literas conveniri, unde dicti iudices interloquendo pronunciarunt, se per easdem literas procedere non debere. (Et infra:) Demum fuit a partibus in quosdam tanquam in arbitros taliter compromissum, quod, si infra terminum in compromisso expressum causam non deciderent, partes ad eorundem iudicum redirent examen. Verum arbitris causam infra terminum negligentibus terminare, dicti iudices iurisdictionem per formam compromissi huiusmodi resumpserunt, a quibus iidem se sentientes gravari, quod super his, super quibus ab eis fuerant absoluti, litigare compellebant eosdem, ad nostram audientiam appellarunt.

You should know that, upon M., a woman, and F., her son, signifying, we have received that, when the noble woman I., a widow, feigning herself poor, had obtained our letters to judges against them concerning lands and other things, the same, by way of exception, took care to set forth before them that, since the said letters had been obtained upon a mendacious suggestion—since the aforesaid Juliana, who is noble and wealthy, had called herself poor in them—they ought not in law to be convened before those judges by such letters unless the lord, under whose jurisdiction they stand, had first been applied to, and before whom they were prepared to exhibit to her the complement of justice; wherefore the said judges, interlocuting, pronounced that they ought not to proceed by those same letters. (And below:) Finally, there was by the parties a compromise into certain persons as arbiters in such manner that, if within the term expressed in the compromise they should not decide the cause, the parties should return to the examination of those same judges. But the arbiters being negligent to terminate the cause within the term, the said judges resumed jurisdiction by the form of such a compromise; from whom the same, feeling themselves aggrieved, because they were compelling them to litigate concerning those matters on which they had been absolved by them, appealed to our audience.

Ideoque mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, revocetis in irritum, etc.

And therefore we command that, insofar as it is so, you revoke into nullity, etc.

CAP. XXXIX.

CHAPTER 39.

Arbitri electi ad causam recusationis, assignant partibus terminum ad probandam causam suspicionis, et iudex recusatus compellit arbitros ad causam finiendam.

The arbiters chosen for the cause of recusation assign to the parties a term for proving the cause of suspicion, and the recused judge compels the arbiters to bring the cause to an end.

Idem.

The same.

Suspicionis causa contra iudicem assignata, non ipse qui forsan provocatus obesset, sed arbitri potius, coram quibus probatio est facienda, et ad quos omnia, quae ad hunc articulum faciunt, pertinere noscuntur, possunt ad hoc terminum assignare. Ab ipso quoque iudice, cui sicut iurisdictio, sic et cetera, sine quibus explicari causa non potest, intelliguntur esse commissa, iidem ut conveniant, si discordes fuerint, in unam sententiam, vel tertium concorditer advocent, cum quo duo vel alter eorum id faciat, sunt cogendi, ne huiusmodi occasione principale negotium plus debito prorogetur.

The cause of suspicion having been assigned against the judge, not he himself, who perhaps, being appealed, would be a hindrance, but rather the arbiters, before whom the proof is to be made, and to whom all things which pertain to this article are known to belong, can assign a term for this. By the judge himself also, to whom, just as jurisdiction, so also the other things, without which the cause cannot be explicated, are understood to have been committed, the same are to be compelled, that, if they should be at variance, they may agree into one sentence, or unanimously call in a third, with whom two, or one of them, may do this, lest on such an occasion the principal business be prolonged beyond what is due.

CAP. XL.

CHAPTER 40.

Delegata iurisdictio ad personas, non expressas in rescripto, etiam de ipsarum consensu prorogari non potest.

Delegated jurisdiction to persons not expressed in the rescript cannot be prorogated even by their own consent.

Idem Abbati sanctae Genovefae.

The same to the Abbot of St. Genevieve.

P. et G. per literas apostolicas conquerentibus coram te de episcopo Londonensi, quod concessum ab eis mutuum promisso loco et termino non persolvit, pendente iudicio I. laicus, qui in quantitate quadam eisdem mercatoribus tenebatur, in se tuam iurisdictionem, sicut asserit, voluit prorogare, ut, si infra terminum constitutum praedictam non solveret quantitatem, excommunicationis et interdicti sententias in personam et terram eius promulgares. Quas huiusmodi occasione a te latas decernimus non valere, quum, etsi alias iurisdictioni praeesse dicaris, quia in dictum I. nullam iurisdictionem habebas, iurisdictionis prorogatio nulla noscitur exstitisse, quum huiusmodi delegata iurisdictio ad alias personas nequeat prorogari.

P. and G., by apostolic letters complaining before you about the bishop of London, that a loan granted by them he did not pay at the promised place and term, while the suit was pending I., a layman, who was bound to those same merchants in a certain amount, wished, as he asserts, to prorogue to himself your jurisdiction, so that, if within the appointed term he should not pay the aforesaid amount, you would promulgate sentences of excommunication and interdict upon his person and land. Which, issued by you on such an occasion, we decree not to be valid, since, although you may be said otherwise to preside over jurisdiction, because with respect to the said I. you had no jurisdiction, a prorogation of jurisdiction is known not to have existed, since such delegated jurisdiction cannot be prorogated to other persons.

CAP. XLI.

CHAPTER 41.

Maior XX. annis potest a quocunque dari delegatus; idem in maiori XVIII., dummodo interveniat consensus partium. Minor vero XVIII. non potest dari, nisi a principe.

One over 20. years may be appointed as delegate by anyone; the same for one over 18., provided the consent of the parties intervenes. But one under 18. cannot be appointed, except by the prince.

Idem.

The same.

Quum vigesimum annum peregeris, dari potuisti in aetate huiusmodi delegatus. Ceterum constituto infra aetatem eandem, nisi partes scienter consentirent in eum, qui annum XVIII. transscendisset, facta delegatio ab alio, quam a principe, non teneret.

When you have completed your 20th year, you could be appointed as a delegate at such an age. Moreover, if someone were appointed below that same age, unless the parties knowingly consented to one who had passed the 18th year, a delegation made by anyone other than the prince would not be binding.

CAP. XLII.

CHAPTER 42.

Potestas plurium delegatorum vel arbitrorum simpliciter datorum exspirat per mortem unius.

The authority of several delegates or arbiters simply appointed expires upon the death of one.

Idem.

The same.

Uno delegatorum vel arbitrorum, sicut proponis, rebus humanis exempto, eorum officium exspiravit, nisi aliud in delegatione aut compromisso fuisset expressum.

With one of the delegates or arbiters, as you propose, removed from human affairs, their office has expired, unless something else had been expressed in the delegation or in the compromise.

CAP. XLIII.

CHAPTER 43.

Delegatus Papae subdelegare potest, licet datus sit ex officio, vel de partium consensu, vel cum clausula praeelectionis, videlicet: "quod si non omnes, tu cum alio exsequaris, etc." Hoc dicit usque ad § Is autem. ñ § 1. Is, cui committitur negotium, ut personaliter exsequatur, potest, si partes consentiunt, alteri subdelegare. Fallit in casibus hic expressis.

The delegate of the Pope can subdelegate, although he may have been appointed ex officio, or by the consent of the parties, or with the clause of preelection, namely: “that if not all, you with another may carry it out, etc.” He says this up to § Is autem. ñ § 1. He to whom the business is committed, to execute it personally, can, if the parties consent, subdelegate to another. This admits of exception in the cases expressed here.

Hoc dicit usque ad § Ceterum. ñ § 2. Is, cui committitur nudum ministerium exsequendum, non potest vices suas alteri committere; fallit in legato sedis apostolicae. Et est textus notabilis, et multum allegatur.

This he says up to § Ceterum. ñ § 2. He to whom a bare ministry is committed to be executed cannot commit his vicarious functions to another; it fails in the legate of the Apostolic See. And it is a notable text, and much alleged (cited).

Abb. Siculus.

Sicilian Abbot.

Idem.

The same.

Quoniam apostolica sedes intendit providere negotiis, et non personis, quibus eadem committuntur, si iudex tertius, licet ex officio nostro, vel de assensu partium pro communi a nobis datus eisdem, alii delegaverit vices suas, quum delegato a principe id concedatur a iure, delegatio valebit ipsius. Idem quoque dicendum est, quum mandatur episcopo, ut cum altero suorum coniudicum mandatum apostolicum exsequatur, et tunc sine subdelegato ab ipso episcopo reliqui duo procedere non valebunt. § 1. Is autem, cui iniungitur, ut personaliter negotium exsequatur, potest, dummodo partes consentiant, hoc aliis delegare, praeterquam si inquisitionem fieri, vel ecclesiis de praelatis vel aliis ministris provideri mandaremus, quum in his omnibus casibus industriam et fidem personae, cui talia committimus, eligere videamur.

Since the apostolic see intends to provide for the affairs, and not for the persons to whom the same are committed, if a third judge, although by our office, or given by us with the assent of the parties for the common matter, shall have delegated his functions to another, since to one delegated by a prince this is granted by law, his delegation will be valid. The same must also be said when it is mandated to a bishop that he execute the apostolic mandate with one of his co-judges, and then, without a subdelegate from the bishop himself, the remaining two will not be able to proceed. § 1. But he to whom it is enjoined to execute the business personally can, provided the parties consent, delegate this to others, except if we were to mandate that an inquisition be made, or that provision be made to churches concerning prelates or other ministers, since in all these cases we seem to choose the industry and fidelity of the person to whom we commit such things.

§ 2. Ceterum, salva legatorum sedis apostolicae auctoritate, nulli, cui commissum fuerit praedicare crucem, excommunicare vel absolvere aliquos, dispensare cum irregularibus, vel iniungere poenitentias, liceat haec de cetero aliis demandare, quia non sibi iurisdictio, sed certum ministerium potius committitur in hac parte.

§ 2. Moreover, saving the authority of the legates of the Apostolic See, let it be permitted to no one to whom it has been committed to preach the cross, to excommunicate or absolve some, to dispense with irregulars, or to enjoin penances, to hand over these things henceforth to others, because in this matter not jurisdiction itself, but rather a certain ministry is committed to him.

TITULUS XXX. DE OFFICIO LEGATI.

TITLE 30. ON THE OFFICE OF THE LEGATE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Legatus Papa etiam per simplicem querelam adiri potest.

The legate of the Pope can also be approached by a simple complaint.

Alexander III. universis Suffraganeis Cantuariensis ecclesiae.

Alexander 3. To all the Suffragans of the Church of Canterbury.

Quum non ignoretis, venerabilem fratrem nostrum Cantuariensem archiepiscopum vobis non solum metropolitico, sed etiam legationis iure praeesse, mirabile satis est, quod quidam vestrum, sicut audivimus, asseverare praesumunt, quod idem archiepiscopus nullam causam de episcopatibus vestris sive metropoleos sive legationis iure debeat audire, nisi per appellationem ad ipsum deferatur. Sane licet forte idem archiepiscopus metropolitico iure audire non debeat causas de episcopatibus vestris, nisi per appellationem deferantur ad eum, legationis tamen obtentu universas causas de ipsis episcopatibus, quae per appellationem vel querimoniam aliquorum perveniunt ad suam audientiam, audire potest et debet, sicut qui in provincia sua vices nostras gerere comprobatur. Mandamus itaque et praecipimus, ut causas quae de episcopatibus vestris ad eundem archiepiscopum proferuntur, eius iudicio relinquatis nec quemlibet clericum vel laicum vestrae iurisdictionis deterrere vel impedire tentetis, quominus causam ad praefatum Archiepiscopum, si voluerit, possit transferre.

Since you are not unaware that our venerable brother, the Archbishop of Canterbury, presides over you not only by metropolitan right but also by the right of legation, it is quite astonishing that certain of you, as we have heard, presume to assert that the same archbishop ought to hear no case concerning your bishoprics, whether by metropolitan or legatine right, unless it be brought before him by appeal. Indeed, although perhaps that same archbishop ought not by metropolitan right to hear cases concerning your bishoprics unless they are brought by appeal to him, nevertheless by virtue of his legation he can and ought to hear all cases concerning those bishoprics which by appeal or by the complaint of some persons come to his hearing, as one who in his province is proved to carry our vicarious office. We therefore mandate and prescribe that you leave to his judgment the cases which concerning your bishoprics are brought before the same archbishop, and that you not attempt to deter or impede any cleric or layman of your jurisdiction, so that he may be able to transfer his case to the aforesaid Archbishop, if he should wish.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

De causa specialiter delegata a Papa legatus se intromittere non potest.

A legate cannot intermeddle in a case specially delegated by the Pope.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

Studuisti a nobis quaerere utrum de causa, quam alicui delegamus, alius, qui sit generalis in provincia legatus, vel ante cognitionem, vel postea cognoscere valeat, vel commissionis nostrae processum, quem iudici delegato transmittimus, taliter impedire. Hanc itaque dubitationem de animo tuo amputare volentes Respondemus, quod, quum mandatum speciale derogat generali, legatus commissionem alii vel aliis factam specialiter impedire non debet nec potest, unde, et si secundum formam expressam mandati nostri sententia iam fuerit promulgata, non poterit ipse legatus, nisi super hoc mandatum speciale receperit, eam quomodolibet irritare. Ipsam tamen, si rationabiliter lata fuerit, confirmare valebit et exsecutioni mandare.

You have been eager to ask from us whether, concerning a case which we delegate to someone, another who is a general legate in the province may be able, either before the hearing or afterwards, to take cognizance of it, or to impede in such a way the course of our commission which we transmit to the delegated judge. Wishing, therefore, to cut off this doubt from your mind, we reply that, since a special mandate derogates from a general one, a legate ought not and cannot specially impede a commission made to another or others; and hence, even if, according to the express form of our mandate, a sentence has already been promulgated, that legate will not be able, unless he receives a special mandate on this point, to invalidate it in any way. Nevertheless, if it has been reasonably delivered, he will be able to confirm it and to command its execution.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Legatus etiam de latere ex generali legatione non potest transferre episcopos, vel unam ecclesiam cathedralem alteri subiicere, et alteri concedere ius primatiae, vel duos episcopatus unire, vel unum dividere; excommunicatos tamen propter manuum iniectionem in clericos absolvere potest. Hoc dicit cum c. seq.

A legate from the side, too, from a general legation, cannot transfer bishops, or subject one cathedral church to another and grant to another the right of primacy, or unite two bishoprics, or divide one; yet he can absolve those excommunicated on account of laying hands upon clerics. This he says together with the following chapter.

Innocentius III. tit. sancti Laurentii in Lucina Presbytero cardinali, sedis apostolicae Legato.

Innocent 3. to the Cardinal Presbyter of the title of Saint Lawrence in Lucina, Legate of the Apostolic See.

Nisi specialis illa dilectio, quam ad personam tuam habuimus et habemus, iustum, immo iustissimum motum animi nostri temperaret, poena docente cognosceres, quantum in personam tuam excesseris, quantumcunquae in Romanam ecclesiam deliqueris, matrem tuam, quae quum te nutriverit et exaltaverit, tu eam penitus sprevisse videris, qui spretis canonicis sanctionibus et consuetudine generali, motu proprio praesumpsisti, quod nec factum fuit, nec auditum, venerabilem fratrem nostrum Troianum episcopum regni Siciliae cancellarium praeter speciale mandatum nostrum de Troiana ecclesia ad Panormitanam de facto, quia de iure non potuisti, transferre. [Sane etc. cf. c. 3. de usu et auct.

Unless that special affection which we have had and still have toward your person were tempering the just, nay the most just, movement of our mind, you would learn, with penalty as your teacher, how far you have exceeded against your person, and howsoever much you have offended against the Roman Church, your mother, who, although she has nourished you and exalted you, you seem to have utterly despised her; you who, the canonical sanctions and the general consuetude spurned, by your own motion presumed—a thing which has neither been done nor heard—to transfer our venerable brother Troianus, bishop, chancellor of the kingdom of Sicily, without our special mandate, from the Church of Troia to that of Palermo de facto, because de iure you could not. [Indeed, etc.; cf. ch. 3, On Use and Authority.]

pall. I. 8.]

pall. 1. 8.]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Summatum fuit supra in cap. praecedenti.

It was summed up above in the preceding chapter.

Idem eidem.

The same to the same.

Quod translationem pontificis de Troiano episcopatu ad Panormitanam metropolim a te factam nolumus ratam habere, zelus utique non amaritudinis, sed rectitudinis nos induxit, quia, Licet in regno Siciliae generalis sit tibi commissa legatio, ad ea tamen sine speciali mandato nostro non debuisti manus extendere, quae in signum privilegii singularis sunt tantum summo Pontifici reservata. Tamen Et si quaedam ex his, quae de speciali concessione saepe fuere legatis indulta, ut illorum videlicet absolutio, qui propter sacrilegas manuum iniectiones in clericos, incidunt in canonem promulgatae sententiae, videantur ex ipso legationis officio iam licere legatis, an existimas, quia vices nostras tanquam legato tibi commisimus exsequendas, quod Panormitanam ecclesiam posses subiicere Messanensi, ut illam praeficeres isti, concesso sibi privilegio primatiae? An putas, ex eadem causa tibi licere, duos episcopatus unire, vel unum dividere sine licentia speciali?

That we do not wish to hold ratified the translation of the pontiff from the Trojan episcopate to the Panormitan metropolis done by you, zeal indeed not of bitterness but of rectitude has induced us, because, Although in the kingdom of Sicily a general legation has been committed to you, nevertheless you ought not, without our special mandate, to have stretched forth your hands to those things which, as a sign of a singular privilege, are reserved only to the Supreme Pontiff. However And if certain of those things which by special concession have often been granted by indult to legates—namely the absolution of those who, on account of sacrilegious layings-on of hands upon clerics, fall under the canon of a promulgated sentence—seem from the very office of the legation now to be permitted to legates, do you suppose that, because we entrusted to you, as legate, our functions to be executed, you could subject the Panormitan church to the Messanensian, so that you would set that one over this one, the privilege of primacy having been granted to it? Or do you think, for the same cause, that it is permitted to you to unite two episcopates, or to divide one without special license?

Non ergo in eius odium, vel ad iniuriam tui reputes esse factum, sed ut privilegium Petri maneat inconcussum, quum et felicis memoriae Alexander Papa, praedecessor noster, quasi simile fecerit, obviando praesumptioni legati, quem in Hispaniam destinarat, volenti simile attentare. [Super eo vero etc. cf. c. 11. de temp.

Therefore, do not reckon that it was done out of hatred toward him, or as an injury to you, but so that the privilege of Peter may remain unshaken, since even Pope Alexander of happy memory, our predecessor, did something nearly similar, by countering the presumption of the legate whom he had dispatched to Spain, when he was wishing to attempt something similar. [On this matter indeed, etc., cf. c. 11, on temp.]

ord. I. 11.]

ord. 1. 11.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Ex quo legatus retulit causam Papae, illius desinit esse iudex.

From the time that the legate has reported the Pope’s case, he ceases to be its judge.

Idem Bononiensi Episcopo et M. Capellano, Subdiacono nostro.

The same to the Bishop of Bologna and to M., Chaplain, our Subdeacon.

Licet Tranenses canonici ab initio dissensissent, tandem tamen omnes unanimiter consenserunt, dilectum filium G. fratrem Cassinensis abbatis in archiepiscopum eligentes, cuius electionem venerabilis frater noster Portuensis episcopus, tunc apostolicae sedis legatus, examinari praecepit, et examinationem redactam in scriptis fecit sigillis dilectorum filiorum archidiaconi et magistri Petrarchae muniri, cum suo quoque sigillo ad sedem apostolicam transmittendam. Literas quoque suas nobis pro dicto fratre Cassinensis abbatis deprecatorias destinavit, quas cum decreto electionis omnium canonicorum subscriptionibus roborato, nec non et literis suffraganeorum et populi, tres de canonicis Tranensis ecclesiae, ab universo capitulo destinati, nobis humiliter praesentarunt, petentes electionem canonicam de persona idonea celebratam auctoritate apostolica confirmari. Nos autem ad maiorem cautelam a praedictis canonicis in iuramentum recepimus, non a nobis exactum, sed ab ipsis oblatum, et factum electionis, sicut est et moris et iuris, examinavimus diligenter.

Although the canons of Trani had dissented at the beginning, yet at length they all consented unanimously, choosing as archbishop our beloved son G., brother of the Abbot of Cassino; and our venerable brother, the Bishop of Porto, then legate of the Apostolic See, ordered the election to be examined, and had the examination reduced into writings, and fortified with the seals of our beloved sons the archdeacon and Master Petrarcha, to be transmitted with his own seal also to the Apostolic See. He likewise sent to us his deprecatory letters on behalf of the said brother of the Abbot of Cassino, which, together with the decree of election strengthened by the subscriptions of all the canons, as well as the letters of the suffragans and of the people, three of the canons of the church of Trani, deputed by the whole chapter, humbly presented to us, asking that the canonical election, celebrated of a suitable person, be confirmed by apostolic authority. We, moreover, for greater caution, received from the aforesaid canons an oath, not exacted by us but offered by them, and we diligently examined the fact of the election, as is both of custom and of law.

Interim vero Nuncius praefati Cassinensis abbatis suas nobis literas praesentavit, gravem contra iam dictum legatum querimoniam continentes, quod, postquam electionem examinaverat, et eam ad nostrae deliberationis examen transtulerat, nunciis iam directis, iterum electionem eandem malitiose nimis examinare praesumpsit. Unde petebat per viros idoneos suspicione carentes de ipso facto diligenter inquiri. Quumque praefatus supervenisset episcopus, et ea, quae gesta sunt, intellexissemus ab ipso, De communi consilio fratrum nostrorum examinationem secundam, tanquam a non suo iudice factam, postquam negotium ad nostrum fuerat translatum examen, censuimus irritam et inanem.

Meanwhile, indeed, the Nuncio of the aforesaid abbot of Cassino presented his letters to us, containing a grave querimony against the already-mentioned legate, because, after he had examined the election and had transferred it to the examination of our deliberation, with nuncios already dispatched, he presumed again to examine that same election with excessive malice. Whence he requested that, through idoneous men free from suspicion, diligent inquiry be made concerning the deed itself. And when the aforesaid bishop had arrived, and we had learned from him the things that were done, by the common counsel of our brothers we judged the second examination—since it was done by one who was not the proper judge, after the business had been transferred to our examination—to be null and void.

[Quia tamen etc. Dat. Lat.

[Because, however, etc. Given at the Lateran.

VIII. Kal. Iul.

June 24.

1202.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Legatus de latere confert beneficium vacans, licet illud spectet ad praesentationem alicuius clerici. Hoc dicit et est casus notabilis.

A legate from the side (a latere) confers a vacant benefice, although that pertains to the presentation of some cleric. He says this, and it is a notable case.

Idem sancti P. et sancti Leonis Abbatibus, et R. archidiacono Tullensibus.

The same to the Abbots of St. P. and St. Leo, and to R., archdeacon, of Toul.

Dilectus filius R. Metensis canonicus nobis humiliter intimavit, quod, quum venerabilis frater noster Praenestinus episcopus, apostolicae sedis legatus, ecclesiam sancti Trudonis ad resignationem proprii pastoris in manibus eius factam liberaliter contulisset eidem, dilectus filius B. Metensis archidiaconus, ad quem illius ecclesiae praesentatio pertinebat, asserens, quod eodem inconsulto conferri non potuit a legato, donationi eius minus rationabiliter se opponens, canonicum ipsum super eadem ecclesia indebite molestare praesumit. Quum igitur plus iuris habeat in concessione praelatus, quam in praesentatione patronus, nec praeiudicetur praelato, si quando per apostolicae sedis legatum eo inconsulto ecclesia concedatur, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus quatenus dictum archidiaconum, ut ab eius super hoc indebita molestatione desistat, monitione praemissa per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione remota cogatis. [Nullis literis etc.

The beloved son R., a canon of Metz, humbly intimated to us that, when our venerable brother the bishop of Praeneste, legate of the Apostolic See, had liberally conferred upon the same the church of Saint Trudo, upon the resignation of its own pastor made into his hands, the beloved son B., archdeacon of Metz, to whom the presentation of that church pertained, asserting that it could not be conferred by the legate without his being consulted, and opposing his grant less than reasonably, presumes to trouble the canon unduly concerning the same church. Since, therefore, the prelate has more right in concession than the patron in presentation, and no prejudice is caused to the prelate if at any time a church is granted by a legate of the Apostolic See without his being consulted, we command by apostolic writings to your discretion that you compel the said archdeacon, the monition having been premised, by ecclesiastical censure, appeal removed, to desist from his undue molestation herein. [Nullis literis etc.

Dat. Anagniae X. Kal. Mart.

Dated at Anagni, on 20 February.

Ao. VI. 1204.]

Year 6. 1204.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Legatus in pluribus locis potest in quolibet dictorum locorum iurisdictionem suam exercere ita, quod facta unius loci potest in alio explicare. Hoc dicit Panorm.

The Legate in several places can exercise his jurisdiction in any of the said places, such that the acts of one place he can complete in another. This Panorm. says.

Idem illustri Regi Francorum.

The same to the illustrious King of the Franks.

Novit ille, qui nihil ignorat, quod regiae sublimitati (Et infra:) Ex parte tua querimoniam accepimus, videlicet quod, quum tibi legatus esset certa ratione suspectus, post appellationem ad nos interpositam extra fines regni Francorum in terram tuam interdicti sententiam promulgavit. Qui etiam in animam tuam promiserunt et obtulerunt iurare, quod tu coram legatis et delegatis nostris super hoc negotio stabis iuri, et quod propter huiusmodi negotium nec per nos, nec per alium fueris ex parte nostra citatus, ut iuri pareres, praedictam petens sententiam recepta huiusmodi cautione relaxari. Ceterum ad ea, quae contra cardinalem obiecerant, et eis respondimus, et Tuae magnificentiae respondemus, quod etsi fines regni Francorum exierat, nondum tamen fuerat terminos suae legationis egressus, quum non solum in regno Francorum, sed in Viennensi, Lugdunensi et Bisuntinensi provinciis iniunctam sibi a nobis legationis sollicitudinem suscepisset.

He who is ignorant of nothing knows that to the royal sublimity (And below:) On your part we have received a complaint, namely that, when the legate was for a certain reason suspected by you, after an appellation to us had been interposed, he promulgated a sentence of interdict outside the bounds of the kingdom of the Franks, in your land. Who also promised upon your soul and offered to swear that you would stand to right before our legates and delegates concerning this business, and that on account of a matter of this kind neither by us nor by another on our behalf had you been cited by us, that you might obey the law—he seeking that the aforesaid sentence be relaxed upon the receipt of such a caution. Moreover, to the things which they had objected against the cardinal, both we answered them, and we answer to Your Magnificence, that although he had gone beyond the bounds of the kingdom of the Franks, yet he had not gone beyond the limits of his legation, since not only in the kingdom of the Franks but also in the Viennese, Lugdunese, and Bisuntine provinces he had undertaken the solicitude of the legation enjoined upon him by us.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Praesente legato de latere minor legatus exsecutionem officii sui dimittere debet.

With the legate de latere present, the lesser legate ought to lay aside the execution of his office.

Gregorius IX. Patriarchae Hierosolymitano.

Gregory 9. To the Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Volentes (Et infra:) Fraternitati tuae legationis officium in provincia tua duximus committendum, ita tamen, quod, si legatum ad partes illas de latere nostro contigerit destinari, exsecutionem ipsius officii, quamdiu legatus ipse ibi fuerit, pro sedis apostolicae reverentia omnino dimittas.

Willing (And below:), we have judged that the office of legation should be committed to your Fraternity in your province, yet in such a way that, if it should happen that a legate from our side is sent to those parts, you shall entirely dismiss the execution of that office, for the reverence of the Apostolic See, for as long as that legate himself shall be there.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Legatus, non de latere sed ratione personae, extra provinciam sibi decretam absolvere nequit excommunicatos pro iniectione manuum in clericos, nec etiam in provincia, si tales excommunicati aliunde veniant. Legatus vero ratione dignitatis nullos tales absolvit. H. d. secundum communem intellectum.

A legate, not de latere but by reason of the person, cannot absolve those excommunicated for the laying-on of hands upon clerics outside the province decreed to him, nor even within the province, if such excommunicates come from elsewhere. But a legate by reason of dignity absolves no such persons. This is held according to the common understanding.

Idem.

The same.

Excommunicatis pro iniectione manuum violenta ecclesiae Romanae legati, qui de ipsius latere non mittuntur, extra provinciam sibi commissam, vel ibidem, si huiusmodi manuum iniectores illuc contingat aliunde accedere, et qui ecclesiarum suarum praetextu legationibus sibi vendicant dignitatem, etiam subditis, quamvis in provincia sua exsistentes, beneficium absolutionis impertiri non possunt, nisi de speciali gratia illis et istis amplius a sede apostolica concedatur.

Legates of the Roman Church, who are not sent from her side, outside the province committed to them, or in the same place, if it happens that such men who have inflicted a violent laying-on of hands come there from elsewhere, and those who under the pretext of their own churches claim for themselves the dignity of legations, cannot impart the benefit of absolution even to subjects, although existing in their own province, unless by special grace it is granted more broadly to those and these by the Apostolic See.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Durant legati statuta etiam legatione finita, finitur tamen sui delegati iurisdictio, si citatio non praecessit.

The legate’s statutes endure even when the legation is finished; nevertheless, the jurisdiction of his delegate is terminated, if a citation has not preceded.

Idem.

The same.

Nemini dubium esse volumus, quin legatorum sedis apostolicae statuta edita in provincia sibi commissa durent tanquam perpetua, licet eandem postmodum sint egressi; secus autem, si causas duxerint aliquibus delegandas, quum iurisdictio istorum exspiret, si ante illorum discessum horum citatio non praecessit.

We wish it to be doubtful to no one that the statutes of the legates of the Apostolic See, issued in the province committed to them, endure as if perpetual, although afterwards they have departed from the same; but otherwise, if they have judged that causes should be delegated to some persons, the jurisdiction of those expires when the jurisdiction of those [legates] expires, if before the departure of those the citation of these did not precede.

TITULUS XXXI. DE OFFICIO IUDICIS ORDINARII.

TITLE 31. ON THE OFFICE OF THE ORDINARY JUDGE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Episcopi in suis dioecesibus possunt crimina inquirere et punire, et, quum opus fuerit, invocare brachium saeculare.

Bishops in their dioceses can inquire into and punish crimes, and, when need shall have arisen, invoke the secular arm.

Ex synodo Ioannis Papae.

From the synod of Pope John.

Perniciosa [inolevit consuetudo, ut iudex publicus vel minister peccata populi, quae ab episcopis sunt inquirenda, quibus animarum sollicitudo commissa est, quasi inquirenda vendant, et ea occasione licenter scelesta vita augmentetur, et, si in proprietate ecclesiae vel clerici feminas inveniant adulteras, infamant, comprehendunt, dilaniant donec domini earum vel parentes eas redimant, pro quo consanguinei earum in modicam deveniunt paupertatem, et eo ordine liberius post venditionem fornicari non metuunt, dicentes nihil pertinere ad episcopum, quae a publico examinata dignoscitur et redempta, quod omnino irregulariter inolevisse manifestum est.] Habeant igitur episcopi singularum urbium in suis dioecesibus, liberam potestatem adulteria et scelera inquirere, ulcisci et iudicare, secundum quod canones censent, absque impedimento alicuius. Et quum opus fuerit, [ad comprimendos rebelles et contemptores] publicum convocent auxilium non ad praeiudicandum, sed potius ad ea, quae Deo sunt placita [et saluti animarum conveniunt,] prosequendum.

Pernicious [a custom has taken root, that the public judge or minister sell, as things to be inquired into, the sins of the people, which are to be investigated by bishops, to whom the solicitude of souls has been entrusted; and on that occasion a criminal life is licentiously augmented; and, if on the property of the church or of a cleric they find women adulteresses, they defame, apprehend, and lacerate them until their masters or parents ransom them, on account of which their kinsmen sink into straitened poverty; and by that arrangement they do not fear to fornicate more freely after the sale, saying that nothing pertains to the bishop in the case of one who is recognized to have been examined by the public authority and redeemed, which it is manifest has altogether taken root irregularly.] Therefore let the bishops of the several cities have in their dioceses free power to inquire into adulteries and crimes, to avenge and to judge, according to what the canons adjudge, without anyone’s impediment. And when there is need, [to repress rebels and despisers] let them summon public aid, not to prejudice, but rather to pursue those things which are pleasing to God [and are conducive to the salvation of souls].

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Ordinarius, qui scit, non ut iudex vel homo, sed ut Deus, subditum esse criminis reum, indeterminate poterit, sed non nominatim, eum arguere vel punire.

The Ordinary, who knows, not as a judge or as a man, but as God, that a subject is guilty of a crime, will be able, indeterminately, but not by name, to accuse or punish him.

Eugenius Papa.

Pope Eugenius.

Si sacerdos sciat pro certo, aliquem, esse reum alicuius criminis, vel si confessus fuerit, et emendare noluerit, nisi iudiciario ordine quis probare possit, non debet eum arguere nominatim, sed indeterminate, sicut dixit Christus: "Unus vestrum me traditurus est." Sed si ille, cui damnum illatum est, petierit iustitiam, potest excommunicare auctorem damni, licet etiam ei confessus sit. Sed tamen non nominatim potest eum removere a communione, licet sciat eum esse reum, quia non ut iudex scit, sed ut Deus. Sed debet eum admonere, ne se ingerat, quia nec Christus Iudam a communione removit.

If a priest knows for certain that someone is guilty of some crime, or if he has confessed and is unwilling to amend, unless someone can prove it by judicial order, he ought not accuse him by name, but indeterminately, as Christ said: "One of you will betray me." But if the one to whom harm has been inflicted seeks justice, he can excommunicate the author of the harm, even though he has confessed to him as well. Yet nevertheless he cannot remove him from communion by name, although he knows him to be guilty, because he knows not as a judge, but as God. But he ought to admonish him not to intrude himself, because neither did Christ remove Judas from communion.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Si ordinarius subiectus episcopo profert in sibi subiectum iustam censuram ecclesiasticam, episcopus illam servare debet, et illam sine satisfactione et conscientia proferentis relaxare non debet.

If an Ordinary subject to the bishop proffers upon his own subordinate a just ecclesiastical censure, the bishop ought to preserve it, and ought not to relax it without the satisfaction and the conscience of the one who proffered it.

Alexander III. Florentino Episcopo.

Alexander 3. To the Bishop of Florence.

Quum ab ecclesiarum praelatis ecclesiastica sententia in malefactores aliquos promulgatur, rata debet et firma consistere, et usque ad condignam satisfactionem inviolabiliter observari. Quapropter discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta [praecipiendo] mandamus, quatenus, si quando dilectus filius noster Lan., plebanus sancti P. de Lucar, in clericos vel laicos parochianos suos interdicti vel excommunicationis sententiam rationabiliter tulerit, ipsam facias inviolabiliter observari, et eam sine congrua satisfactione et absque eiusdem plebani conscientia non relaxes.

When by the prelates of churches an ecclesiastical sentence is promulgated against certain malefactors, it ought to stand ratified and firm, and to be inviolably observed until condign satisfaction. Wherefore to your discretion through apostolic writings [praecipiendo] we mandate, to wit, that if at any time our beloved son Lan., plebanus (parish priest) of Saint P. of Lucar, shall have reasonably brought a sentence of interdict or excommunication upon his clerical or lay parishioners, you make the same be inviolably observed, and that you do not relax it without congruent satisfaction and without the conscience of the same plebanus.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Si ordinatio vacantis ecclesiae etiam patronatae ex iuxta causa differtur, est ibi per episcopum oeconomus ponendus.

If the ordination of a vacant church, even one under patronage, is deferred for a just cause, an oeconomus is to be appointed there by the bishop.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Suffragans.

Quum vos plerumque oporteat ordinationem ecclesiarum differre pro eo, quod quandoque personae vobis minus idoneae praesentantur, aut interdum inter vos et praesentatores personarum alia de causa radix dissensionis emerserit providendum nobis est, ne occasione huius dissensionis et scandali interim fructus illarum depereant, aut eis in spiritualibus gravia proveniant detrimenta. Inde est, quod fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si quando in illis vacantibus ecclesiis, in quibus ecclesiastica persona praesentationem non habet, vel quia personae minus idoneae vobis praesentantur, vel alia de causa, de iure personas non potueritis in eis instituere, [contradictione et] appellatione remota ponatis oeconomos, qui debeant ecclesiarum fructus percipere, et eos aut in ecclesiarum utilitatem expendere, aut futuris personis fideliter reservare.

Since it often behooves you to defer the ordination of churches, for the reason that sometimes persons less suitable are presented to you, or at times between you and the presenters of persons for another cause the root of dissension has emerged, it must be provided by us, lest on the occasion of this dissension and scandal in the meantime their fruits perish, or grievous detriments befall them in spiritual matters. Hence it is that to your fraternity by apostolic writings we command by way of precept, that, whenever in those vacant churches in which an ecclesiastical person does not have the presentation, either because persons less suitable are presented to you, or for another cause, you are not able by law to institute persons in them, with [contradiction and] appeal removed you are to appoint economi (stewards), who ought to receive the fruits of the churches, and either expend them for the utility of the churches, or faithfully reserve them for future persons.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Si constat ordinario, quod absolutus a Papa suppressit veram causam, quare fuerat excommunicatus, debet illum remittere ad Papam. Si vero sibi non constat, est tamen sibi urgens suspicio contra eum, debet cogere eum se purgare.

If it is evident to the ordinary that one, absolved by the Pope, suppressed the true cause for which he had been excommunicated, he ought to remit him to the Pope. But if it is not evident to him, yet there is for him an urgent suspicion against him, he ought to compel him to purge himself.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Ex parte tua nobis est constanti assertione propositum, quod interdum quidam pro certis causis excommunicati sedem apostolicam visitant, et reticentes causas, pro quibus sunt vinculo excommunicationis adstricti, de absolutione sua literas deferunt, continentes, eos ad sedem apostolicam accessisse, et auditis confessionibus suis absolutionis beneficium meruisse. Unde Quia nos consulere voluisti, utrum illorum absolutio teneat, qui, occultatis excessibus, pro quibus excommunicati fuerant, absolutionis beneficium per sedem apostolicam meruerunt, suae excommunicationis causam aliam praetendentes, tuae consultationi taliter respondemus, quod, si ita tibi constiterit, debes eos ecclesiastica censura compellere, cum literis tuis rei veritatem continentibus ad sedem apostolicam redire. Si vero id tibi non constiterit, et eos suspectos habueris, quod confessi non fuerint veritatem, ipsos compellere debes exinde coram te, quod veritatem confessi fuerint, purgationem praestare.

On your part it has been set before us by a constant assertion, that sometimes certain persons excommunicated for certain causes visit the apostolic see, and, keeping back the causes for which they are bound by the bond of excommunication, bring letters concerning their absolution, containing that they have approached the apostolic see and, their confessions having been heard, have merited the benefit of absolution. Wherefore, since you wished to consult us whether the absolution holds of those who, having concealed the excesses for which they had been excommunicated, have merited the benefit of absolution through the apostolic see, alleging another cause of their excommunication, we thus answer your consultation: that, if it has been established to you thus, you ought to compel them by ecclesiastical censure to return to the apostolic see with your letters containing the truth of the matter. But if this has not been established to you, and you have held them suspected of not having confessed the truth, you ought therefore to compel them before you to furnish purgation to the effect that they have confessed the truth.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Si ex desidia vel malitia delegati Papae quis perseverat in peccato, ordinarius loci potest supplere, non obstante, quod causa fuerit delegato commissa. Hoc dicit et est casus notabilis et singularis.

If by the sloth or malice of the Pope’s delegate someone perseveres in sin, the ordinary of the place can supply, notwithstanding that the case had been committed to the delegate. This he says, and it is a notable and singular case.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine 3.

Significavit nobis tua fraternitas, quod quidam de parochianis tuis, quum pro illicita consanguinitatis et affinitatis copula excommunicatione notantur, ad iudices remotiores ab apostolica sede literas impetrant commissionis. Per quas, quum ab excommunicatione fuerint absoluti, quia dicti delegati ad locum, ubi testes consanguinitatis vel affinitatis produci valeant, non accedunt, nec aliquos pro eorum receptione transmittunt, in praenominata nefariae coniunctionis copula remanent, et causa debitum non sortitur effectum. Unde postulasti a nobis, quid sit tibi in tali articulo faciendum.

Your fraternity has signified to us that certain of your parishioners, when they are marked with excommunication for an illicit bond of consanguinity and affinity, obtain letters of commission from the Apostolic See to judges more remote. By which, when they have been absolved from excommunication, since the said delegates do not go to the place where witnesses of consanguinity or affinity can be produced, nor do they send any for their reception, they remain in the aforesaid bond of nefarious conjunction, and the case does not attain its due effect. Whence you have asked of us what is to be done by you at such a juncture.

Quum itaque pro malitia vel desidia iudicis delegati non debeat quis ad remanendum in copula coniunctionis iniquae suffragium invenire, tale damus tuae fraternitati in hac consultatione responsum, quod, quotiens ea, quae praediximus, in tua dioecesi evenire contigerit, licite potes taliter absolutos in pristinam excommunicationis sententiam revocare, ipsosque tam diu eadem sententia tenere ligatos, donec causa in receptione testium et in aliis legitimum incipiat habere progressum, vel aliud exinde suscipias ab apostolica sede mandatum. [Ceterum etc. cf. c. 6. de test.

Since therefore, on account of the malice or sloth of the delegated judge, one ought not to find suffrage for remaining in the bond of an iniquitous conjunction, we give to your fraternity in this consultation such an answer: that, as often as the things which we have said above should happen in your diocese, you may lawfully recall those thus absolved into the former sentence of excommunication, and hold them bound by the same sentence for so long, until the case begins to have lawful progress in the reception of witnesses and in other matters, or you receive from the Apostolic See some other mandate thereon. [The rest etc.; cf. c. 6. on witnesses.

cog. II. 21.]

cog. 2. 21.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Ordinarius supplet negligentiam abbatis, non revocantis monachum vagabundum.

The Ordinary supplies for the negligence of the abbot, from the abbot’s not recalling the vagabond monk.

Innocentius III. Ausitano Archiepiscopo.

Innocent 3. To the Ausitan Archbishop.

Quanto devotio religiosorum virorum studiosius mandatis divinis inhaeret, et creatori suo placere per opera sanctae conversationis intendit, tanto humani generis inimicus ad seductionem eorum suae fraudis malignitate laborat, et variis modis eis praestat materiam excedendi, et animas eorum inextricabili laqueo nititur irretire. Ad audientiam siquidem nostram noveris pervenisse, quod monachi, canonici et alii regulares tuae provinciae, quum deberent potius in claustro iuxta regularia constituta divinis obsequiis vigilare, de obedientiis et reditibus, quorum curam gesserunt, pecunia congregata, claustrum abhorrentes, per curias principum et potentum discurrere non verentur, et muneribus suis illorum sibi favorem et gratiam acquirunt, ac de eorum familiaritate confisi in conventu suo graves dissensiones commovent et ceterorum humilitatem in spiritu arrogantiae contemnentes mandatis praelatorum suorum inobedientes et contumaces exsistunt, et contra illorum prohibitionem saecularium negotiorum sollicitudinibus se immergunt. Quoniam igitur propter hoc ordo religionis non modicum enervatur: fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta Mandamus, quatenus, quoscunque tales inveneris, nisi ad commonitionem tuam resipuerint, ut proprium suum in manibus praelatorum suorum sine difficultate resignent, convertendum in utilitatem domus secundum abbatis consilium, et regularem vitam observent, si praelati eorum post tuam commonitionem id exsequi negligenter omiserint, per suspensionem officii et beneficii appellatione remota compellas.

The more the devotion of religious men clings more zealously to the divine mandates, and aims to please its creator through the works of holy conversation, by so much the enemy of the human race to their seduction labors by the malignity of his fraud, and in various modes supplies them with material for transgressing, and strives to ensnare their souls in an inextricable noose. You should know, indeed, that it has come to our hearing that monks, canons, and other regulars of your province, when they ought rather in the cloister, according to the regular constitutions, to keep vigil in the divine offices, with money gathered from obediences and revenues whose care they have exercised, abhorring the cloister, do not fear to run about through the courts of princes and the powerful, and by their gifts acquire for themselves the favor and grace of those men, and, relying on their familiarity, stir up grave dissensions in their convent, and, despising the humility of the rest in a spirit of arrogance, prove disobedient and contumacious to the mandates of their prelates, and, against their prohibition, plunge themselves into the solicitudes of secular business. Since therefore on account of this the order of religion is not a little enervated: we command to your fraternity by apostolic writings that, whomever such you shall find, unless at your admonition they come to their senses, they should resign their private property without difficulty into the hands of their prelates, to be converted to the utility of the house according to the counsel of the abbot, and that they observe the regular life; if their prelates after your admonition shall have negligently omitted to execute this, you are to compel them by suspension from office and benefice, appeal removed.

[Dat. Lat. XIV.

[Dated: Lateran, 14.

Kal. Apr. 1198.]

Kalends of April 1198.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Ab uno episcopo excommunicatus ab aliis est vitandus. Et archiepiscopus per querelam aditus, non absolvet, nisi primo remittat.

Excommunicated by one bishop, he is to be avoided by the others. And the archbishop, approached through a complaint, will not absolve, unless he first remit it.

Idem Rothomagensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.

The same to the Archbishop of Rouen and his Suffragans.

Ad reprimendam malitiam perversorum poenae certae sunt in canonibus constitutae, quas, sicut latas a vobis interdum in subditos vultis inviolabiliter observari, ita latas ab aliis debetis inviolabiliter observare. Ideoque per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus sententias, quas venerabilis frater noster Lexoniensis episcopus duxerit in subditos suos canonice promulgandas, et vos ipsi servetis, et eas a vestris subditis faciatis inviolabiliter observari. § 1. Tu vero, frater archiepiscope, quum excommunicationis sententia per appellationis non suspendatur obiectum, si quis excommunicatus ab episcopo de iniusta tibi fuerit excommunicatione conquestus, ad ipsum, ei quasi coepiscopo deferens, absolvendum secundum ecclesiae formam remittas.

To repress the malice of the perverse, fixed penalties have been established in the canons, which, just as you wish those laid by you at times upon your subjects to be observed inviolably, so you ought inviolably to observe those laid by others. Therefore through apostolic writings we command that the sentences which our venerable brother, the bishop of Lisieux, shall have deemed to be canonically promulgated upon his subjects, both you yourselves shall keep, and you shall cause them to be observed inviolably by your subjects. § 1. But you, brother archbishop, since a sentence of excommunication is not suspended by the lodging of an appeal, if someone excommunicated by a bishop has complained to you of an unjust excommunication, you shall remit him to that same bishop for absolution, deferring to him as to a fellow-bishop, according to the Church’s form.

Qui si forte noluerit ipsum absolvere, tu recepta cautione iuratoria absolutionis munus ei poteris exhibere, ita tamen, quod, nisi legitime tibi constiterit, eum contra iustitiam excommunicatum fuisse, ex debito sibi iuramenti praecipias, ut super eo, de quo fuerit excommunicatione notatus, eidem episcopo satisfaciat competenter. Quod si facere forte contempserit, eum in excommunicationis sententiam appellatione remota reducere non omittas. [Dat.

Who, if by chance he should be unwilling to absolve him, you, upon receiving a sworn surety, can bestow upon him the office of absolution; yet on this condition: unless it has lawfully been established to you that he was excommunicated against justice, you shall, by the obligation of his oath, enjoin him to make suitable satisfaction to the same bishop concerning that matter for which he was marked with excommunication. But if by chance he should contemn to do this, do not omit to bring him back under the sentence of excommunication, appeal set aside. [Given.

etc. Kal. Iun.

etc., on the Kalends of June.

1198.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

De causis subditorum archiepiscoporum et episcoporum suorum patriarcha non cognoscit, nisi per appellationem legitimam, aut vigore consuetudinis seu privilegii.

Concerning the causes of his subordinate archbishops and bishops the patriarch does not take cognizance, except through a legitimate appeal, or by the force of custom or privilege.

Idem Turonensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Tours.

Duo simul consultationem scilicet et querimoniam, unica tuae fraternitatis petitio continebat, per quam a venerabili fratre nostro Hierosolymitano patriarcha conquerebaris, clericos tuos tecum iniuste gravari, qui eos, spreto tuo iudicio, coram quo parati sunt de se querimoniam deponentibus iustitiam exhibere, licet ad eum per appellationem causa minime deferatur, coram se respondere compellit, et utrum ad id possint de iure compelli, per nostras postulabas literas edoceri. Volentes igitur tibi super gravaminibus providere praedictis, Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod, quum sit in canonibus diffinitum, primates vel patriarchas nihil iuris prae ceteris habere, nisi quantum sacri canones concedunt, vel prisca illis consuetudo contulit ab antiquo, ita, ut secundum Nicaenas regulas sua privilegia serventur ecclesiis, praeterquam si apostolica sedes aliquam ecclesiam vel rectorem ipsius quolibet speciali privilegio decreverit honorare, de fratrum nostrorum consilio respondemus, quod, quamdiu clerici tui coram te voluerint stare iuri, compelli non debent iudicium eiusdem patriarchae subire, nisi causa forsitan per appellationem ad eius audientiam perferatur, aut, quod non credimus, ei aliquid super hoc a sede apostolica sit indultum. [Dat.

Two at once—namely a consultation and a complaint—were contained in the single petition of your fraternity, through which you were complaining against our venerable brother, the patriarch of Jerusalem, that your clerics are unjustly burdened together with you: for he, spurning your judgment, before which they are prepared, for those bringing a complaint against them, to render justice, although the case is by no means carried to him by appeal, compels them to answer before himself; and you were asking to be instructed by our letters whether they can by right be compelled to that. Wishing, therefore, to provide for you concerning the aforesaid grievances, we answer your Consultation thus: since it is defined in the canons that primates or patriarchs have nothing of right before others except in so far as the sacred canons grant or ancient custom from of old has conferred upon them, such that, according to the Nicene rules, their privileges are preserved to the churches, unless perhaps the apostolic see shall have decreed to honor some church or its rector with some special privilege, by the counsel of our brothers we answer that, so long as your clerics shall have wished to stand to law before you, they ought not to be compelled to undergo the judgment of that same patriarch, unless perhaps the case be carried to his hearing by appeal, or, which we do not believe, something over this has been granted to him by the apostolic see. [Given.

Lat. Non. Ian.

Lateran. Nones of January.

1199.]

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Archiepiscopus impeditus potest consecrationem sui suffraganei alteri committere, et consecrandus tenetur ab illo commissario munus consecrationis recipere.

An impeded archbishop can commit the consecration of his suffragan to another, and the one to be consecrated is bound to receive the office (munus) of consecration from that commissary.

Idem Turonensi Archiepiscopo.

The same, to the Archbishop of Tours.

Quod sedem apostolicam consulis super his, quae tibi dubia exsistunt, gratum gerimus et acceptum, et tua exinde fraternitas merito videtur commendanda, quum lex divinae constitutionis eandem sedem totius posuerit orbis terrarum magistram, ut quicquid dubitatur ab aliquo, ab ea tandem eiusdem ratio requiratur. Nos siquidem consuluisti, utrum, si forte aliqua infirmitate vel alia iusta causa detentus aliquem suffraganeorum tuorum consecrare non posses, alicui coepiscoporum tuorum vices tuas committere licitum tibi esset, et utrum electus, qui pro consecratione instaret, ab eo, cui vices tuas taliter commisisses, deberet licite consecrari? In quo Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod in tali articulo constituto et tuas vices, ut dictum est, tibi committere licet, et consecrandus munus debet ab eo consecrationis accipere, cui eas duxeris committendas, dummodo catholicus habeatur, et impedimentum ei ex subtractione gratiae apostolicae sedis non obsistat.

That you consult the apostolic see concerning those things which exist as doubtful to you, we hold as pleasing and acceptable, and your fraternity therefrom seems deservedly to be commended, since the law of divine constitution has set that same see as the teacher of the whole orb of lands, so that whatever is doubted by anyone, from it at length the decision on the same should be required. For indeed you have consulted us, whether, if perchance detained by some infirmity or another just cause you were not able to consecrate any of your suffragans, it would be licit for you to commit your functions by proxy to some one of your fellow-bishops, and whether the elect, who was pressing for consecration, ought lawfully to be consecrated by him to whom you had so committed your functions by proxy? In which matter we thus answer your Consultation, that in such a case constituted it is permitted, as said, to commit your functions by proxy, and the one to be consecrated ought to receive from him the office of consecration, to whom you shall have judged them to be committed, provided he is held Catholic, and that an impediment does not stand in his way from the withdrawal of the grace of the apostolic see.

[Dat. Lat. XVI.

[Given at the Lateran 16.

Kal. Iun. 1199.]

Kalends of June, 1199.]

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Archiepiscopus causam ad se per appellationem delatam subditis suffraganei committere potest, non tamen ad ipsam suscipiendam compellere potest. H. d. usque ad § Praeterea. ñ § 1. Mortuo delegato Papae, qui excommunicavit reum, vel actorem in possessionem induxit, si eius successor in delegatione succedit, absolvere et restituere possessionem poterit, alias solus Papa restituet et absolvet, praeterquam in mortis articulo; ne tamen currat annalis praescriptio, reus coram ordinario, vel publicis personis de stando iuri cautionem praestabit.

An archbishop can commit to the subjects of a suffragan a cause brought to himself by appeal, yet he cannot compel them to undertake the same. To this point down to § Moreover. ñ § 1. Upon the death of the Pope’s delegate, who excommunicated the defendant, or inducted the plaintiff into possession, if his successor succeeds in the delegation, he will be able to absolve and to restore possession; otherwise the Pope alone will restore and absolve, except at the point of death; lest, however, the annual prescription run, the defendant before the ordinary, or before public persons, shall furnish a caution of standing to the law.

Hoc dicit.

He says this.

Idem Episcopo Heliensi.

The same to the Bishop of Ely.

Pastoralis officii (Et infra: cf. c. 28. de off. iud. del.

Of the pastoral office (And below: cf. ch. 28 on the office of the delegated judge.

I. 29.) Ex parte tua fuit insuper quaesitum, utrum, si aliqua causa fuerit ad archiepiscopum per appellationem delata, possit eandem iure ordinariae potestatis suffraganei sui subdito delegare, vel animadvertere in eundem, si causam renuerit suscipere delegatam? Ad quod utique respondemus, quod archiepiscopus ipsum ad suscipiendam delegationem huiusmodi compellere nequit invitum, quum in eum, exceptis quibusdam articulis, nullam habeat potestatem, licet episcopus suus eidem sit metropolitana lege subiectus. [Praeterea etc.

1. 29.) On your part it was furthermore asked whether, if some cause has been carried to the archbishop by appeal, he can, by the right of ordinary power, delegate the same to a subject of his suffragan, or take action against that same person if he refuses to undertake the delegated cause? To which we assuredly respond that the archbishop cannot compel him, being unwilling, to accept a delegation of this kind, since over him, except in certain articles, he has no power, although his bishop is subject to him by metropolitan law. [Moreover etc.

cf. c. 28. de off. iud. del.

cf. ch. 28 on the office of the delegated judge.

I. 29.] § 1. Edoceri Praeterea postulasti, an alicui liceat sine speciali mandato apostolicae sedis, delegato, qui reum propter contumaciam manifestam excommunicationis vinculo innodavit, vel petitorem causa rei servandae in possessionem petitorum induxit, rebus humanis exempto, eidem volenti iuri parere absolutionis beneficium impertiri, et possessionem restituere infra annum, sufficienti recepta primitus cautione? Ad quod utique dicimus, quod, quum delegatus, quantum ad illud sit maior ordinario, sine mandato summi Pontificis excommunicatus ab huiusmodi delegato non potest per alium, praeterquam in mortis articulo, absolutionis gratiam obtinere, nisi forsan delegatus talis exstiterit, cui alius succedat in onere et honore. Nec per alium, quam per summum Pontificem recuperare poterit possessionem amissam.

1. 29.] § 1. Moreover you have requested to be instructed, whether it is permitted to someone, without a special mandate of the Apostolic See, when a delegate, who has knotted the defendant on account of manifest contumacy with the bond of excommunication, or has led the petitioner, for the sake of preserving the thing, into possession of the things petitioned-for, has been removed from human affairs, to impart to the same person, willing to obey the law, the benefice of absolution, and to restore possession within a year, sufficient security having first been received? To which indeed we say, that, since the delegate, in that respect, is greater than the ordinary, one excommunicated by such a delegate cannot, without a mandate of the Supreme Pontiff, obtain through another, except in the article of death, the grace of absolution, unless perhaps the delegate has been such that another succeeds to him in burden and in honor. Nor will he be able to recover the possession lost through any other than the Supreme Pontiff.

Verumtamen, ne alius post annum verus efficiatur possessor, coram ordinario, vel si eius copiam habere nequiverit, coram publicis et honestis personis, ut quasi praescriptionem interrumpat annalem, offere ac praestare, quod iuri parebit, poterit cautionem, ut sic post annum recuperare possessionem per sedem apostolicam mereatur [Quaesivisti etc. cf. c. 53. de app. II. 28. Dat.

Nevertheless, lest another after a year become the true possessor, before the ordinary, or, if he cannot have access to him, before public and honest persons, in order, as it were, to interrupt the annual prescription, he will be able to offer and furnish a caution that he will submit to the law, so that thus after a year he may merit to recover the possession through the apostolic see [You have asked, etc. cf. ch. 53 on appeals 2. 28. Given.

Rom. ap. S. Petr. XIV.

Rome, at St. Peter's, 14.

Kal. Ian. 1204.]

Kalends of January, 1204.]

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Papa per rescriptum, quo mandat ordinario, ut subditos suos corrigat, non facit ex hoc ipsum delegatum, ideo ab eo poterit appellari ad proximum superiorem, sicut, si Papa nullum mandatum fecisset. Hoc dicit.

The Pope, by a rescript in which he commands the ordinary to correct his subjects, does not by this make him a delegate; therefore one may appeal from him to the next superior, just as if the Pope had made no mandate. He says this.

Idem Archiepiscopo Senonensi.

The same to the Archbishop of Sens.

Licet in corrigendis excessibus iuxta canonicas sanctiones appellationis sit diffugium interclusum, et ideo venerabilis frater noster Parisiensis episcopus a nobis receperit in mandatis, ut tam circa monachos et alios viros religiosos, quam etiam clericos saeculares suae iurisdictioni subiectos, qui multa et gravia crimina committere proponunt, quae cedunt non solum in animarum dispendium, sed etiam in scandalum plurimorum, inquirat et corrigat appellatione remota quae viderit corrigenda, statuens ad reformationem eorum quod regulare fuerit et honestum; quia tamen intentionis nostrae nec fuit, nec esse debuit, iurisdictioni tuae per mandatum huiusmodi derogare: praesentium auctoritate duximus declarandum, quod, si forsitan in inquisitionibus ab eodem episcopo, non tanquam delegato, sed tanquam ordinario faciendis, aliquis casus emerserit, in quo licitum sit ad sedem metropolitanam appellare, praedicti occasione mandati auctoritati tuae, quo minus ad te tanquam ad metropolitanum appellari valeat, nolumus aliquatenus derogare. Tu tamen nec impedias per te ipsum, nec per alios facias impediri, quominus idem episcopus in corrigendis excessibus subditorum officii sui debitum exsequatur, etsi forsan in casu concesso ad te fuerit appellatum, in appellationis causa prudenter et iuste procedas. [Dat.

Although in correcting excesses according to canonical sanctions the refuge of appeal is shut off, and therefore our venerable brother the bishop of Paris has received from us in mandates that, both concerning monks and other religious men, and also secular clerics subject to his jurisdiction, who propose to commit many and grave crimes, which redound not only to the detriment of souls but also to the scandal of many, he should inquire and correct, appeal removed, what he shall have seen ought to be corrected, establishing for their reformation what shall be regular and honest; because, however, it was not, nor ought it to have been, of our intention to derogate from your jurisdiction by a mandate of this kind: by authority of these presents we have deemed it to be declared that, if perchance in the inquisitions to be made by the same bishop, not as a delegate but as an ordinary, some case should arise in which it is licit to appeal to the metropolitan see, on account of the aforesaid mandate we do not wish in any way to derogate from your authority, so as to lessen the ability to appeal to you as to the metropolitan. You, however, neither impede by yourself, nor cause to be impeded by others, the same bishop from executing the debt of his office in correcting the excesses of his subjects; and even if perhaps, in the conceded case, appeal has been made to you, proceed prudently and justly in the cause of the appeal. [Dat.

Rom. ap. S. Petr. XIV.

Rome, at St. Peter’s, 14.

Kal. Ian. Ao. X. 1207.]

Kalends of January. Year 10. 1207.]

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Praelati subditos corrigunt et reformant, appellatione remota, vel consuetudine non obstante. Si tamen capitulum consuevit corrigere excessus canonicorum, si infra terminum ab episcopo praefigendum non facit, ipse episcopus hoc faciet. Hoc dicit usque ad § Ceterum.

Prelates correct and reform their subjects, appeal removed, or notwithstanding custom. If, however, the chapter is accustomed to correct the excesses of the canons, if it does not do this within the time-limit to be pre-fixed by the bishop, the bishop himself will do it. This says so up to § Furthermore.

ñ § 1. Si canonici sine manifesta et rationabili causa, maxime in contemptum episcopi, cessant a divinis, episcopus cessationem non servabit, et metropolitanus vice Papae cognoscet. Hoc dicit. ñ § 2. Praelatus in impositione poenae cavere debet a quaestu pecuniae, et ab omni alio gravamine.

ñ § 1. If the canons, without a manifest and reasonable cause, especially in contempt of the bishop, cease from the divine offices, the bishop will not observe the cessation, and the metropolitan, in the stead of the Pope, will take cognizance. This he says. ñ § 2. The prelate, in the imposition of a penalty, ought to beware of pecuniary gain, and of every other grievance.

H. d. usque ad finem.

This he says up to the end.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the general council.

Irrefragabili constitutione sancimus, ut ecclesiarum praelati ad corrigendum subditorum excessus, maxime clericorum, et reformandos mores prudenter ac diligenter intendant, ne sanguis eorum de suis manibus requiratur. Ut autem correctionis et reformationis officium libere valeant exercere, decernimus, ut exsecutionem ipsorum nulla consuetudo vel appellatio valeat impedire, nisi formam in talibus excesserint observandam. Excessus tamen canonicorum cathedralis ecclesiae, qui consueverunt corrigi per capitulum, per ipsum in illis ecclesiis, qui talem hactenus consuetudinem habuerunt, ad commonitionem vel iussionem episcopi corrigantur infra terminum competentem ab eo praefigendum, alioquin ex tunc episcopus Deum habens prae oculis, [omni contradictione cessante] ipsos, ut animarum cura requirit, per censuram ecclesiasticam corrigere non postponat.

By an irrefragable constitution we sanction that the prelates of churches should prudently and diligently apply themselves to correcting the excesses of their subjects, especially of clerics, and to reforming morals, lest their blood be required from their hands. And that they may be able to exercise the office of correction and reformation freely, we decree that no custom or appeal may avail to impede the execution of the same, unless they shall have exceeded the form to be observed in such matters. The excesses, however, of the canons of a cathedral church, who are accustomed to be corrected by the chapter, are to be corrected by the chapter itself in those churches which up to now have had such a custom, at the admonition or command of the bishop, within a competent term to be fixed by him; otherwise, from then on, the bishop, having God before his eyes, [all contradiction ceasing], should not postpone to correct them, as the care of souls requires, by ecclesiastical censure.

[Sed et alios eorum excessus corrigere non omittat, prout animarum causa requirit, debito tamen in omnibus ordine observato.] § 1. Ceterum si canonici absque manifesta et rationabili causa, maxime in contemptum episcopi, cessaverint a divinis, episcopus, si voluerit, nihilominus celebret in ecclesia cathedrali, et metropolitanus ad querelam ipsius, tanquam super hoc delegatus a nobis, taliter eos per censuram ecclesiasticam cognita veritate castiget, quod metu poenae talia de cetero non praesumant. § 2. Provideant itaque diligenter ecclesiarum praelati, ut hoc salutare statutum ad quaestum pecuniae vel gravamen aliud non convertant, sed istud studiose ac fideliter exsequantur, si canonicam velint effugere ultionem, quoniam super his sedes apostolica auctore Domino attentissime vigilabit.

[But let him not omit to correct their other excesses, as the cause of souls requires, the due order, however, being observed in all things.] § 1. Moreover, if the canons without a manifest and reasonable cause, especially in contempt of the bishop, should cease from the divine offices, the bishop, if he wishes, may nonetheless celebrate in the cathedral church; and the metropolitan, upon his complaint, as delegated by us in this matter, shall so chastise them by ecclesiastical censure, once the truth has been ascertained, that for fear of penalty they may not henceforth presume such things. § 2. Therefore let the prelates of churches provide diligently that they do not convert this healthful statute into a gain of money or any other burden, but carry it out zealously and faithfully, if they wish to escape canonical retribution, since over these matters the Apostolic See, with the Lord as author, will keep most attentive watch.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Quum in civitate vel dioecesi sunt populi diversarum linguarum; episcopus debet providere eis per viros idoneos, qui secundum varietatem linguarum officia eis celebrent, et sacramenta ministrent. Et si urgens est necessitas, constituet sibi vicarium pontificem illius linguae; non tamen propter hoc eadem dioecesis debet habere duos episcopus.

When in a city or diocese there are peoples of diverse languages; the bishop ought to provide for them through suitable men, who according to the variety of languages celebrate the offices for them and minister the sacraments. And if necessity is urgent, he will constitute for himself a vicar-bishop of that language; nevertheless on account of this the same diocese ought not to have two bishops.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Quoniam in plerisque partibus infra eandem civitatem atque dioecesim permixti sunt populi diversarum linguarum, habentes sub una fide varios ritus et mores, districte praecipimus, ut pontifices huiusmodi civitatum sive dioecesum provideant viros idoneos, qui secundum diversitates rituum et linguarum divina illis officia celebrent et ecclesiastica sacramenta ministrent, instruendo eos verbo pariter et exemplo. Prohibemus autem omnino, ne una eademque civitas sive dioecesis diversos pontifices habeat, tanquam unum corpus diversa capita, quasi monstrum. Sed si propter praedictas causas urgens necessitas postulaverit, pontifex loci catholicum praesulem nationibus illis conformem provida deliberatione constituat sibi vicarium in praedictis, qui ei per omnia sit obediens et subiectus.

Since in many parts within the same city and diocese there are intermixed peoples of diverse languages, having under one faith various rites and mores, we strictly command that the pontiffs of such cities or dioceses provide fit men who, according to the diversities of rites and languages, celebrate for them the divine offices and minister the ecclesiastical sacraments, instructing them alike by word and by example. We altogether forbid, moreover, that one and the same city or diocese have diverse pontiffs, as though one body had different heads, like a monster. But if on account of the aforesaid causes urgent necessity should require it, let the pontiff of the place, by provident deliberation, appoint for himself as vicar in the aforesaid matters a catholic prelate conformable to those nations, who shall in all things be obedient and subject to him.

Unde, si quis aliter se ingesserit, excommunicationis se noverit mucrone percussum, et, si nec sic resipuerit, ab omni ministerio ecclesiastico deponendum, adhibito, si necesse fuerit, brachio saeculari ad tantam insolentiam repellendam.

Wherefore, if anyone shall have conducted himself otherwise, let him know himself struck by the blade of excommunication; and, if not even thus he shall have come to his senses, he is to be deposed from every ecclesiastical ministry, the secular arm being applied, if need be, to repel so great an insolence.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Episcopi, qui per se non possunt, tenentur assumere idoneos, qui suppleant suo loco quoad praedicationes, visitationes et confessionum auditiones; et ut possint episcopi reperire tales, praecipit in ecclesiis cathedralibus et collegiatis tales institui.

Bishops, who by themselves are not able, are bound to appoint suitable persons, who may supply in their place as to preachings, visitations, and the hearings of confessions; and that bishops may be able to find such men, it prescribes in cathedral and collegiate churches that such be instituted.

Idem in eodem.

The same in the same.

Inter cetera, quae ad salutem spectant populi Christiani, pabulum verbi Dei permaxime sibi noscitur esse necessarium, quia, sicut corpus materiali, sic anima spirituali cibo nutritur, eo, quod non in solo pane vivit homo, sed in omni verbo, quod procedit de ore Dei. Unde, quum saepe contingat, quod episcopi propter suas occupationes multiplices, vel invaletudines corporales, aut hostiles incursus, seu occasiones alias, ne dicamus defectum scientiae, quod in eis reprobandum est omnino, nec de cetero tolerandum, per se ipsos non sufficiunt ministrare populo verbum Dei, maxime per amplas dioeceses et diffusas: generali constitutione sancimus, ut episcopi viros idoneos ad sanctae praedicationis officium salubriter exsequendum assumant, potentes in opere et sermone, qui plebes sibi commissas vice ipsorum, quum per se iidem nequiverint, sollicite visitantes, eas verbo aedificent et exemplo, quibus ipsi, quum indiguerint, congrue necessaria subministrent, ne pro necessariorum defectu compellantur desistere ab incepto. Unde praecipimus, tam in cathedralibus quam in aliis conventualibus ecclesiis viros idoneos ordinari, quos episcopi possint coadiutores et cooperatores habere, non solum in praedicationis officio, verum etiam in audiendis confessionibus et poenitentiis iniungendis, ac ceteris, quae ad salutem pertinent animarum.

Among the other things which look to the salvation of the Christian people, the food of the Word of God is known to be most especially necessary, because, just as the body is nourished by material food, so the soul is nourished by spiritual food, in that man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Whence, since it often happens that bishops, on account of their manifold occupations, or bodily infirmities, or hostile incursions, or other occasions, not to say a defect of knowledge, which in them is altogether to be reprobated and henceforth not to be tolerated, are not sufficient by themselves to minister the Word of God to the people, especially through wide and far‑spread dioceses: by a general constitution we sanction that bishops assume suitable men to carry out healthfully the office of holy preaching, mighty in work and word, who, diligently visiting in their stead the peoples committed to them when they themselves have not been able, may edify them by word and by example; and to whom they themselves may, when there is need, suitably supply the necessaries, lest by reason of a defect of necessaries they be compelled to desist from the undertaking. Whence we command that, as well in cathedral as in other conventual churches, suitable men be ordained, whom the bishops may have as coadjutors and cooperators, not only in the office of preaching, but also in hearing confessions and enjoining penances, and the other things which pertain to the salvation of souls.

Si quis autem hoc adimplere neglexerit, districtae subiaceat ultioni.

But if anyone shall have neglected to fulfill this, let him be subject to strict punishment.

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Episcopus in ecclesiis dioecesis suae debet esse contentus iuribus episcopalibus, et quae sint iura episcopalia declarat.

The bishop, in the churches of his diocese, ought to be content with episcopal rights, and it declares what the episcopal rights are.

Honorius III. Episcopo Assisinatino.

Honorius 3. To the Bishop of Assisi.

Conquerente oeconomo monasterii sancti Benedicti montis Subasii nobis innotuit, quod tu iuribus episcopalibus non contentus, quae in ecclesiis seu capellis eiusdem monasterii debes habere, a quibusdam earum procurationem exigis, quas ad dandam procurationem minime sufficere proponebat, petens, ut iure tuo contentus exsistens a molestatione dictarum ecclesiarum super ceteris desisteres, postulans etiam ad omnem litis materiam in posterum amputandam, ut specificares, quae tibi ratione iuris episcopalis competerent in eisdem, quorum quibusdam iuribus episcopalibus specificatis hinc inde lis fuit super praemissis legitime contestata. Nos autem, inspectis probationibus utrinque receptis, et quae ab utraque parte fuere proposita plenius intellectis, decrevimus, ut in ecclesiis seu capellis tuae dioecesis, ad monasterium ipsum spectantibus, habeas canonicam obedientiam, subiectionem et reverentiam, institutionem et destitutionem, correctionem et reformationem, ac censuram ecclesiasticam, iurisdictionem quoque causarum omnium ad forum ecclesiasticum de iure spectantium, poenitentias et sacramentorum omnium, quae ab episcopo sunt recipienda, collationem, synodum et synodatici seu cathedratici nomine duos solidos Lucensis monetae, quartam decimationum et mortuariorum, visitationem quoque annuam, ita, quod, quum ad eas visitandas accesseris, non amplius procurationis nomine requiras ab eis, nisi quantum, pensatis facultatibus earundem, moderate poterunt exhibere, ne plus ceteris capellis eiusdem dioecesis in procurationibus ullatenus onerentur, et ecclesiam S. Pauli de Assisia a procurationis onere penitus relevamus. Tu autem his iuribus in praefatis ecclesiis contentus exsistens, non amplius ab eis exigas praeter moderatum auxilium, quod iuxta formam Lateranensis concilii, si manifesta et rationabilis causa exstiterit, cum caritate postulandum, sicut ab aliis ecclesiis eiusdem dioecesis pro necessitate temporis sustinemus.

Upon the economus (steward) of the monastery of Saint Benedict of Mount Subasio lodging a complaint, it became known to us that you, not content with the episcopal rights which you ought to have in the churches or chapels of the same monastery, are exacting procuration from some of them, which he alleged were by no means sufficient to give procuration; he asked that, being content with your right, you would desist from molesting the said churches concerning the rest, asking also, in order to cut off every matter of litigation for the future, that you would specify what things were competent to you therein by reason of episcopal right; after some of which episcopal rights were specified, the suit on the aforesaid matters was lawfully contested on both sides. But we, after inspecting the proofs received on either side and more fully understanding what was proposed by each party, have decreed that in the churches or chapels of your diocese that pertain to the monastery itself you shall have canonical obedience, subjection and reverence, institution and destitution, correction and reformation, and ecclesiastical censure, as well as jurisdiction over all causes that by right pertain to the ecclesiastical forum, the penances and the collation of all the sacraments that are to be received from the bishop, the synod and, under the name of synodatic or cathedratic, two solidi of Lucca coinage, the fourth part of tithes and of mortuaries, and also an annual visitation; in such wise that, when you shall have gone to visit them, you shall not require from them under the name of procuration more than, their resources being weighed, they will be able to provide moderately, lest they be burdened in procurations more than the other chapels of the same diocese in any way whatsoever; and we entirely relieve the church of St Paul of Assisi from the burden of procuration. You, however, being content with these rights in the aforesaid churches, shall not exact from them beyond a moderate aid which, according to the form of the Lateran Council, if a manifest and reasonable cause should exist, is to be asked with charity, just as we tolerate from the other churches of the same diocese for the necessity of the time.

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Episcopus visitans monasterium non introducat saeculares, sed duos aut tres canonicos suos cum aliquibus religiosis.

A bishop visiting a monastery is not to introduce seculars, but two or three of his own canons with some religious.

Idem Abbati et Conventui sancti Remigii.

The same to the Abbot and the Convent of Saint Remigius.

Ut iuxta illius supremi post Christum pastoris edictum pastor forma factus gregis ex animo dignoscitur, non dominandi libidine, sed amore recte regendi debet illum salubriter visitare, sic excessus delinquentium quantum potest corripiens, ne revelet, sic increpans, ne confundat: quia, quum iuxta sapientis edictum secreto sit arguendus amicus, amicitiae legem violare videtur, si econtra palam arguat exprobrando. Attendentes igitur, quod indecens est, ut venerabili fratri nostro Remensi archiepiscopo in monasterio vestro visitationis officium exercente saeculares intersint, per quos possit in claustro dissolutionis materia provenire, quum nequaquam bene in claustralibus inducantur: auctoritate praesentium firmiter inhibemus, ut nullos de cetero saeculares in capitulum, nisi duos vel tres de canonicis ecclesiae suae in decenti habitu, viris aliis, quos expedire viderit, religiosis adiunctis, secum visitationis tempore introducat.

That in accordance with the edict of that supreme shepherd after Christ, a shepherd, made a model of the flock, is recognized from the heart—not by a lust of dominating, but by a love of rightly ruling—he ought wholesomely to visit it, thus correcting, as far as he can, the excesses of delinquents, so rebuking as not to reveal, so chiding as not to confound: because, since according to the edict of the Wise Man a friend is to be reproved in secret, he seems to violate the law of friendship if, on the contrary, he should openly accuse by upbraiding. Attending, therefore, that it is indecent that, while our venerable brother the archbishop of Reims is exercising the office of visitation in your monastery, seculars be present—through whom matter of dissoluteness can arise in the cloister, since they are by no means well introduced among cloistered persons—we, by the authority of these presents, firmly forbid that henceforth he introduce no seculars into chapter, unless two or three of the canons of his church in decent habit, with other religious men adjoined whom he shall see to be expedient, be brought in with him at the time of visitation.

CAP. XVIII.

CHAPTER 18.

Lex dioecesana et lex iurisdictionis sunt diversae, unde res iudicata in una non obstat agenti in alia.

The diocesan law and the law of jurisdiction are diverse, whence a res judicata in the one does not obstruct one proceeding in the other.

Idem Episcopo Baiocensi et Archidiacono Rothomagensi.

The same, to the Bishop of Bayeux and the Archdeacon of Rouen.

Dilectus filius abbas monasterii Rothomagensis Venetensis dioecesis coram nobis exposuit, quod tertia pars emendarum, quas homines quinque parochiarum, quae sui conventus sunt usibus deputatae, pro suis excessibus solvere compelluntur, ad suum spectat monasterium ab antiquo, et quod inter ipsos homines orta ecclesiastica quaestione citatio ad eundem, sed examinatio et decisio quaestionis ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum Venetensem episcopum et ipsum abbatem pertinent in communi. Quumque felicis memoriae Innocentius Papa praedecessor noster, conquerente ipso abbate, quod praefatus episcopus super hoc inquietabat eundem, vobis de assensu partium dederit in mandatis, ut, vocatis partibus et auditis hinc inde propositis, causam remitteretis ad eum sufficienter instructam, dictus episcopus processum vestrum diutius impedivit occasione cuiusdam sententiae, quae super quibusdam ecclesiis quoad legem dioecesanam promulgata exstitit pro eodem. Unde praefatus abbas nobis humiliter supplicavit, ut quum citatio, causarum examinatio et decisio, ac emendae ad legem iurisdictionis pertinere noscantur, non sineremus sententiae memoratae praetextu negotii processum ulterius impediri.

The beloved son, the abbot of the monastery of Rouen of the diocese of Vannes, set forth before us that a third part of the amends, which the men of five parishes—assigned to the uses of his convent—are compelled to pay for their excesses, pertains to his monastery from of old, and that, an ecclesiastical question having arisen among those men, the citation is to the same, but the examination and decision of the question pertain in common to our venerable brother the bishop of Vannes and the abbot himself. And when Innocent, Pope of happy memory, our predecessor, the abbot himself complaining that the aforesaid bishop was troubling him in this matter, had given you by the assent of the parties a mandate that, the parties having been called and the proposals on either side heard, you should remit the cause to him sufficiently instructed, the said bishop hindered your process for a long time on the occasion of a certain sentence which had been promulgated concerning certain churches as to the diocesan law in favor of the same. Wherefore the aforesaid abbot humbly supplicated us that, since citation, examination and decision of causes, and amends are known to pertain to the law of jurisdiction, we would not allow the process of the business to be further impeded under the pretext of the aforesaid sentence.

Quum igitur praedicta de lege iurisdictionis exsistant, discretioni vestrae mandamus, quatenus huiusmodi sententia non obstante procedatis in negotio ipso iuxta traditam vobis formam.

Therefore, since the aforesaid matters concerning the law of jurisdiction exist, we mandate to your discretion that, the sentence of this kind notwithstanding, you proceed in the matter itself according to the form delivered to you.

CAP. XIX.

CHAPTER 19.

Per rescriptum, quo Papa mandat ordinario, ut corrigat clericos suae dioecesis, non datur ei iurisdictio super exemptos.

By a rescript, whereby the Pope mandates the ordinary to correct the clerics of his diocese, jurisdiction is not granted to him over the exempt.

Gregorius IX. Episcopo Suanensi.

Gregory IX. To the Bishop of Sovana.

Grave gerimus [et indignum], quod quum in ecclesiam sanctae Mariae de Orbitello, et quasdam alias ecclesias in tua dioecesi exsistentes, ad monasterium sancti Anastasii de Urbe spectantes, nullam iurisdictionem habeas ordinariam aut etiam delegatam, occasione literarum nostrarum, quas super correctione clericorum tibi transmisimus, in eas interdicti, ac in clericos earundem suspensionis sententias promulgasti, quanquam abbas eiusdem monasterii eos corrigere sit paratus, [prout pertinet ad eundem; quia vero eo minus debemus iniurias ipsius monasterii sustinere, quo specialiter ad nos spectans, nos post Deum operat praecipuos adiutores, fraternitati tunc per apostolica scripta firmiter praecipiendo] Mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, prudenter corrigens per te ipsum quae minus provide attentasti, praedictas sententias [infra octo dies post susceptionem praesentium] sine [qualibet] difficultate relaxes [Alioquin dilectis filiis s. Iusti et Albaren. Abbatibus et archipresbytero S. Ioannis Montis alti Tuscanensis Suanensis est Castrensis dioecesis nostris damus literis in mandatis ut ipsi ex tunc easdem sententias auctoritate nostra studeant relaxare].

We consider it grave [and unworthy], that although with respect to the church of Saint Mary of Orbitello, and certain other churches existing in your diocese, belonging to the monastery of Saint Anastasius of the City, you have no jurisdiction, ordinary or even delegated, on the occasion of our letters, which we sent to you concerning the correction of the clerics, you have promulgated sentences of interdict upon them, and of suspension upon their clerics, although the abbot of the same monastery is prepared to correct them, [as pertains to the same; and indeed because we ought the less to endure the injuries of that monastery, inasmuch as, looking specially to us, it employs us after God as chief helpers, firmly enjoining your fraternity then through apostolic writings] We command, that, if it is so, prudently correcting by yourself the things which you have less providently attempted, you relax the aforesaid sentences [within eight days after the reception of the present letters] without [any] difficulty [Otherwise we give by our letters in mandate to our beloved sons, the Abbots of St. Justus and Albaren., and to the archpriest of St. John of Monte Alto of Tuscany, of the Suanense and Castrense diocese, that they from then on strive to relax the same sentences by our authority].

CAP. XX.

CHAPTER 20.

Ordinarius, cui competit absolvere ab excommunicatione, potest aliis absolutionem demandare.

The Ordinary, to whom it pertains to absolve from excommunication, can entrust the absolution to others.

Idem.

The same.

His, quibus ex officio in certis casibus competit illos absolvere qui pro violenta manuum iniectione incidunt in canonem sententiae promulgatae, licet aliis huiusmodi absolutionem committere, quum viderint expedire.

To those to whom, by office, in certain cases it is competent to absolve those who, for violent laying-on of hands, fall into the canon of a promulgated sentence, it is permitted to commit such absolution to others, when they shall have seen it to be expedient.

TITULUS XXXII. DE OFFICIO IUDICIS.

TITLE 32. ON THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Ad officium iudicis etiam delegati spectat providere advocatum parti, quae non potest habere; et poterit dare domesticum.

It pertains to the office of the judge, even of a delegated one, to provide an advocate for the party which cannot have one; and he may assign a domestic.

Honorius III. Archiepiscopo sancti Leonardi et Abbati Salernitano.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishop of St. Leonard and the Abbot of Salerno.

Ex literis vestris accepimus, quod, quum causam, quae inter dilectos filios abbatem et conventum Fossae novae ex parte una, et abbatem et conventum monasterii Cavensis Salernitanae dioecesis ex altera super quibusdam possessionibus monasterii sancti Petri de Almaphia vertebatur, quas bonae memoriae frater Silvester monachus Fossae novae, quum idem S. Petri monasterium visitasset, eisdem abbati et conventui Cavensi vendidit in eiusdem monasterii S. Petri praeiudicium et gravamen, vobis duximus committendam, quia partibus in vestra praesentia constitutis pars praedicti monasterii S. Petri proposuit, quod aliquem de civitate Salernitana habere non poterat advocatum, vestrum super hoc implorando officium, tu, frater archiepiscope, eidem de magistro R. Capuda, Aquensi thesaurario, clerico tuo, ad exhibendum in causa ipsa patrocinium providisti. Verum frater Stephanus prior S. Mariae de Dompno Cavensis monachus pro monasterio suo proposuit, in praeiudicium eiusdem monasterii factum esse eo, quod dictus R. clericus et domesticus tuus erat. Nos igitur decisionem negotii nolentes frivolis exceptionibus impediri, causam ipsam ad vos duximus remittendam; per apostolica vobis scripta Mandamus, quatenus, hoc non obstante, eisdem concedentes advocatum praedictum et, in negotio ipso, sublato appellationis obstaculo, sine morae dispendio ratione praevia procedatis iuxta priorum continentiam literarum et quoniam instrumenta S. Petri monasterii quae ipsis dictus S. venditionis eiusdem tempore tradidit abbas et conventus Cavensis malitiose occultare dicuntur, ipsos ut ea vobis exhibeant monitione praemissa per censuram ecclesiasticam sicut iustum fuerit, appellatione postposita compellatis.

From your letters we have received that, since the case which was turning between the beloved sons, the abbot and convent of Fossanova on the one part, and the abbot and convent of the monastery of Cava of the Salernitan diocese on the other, over certain possessions of the monastery of Saint Peter of Almaphia, which brother Sylvester of good memory, a monk of Fossanova, when he had visited that same monastery of Saint Peter, sold to the same abbot and convent of Cava to the prejudice and burden of that same monastery of Saint Peter, we judged should be committed to you; because, when the parties had been set in your presence, the party of the aforesaid monastery of Saint Peter put forward that it could not have any advocate from the city of Salerno, imploring your office herein; you, brother archbishop, provided for the same, from Master R. Capuda, treasurer of Aquensis, your cleric, to exhibit patronage in that very case. But brother Stephen, prior of Saint Mary of Dompno, a monk of Cava, on behalf of his monastery alleged that it was done to the prejudice of that same monastery, because the said R. was your cleric and domesticus. We, therefore, not wishing the decision of the business to be impeded by frivolous exceptions, have deemed the case itself to be remitted to you; by apostolic writings we Mandate to you that, notwithstanding this, granting to them the aforesaid advocate, and in the business itself, the obstacle of appeal having been removed, you proceed without loss of delay, reason going before, according to the tenor of the prior letters; and since the instruments of the monastery of Saint Peter, which the said S. at the time of that same sale delivered to them, are said to be maliciously concealed by the abbot and convent of Cava, you shall compel them, the monition first given, by ecclesiastical censure, as shall be just, the appeal set aside, to exhibit them to you.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Quum imploratur officium nobile, fit litis contestatio; secus in mercenario.

When a noble office is implored, there is a contestation of the suit; otherwise in the case of a mercenary.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory IX.

Iudicis officium, ubicunque pro actione proponitur, veluti quum restitutio in integrum principaliter postulatur, litis contestationem exposcit; alias ante et post ingressum causae potest ad hoc sine litis contestatione haberi recursus.

The judge’s office, wherever it is proposed in place of an action, for example when restitution in integrum is principally demanded, requires the contestation of the suit; otherwise, before and after the entry of the cause, recourse may be had to this without contestation of the suit.

TITULUS XXXIII. DE MAIORITATE ET OBEDIENTIA.

TITLE 33. ON SUPERIORITY AND OBEDIENCE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Prius ordinatus, ceteris paribus, prior et maior habendus est.

He who was ordained earlier, other things being equal, is to be held prior and greater.

Gregorius Augustino Anglorum Episcopo.

Gregory to Augustine, Bishop of the English.

Quum certum [sit, pro omnipotenti Deo laborantibus ineffabilia aeterni regni praemia reservari, nobis tamen eis necesse est bonorum beneficia tribuere, ut in spiritualis operis studio ex remuneratione valeant multiplicius insudare. Et quia nova Anglorum ecclesia ad omnipotentis Dei gratiam eodem Domino largiente et te laborante perducta est, usum tibi pallii in ea ad sola missarum solennia agenda concedimus ita, ut per loca singula duodecim episcopos ordines, qui tuae ditioni subiaceant, quatenus Londoniensis civitatis episcopus semper in posterum a synodo propria debeat consecrari, atque honoris pallium ab hac sancta et apostolica, cui auctore Deo inservio, sede percipiat. Ad Eboracam vero civitatem te volumus episcopum mittere, quem ipse iudicaveris ordinandum, ita, ut si eadem civitas cum finitimis locis verbum Dei receperit, ipse quoque duodecim episcopos ordinet, ut metropolitani honore perfruatur, quia ei quoque, si vita comes fuerit, pallium tribuere Domino favente disponimus; quem tamen tuae fraternitatis volumus dispositioni subiacere.

Since it is certain [that for those laboring for the omnipotent God ineffable rewards of the eternal kingdom are reserved, yet it is necessary for us to grant to them benefits of good things, so that in the zeal of spiritual work, from remuneration, they may be able to sweat more abundantly. And because the new church of the Angles has been brought to the grace of the omnipotent God, the same Lord bestowing and you laboring, we grant to you the use of the pallium in it for the purpose of performing only the solemnities of the Masses, in such a way that in each several place you may ordain twelve bishops, who shall be subject to your dominion, to the end that the bishop of the city of London shall always in the future be consecrated by his own synod, and receive the pallium of honor from this holy and apostolic see, which, with God as author, I serve. But to the city of York we wish you to send a bishop, whom you yourself shall judge should be ordained, so that, if that same city with the neighboring places shall have received the word of God, he also may ordain twelve bishops, that he may enjoy the honor of a metropolitan, for we also plan, if life be companion, with the Lord favoring, to bestow the pallium upon him; whom nevertheless we wish to be subject to the disposition of your fraternity.

Post obitum vero tuum ita episcopis, quos ordinaverit, praesit, ut Londoniensis episcopi nullo modo ditioni subiaceat.] Sit vero inter Londoniae et Eboracae civitatis episcopos in posterum honoris ista distinctio, ut ipse prior et maior habeatur, qui prius communitatis consilio et concordi fuerit actione ordinatus. [Tua vero etc. Dat.

After your death, however, let him preside over the bishops whom he shall have ordained in such a way that he be in no manner subject to the jurisdiction of the bishop of London.] But let there be in the future between the bishops of the city of London and of York this distinction of honor: that he be held as prior and greater who shall first have been ordained by the counsel of the community and by a concordant action. [But your ... etc. Given.

die X. Kal. Iul., imperante domino nostro Mauricio Tiberio piissimo Augusto Ao. XIX. post consulatum eiusdem domini Ao. XVIII., Ind.

on the 10th day before the Kalends of July, under the rule of our lord Maurice Tiberius, most pious Augustus, in year 19, in year 18 after the consulship of the same lord, Indiction.

IV. 601.]

4. 601.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Veniens contra decretum vel constitutionem episcopi debet excommunicari.

One coming against the decree or constitution of the bishop ought to be excommunicated.

Idem.

The same.

Si quis venerit contra decretum episcopi, ab ecclesia abiiciatur. In libro Regum legitur: "Qui non obedierit principi, morte moriatur." Et in concilio Agathensi, quod anathematizetur.

If anyone shall have come against the decree of the bishop, let him be cast out from the church. In the Book of Kings it is read: "Whoever does not obey the prince, let him die by death." And in the Council of Agde, that he be anathematized.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Clericus administratione carens non tenetur ad iuramentum obedientiae, vel ad faciendam scripturam super ea.

A cleric lacking an administration is not bound to the oath of obedience, nor to making a writing upon it.

Leo Papa.

Pope Leo.

Legebatur [quoque] in literis tuis, [quas iidem diaconi detulerunt,] quod frater Atticus [Thessalonicam venisset, quodque consensum suum etiam scripturae professione signasset, ut de illo non aliud a nobis posset intelligi, quam proprii arbitrii et spontaneae devotionis fuisse, quod venerat, quodque] chartulam de obedientiae sponsione conscripserat, in qua signum prodebatur iniuriae. Non enim necessarium fuerat, ut obligaretur scripto, qui obedientiam suam ipso iam voluntarii adventus officio comprobabat. [Unde deplorationibus etc.]

It was read [also] in your letters, [which the same deacons delivered,] that brother Atticus [had come to Thessalonica, and that he had even sealed his consent by a profession of writing, so that concerning him nothing else could be understood by us than that it had been of his own arbitrament and spontaneous devotion that he had come, and that] he had drawn up a little slip concerning a pledge of obedience, in which a mark of injury was disclosed. For it had not been necessary that he be bound by a writing, he who already by the very office of a voluntary advent was proving his obedience. [Whence lamentations etc.]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Ab omnibus de dioecesi obediendum est episcopo.

The bishop is to be obeyed by all of the diocese.

Clemens Papa III.

Pope Clement 3.

Omnes principes terrae et ceteros homines episcopis obedire, [et capita sua submittere, eorumque adiutores exsistere,] beatus Petrus praecipiebat, [ut omnes etc.]

All the princes of the earth and the other men to obey the bishops, [and to submit their heads, and to be their adjutors,] blessed Peter was enjoining, [that all etc.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Non obediens canonicis institutis incurrit inobedientiae notam, id est infamiam.

One not obedient to the canonical institutes incurs the mark of disobedience, that is, infamy.

Innocentius III. Capitulo Herbipolensi.

Innocent III. To the Chapter of Würzburg.

Illud Dominus in beato Petro (Et infra: [cf. c. 5. de cler. exc. V. 27.]) Munitiones autem et oppida Herbipolensis ecclesiae in utilitatem ipsius se asseruit tenuisse, ne, si ad alienas manus forsitan devenissent, non esset qui ea postmodum liberaret.

That saying of the Lord concerning blessed Peter (And below: [cf. c. 5. on clerical exemption, 5. 27.]) He, moreover, asserted that he had held the fortifications and the towns of the Herbipolensis Church for its benefit, lest, if they had perhaps come into alien hands, there would be no one who would afterwards free them.

Sed Quum spiritualia sint temporalibus digniora, et obedientia melior sit quam victima, et auscultare magis quam adipem arietum offerre, non debuerat Hildesemensis episcopus pro temporali commodo Herbipolensis ecclesiae inobedientiae notam incurrere, et, apostolicis iussionibus contraire. [V. Id. April. ao. II. 1200.]

But Since spiritual things are more worthy than temporal things, and obedience is better than sacrifice, and to hearken rather than to offer the fat of rams, the Bishop of Hildesheim ought not, for the temporal advantage of the Church of Würzburg, to have incurred the mark of disobedience, and to oppose apostolic injunctions. [April 9, year 2, 1200.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Imperium non praeest sacerdotio, sed subest, et ei obedire tenetur. Vel sic: Episcopus non debet subesse principibus, sed praeesse. H. d. et est multum allegabile.

The imperium does not preside over the priesthood, but is subject to it, and is bound to obey it. Or thus: A bishop ought not to be subject to princes, but to preside. Here in this Distinction; and it is much allegable.

Idem illustrissimo Constantinopolitano Imperatori.

The same, to the most illustrious Constantinopolitan Emperor.

Solitae benignitatis affectu recepimus literas, quas per dilectum filium archidiaconum Durachii, virum providum et fidelem, imperialis nobis excellentia destinavit, per quas intelleximus, quod literae, quas per dilectum filium I. capellanum nostrum, tunc apostolicae sedis legatum, tibi transmisimus, imperio tuo praesentatae fuerant et perlectae. § 1. Mirata est autem imperialis sublimitas, sicut per easdem nobis literas destinasti, quod te nisi fuimus in nostris literis aliquantulum increpare, licet non increpandi animo, sed affectu potius commonendi quod scripsimus meminerimus nos scripsisse. Huic autem tuae admirationi non causam, sed occasionem praebuit, sicut ex eisdem coniecimus literis, quod legisti, beatum Petrum Apostolorum principem sic scripsisse: "Subditi estote omni humanae creaturae propter Deum, sive regi, tanquam praecellenti, sive ducibus, tanquam ab eo missis, ad vindictam malefactorum, laudem vero bonorum." Volens enim, de quo nos rationabilius admiramur, imperatoria celsitudo per haec et alia, quae induxit, imperium sacerdotio dignitate ac potestate praeferre, ex auctoritate praemissa triplex trahere voluit argumentum, primum ex eo, quod legitur: "subditi estote;" secundum ex eo, quod sequitur: "regi tanquam praecellenti;" tertium ex eo, quod est adiectum subsequenter: "ad vindictam malefactorum, laudem vero bonorum;" per primum subesse sacerdotium, per secundum imperium praeeminere, per tertium imperatorem tam in sacerdotes quam laicos iurisdictionem, immo etiam gladii potestatem accepisse praesumens.

With the affection of our accustomed benignity we received the letters which the imperial excellency sent to us through the beloved son, the archdeacon of Dyrrhachium, a prudent and faithful man, through which we understood that the letters which through the beloved son I., our chaplain, then legate of the apostolic see, we transmitted to you, had been presented to your empire and read. § 1. Moreover, the imperial sublimity, as you conveyed to us through those same letters, was astonished that we had in our letters somewhat rebuked you—though not with a spirit of rebuking, but rather with an affection of admonishing; we remember that what we wrote, we wrote. But to this your astonishment there supplied not a cause, but an occasion, as we inferred from those same letters, that you read that blessed Peter, the prince of the Apostles, thus wrote: “Be subject to every human creature for God’s sake, whether to the king, as pre-eminent, or to the dukes, as sent by him, for the avenging of malefactors, but the praise of the good.” For the imperial celsitude, wishing—at which we more reasonably marvel—by these and other things which it adduced to prefer the empire to the priesthood in dignity and power, wished to draw a threefold argument from the aforesaid authority: first from that which is read, “be subject”; second from that which follows, “to the king as pre-eminent”; third from that which is subsequently added, “for the avenging of malefactors, but the praise of the good”; by the first, that the priesthood is subject; by the second, that the empire is pre-eminent; by the third, presuming that the emperor has received jurisdiction, nay even the power of the sword, over both priests and laity.

Quum enim et boni quidam sint sacerdotes, et quidam eorum malefactores exsistant, is, qui secundum Apostolum gladium portat ad vindictam malefactorum, laudem vero bonorum, in malefacientes presbyteros excessus praesumptos potest ultore gladio vindicare, quum inter presbyteros et alios Apostolus non distinguat. § 2. Verum si et personam loquentis, et eorum, ad quos loquebatur, ac vim locutionis diligentius attendisses, scribentis non expressisses taliter intellectum. Scribebat enim Apostolus subditis suis, et eos ad humilitatis meritum provocabat.

Since indeed both some priests are good, and some of them turn out to be malefactors, he who, according to the Apostle, bears the sword for the vengeance of malefactors, but for the praise of the good, can with the avenging sword vindicate the presumptuous excesses in presbyters who do evil, since the Apostle does not distinguish between presbyters and others. § 2. But if you had more diligently attended both to the person of the one speaking, and to those to whom he was speaking, and to the force of the locution, you would not have expressed the writer’s meaning in such a manner. For the Apostle was writing to his subjects, and was provoking them to the merit of humility.

Nam si per hoc, quod dixit: "subditi estote," sacerdotibus voluit imponere iugum subiectionis, et eis praelationis auctoritatem afferre, quibus eos subiectos esse monebat, sequeretur ex hoc, quod etiam servus quilibet in sacerdotes imperium accepisset, quum dicatur: "omni humanae creaturae." Quod autem sequitur, "regi tanquam praecellenti," non negamus, quin praecellat imperator in temporalibus illos duntaxat, qui ab eo suscipiunt temporalia. Sed Pontifex in spiritualibus antecellit, quae tanto sunt temporalibus digniora, quanto anima praefertur corpori, licet non simpliciter dictum fuerit: "subditi estote," sed additum fuerit: "propter Deum," nec pure sit subscriptum: "regi praecellenti," sed interpositum forsitan fuit non sine causa, "tanquam." Quod autem sequitur: "ad vindictam malefactorum, laudem vero bonorum," intelligendum non est, quod rex vel imperator super omnes et bonos et malos gladii acceperit potestatem, sed in eos solummodo, qui utentes gladio eius sunt iurisdictioni commissi, iuxta quod Veritas ait: "Omnes, qui acceperint gladium, gladio peribunt." Non enim potest aut debet quisquam servum alterius iudicare, quum servus domino suo secundum Apostolum stet aut cadat. Ad id etiam induxisti, quod, licet Moyses et Aaron secundum carnem fratres exstiterint, Moyses tamen princeps populi, et Aaron sacerdotii potestate praeerat, et Iesus successor ipsius imperium in sacerdotes accepit.

For if by this, that he said, "be subject," he wished to impose upon priests the yoke of subjection and to confer upon those to whom he was admonishing them to be subject the authority of prelation, it would follow from this that even any slave whatsoever would have received imperium over priests, since it is said: "to every human creature." But as to what follows, "to the king as preeminent," we do not deny that the emperor excels in temporal matters those only who receive temporals from him. But the Pontiff antecells in spirituals, which are by so much more worthy than temporals as the soul is preferred to the body, although it was not said simply: "be subject," but "for God’s sake" was added; nor is it written purely: "to the preeminent king," but "as though" was perhaps interposed not without cause. And as to what follows: "for the avenging of evildoers, but the praise of the good," it is not to be understood that the king or the emperor has received the power of the sword over all, both good and evil, but only over those who, making use of the sword, are committed to his jurisdiction, according as the Truth says: "All who will have taken the sword shall perish by the sword." For no one can or ought to judge the servant of another, since the servant stands or falls to his own lord, according to the Apostle. To this also you adduced that, although Moses and Aaron were brothers according to the flesh, yet Moses was prince of the people, and Aaron was preeminent by the power of the priesthood, and Joshua, his successor, received authority over priests.

David quoque rex Abiathar pontifici praeeminebat. Ceterum licet Moyses dux populi fuerit, fuit etiam et sacerdos, qui Aaron in sacerdotem unxit, et cui Propheta sacerdotium recognoscens: "Moyses" inquit "et Aaron in sacerdotibus eius." Quod vero de Iesu, id est Iosue, ad commendandam praelationem eius scripsisti, magis secundum spiritum, quam literam debet intelligi, quia secundum Apostolum litera occidit, spiritus autem vivificat, pro eo, quod ipse veri Iesu figuram expressit, qui populum suum in terram promissionis induxit. David etiam quamvis diadema regium obtineret, Abiathar sacerdoti non tam ex dignitate regia, quam auctoritate prophetica imperabat.

King David also was pre-eminent over the pontiff Abiathar. Moreover, although Moses was the leader of the people, he was also a priest, who anointed Aaron as priest; and to him the Prophet, acknowledging the priesthood, says: “Moses and Aaron among his priests.” But as to what you wrote about Jesus, that is Joshua, to commend his preeminence, it ought to be understood more according to the spirit than the letter, because, according to the Apostle, the letter kills, but the spirit gives life, for the reason that he expressed the figure of the true Jesus, who led his people into the land of promise. David also, although he held the royal diadem, commanded the priest Abiathar not so much by royal dignity as by prophetic authority.

Verum quicquid olim fuerit in veteri testamento, nunc aliud est in novo, ex quo Christus factus est sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech, qui se non ut rex, sed ut sacerdos in ara crucis hostiam obtulit Deo Patri, per quam genus redemit humanum, circa illum praecipue, qui successor est Apostoli Petri et vicarius Iesu Christi. § 3. Potuisses autem praerogativam sacerdotii ex eo potius intelligere, quod dictum est: non a quolibet, sed a Deo; non regi, sed sacerdoti; non de regia stirpe, sed de sacerdotali prosapia descendenti, de sacerdotibus videlicet, qui erant in Anathot: "Ecce constitui te super gentes et regna, ut evellas et dissipes, aedifices et plantes" Dictum est etiam in divina lege: "Diis non detrahes, et principem populi tui non maledices" quae sacerdotes regibus anteponens istos Deos et alios principes appellavit. § 4. Praeterea nosse debueras, quod fecit Deus duo magna luminaria in firmamento coeli; luminare maius, ut praeesset diei, et luminare minus, ut praeesset nocti; utrumque magnum, sed alterum maius, quia nomine coeli designatur ecclesia, iuxta quod Veritas ait: "Simile est regnum coelorum homini patri familias, qui summo mane conduxit operarios in vineam suam." Per diem vero spiritualis accipitur, per noctem carnalis secundum propheticum testimonium: "dies diei eructat verbum, et nox nocti indicat scientiam." Ad firmamentum igitur coeli, hoc est universalis ecclesiae, fecit Deus duo magna luminaria, id est, duas magnas instituit dignitates, quae sunt pontificalis auctoritas, et regalis potestas.

But whatever once was in the Old Testament, now it is otherwise in the New, from the time Christ was made priest unto eternity according to the order of Melchizedek, who offered himself not as king, but as priest upon the altar of the cross as a victim to God the Father, by which he redeemed the human race—especially with regard to him who is the successor of the Apostle Peter and the vicar of Jesus Christ. § 3. You could, moreover, have understood the prerogative of the priesthood rather from this, which was said: not from just anyone, but from God; not to the king, but to the priest; not to one descending from royal stock, but from sacerdotal lineage—namely, of the priests who were in Anathoth: “Behold, I have set you over nations and kingdoms, that you may root up and pull down, build and plant.” It is also said in the divine law: “You shall not detract from the gods, and the prince of your people you shall not curse,” which, preferring priests to kings, called these “gods” and the others “princes.” § 4. Furthermore, you ought to have known that God made two great luminaries in the firmament of heaven: the greater luminary, that it might preside over the day, and the lesser luminary, that it might preside over the night; both great, but one greater—because by the name “heaven” the Church is designated, according to what the Truth says: “The kingdom of heaven is like to a man, the father of a family, who at the first hour hired laborers into his vineyard.” By “day,” indeed, the spiritual is understood; by “night,” the carnal, according to the prophetic testimony: “day unto day pours forth word, and night unto night declares knowledge.” To the firmament, therefore, of heaven—that is, of the universal Church—God made two great luminaries; that is, he established two great dignities, which are pontifical authority and regal power.

Sed illa, quae praeest diebus, id est spiritualibus, maior est; quae vero [noctibus, id est] carnalibus, minor, ut, quanta est inter solem et lunam, tanta inter pontifices et reges differentia cognoscatur. Haec autem si prudenter attenderet imperatoria celsitudo, non faceret aut permitteret venerabilem fratrem nostrum Constantinopolitanum patriarcham, magnum quidem et honorabile membrum ecclesiae, iuxta scabellum pedum suorum in sinistra parte sedere, quum alii reges et principes archiepiscopis et episcopis suis, sicut debent, reverenter assurgant, et eis iuxta se venerabilem sedem assignent. Nam et piissimus Constantinus quantum honoris exhibuerit sacerdotibus, tua sicut credimus, discretio non ignorat.

But that which presides over the days, that is, the spiritual things, is greater; whereas that which [over the nights, that is,] over the carnal things, is lesser, so that, as great as is the difference between the sun and the moon, so great may the difference between pontiffs and kings be recognized. But if imperial celsitude would attend to this prudently, it would not make or permit our venerable brother the Constantinopolitan patriarch, truly a great and honorable member of the church, to sit beside the footstool of his feet on the left side, when other kings and princes, as they ought, rise reverently to their archbishops and bishops and assign to them a venerable seat beside themselves. For indeed how much honor the most pious Constantine displayed to priests, your discretion, as we believe, does not ignore.

§ 5. Nos autem etsi non increpando scripserimus, potuissemus tamen rationabiliter increpare, quum B. Paulus Apostolus episcopum instruens ad Timotheum scripisse legatur. "Praedica verbum, insta opportune, importune, argue, obsecra, increpa in omni patientia et doctrina." Non enim os nostrum debet esse ligatum, sed patere debet ad omnes, ne secundum propheticum verbum simus canes muti, non valentes latrare. Unde correctio nostra tibi non debuit esse molesta, sed magis accepta, quia pater filium, quem diligit, corripit, et Deus quos amat arguit et castigat.

§ 5. But although we have written not by rebuking, yet we could reasonably have rebuked, since Blessed Paul the Apostle, instructing a bishop, is read to have written to Timothy: "Proclaim the word, press on opportune, inopportune; argue, beseech, rebuke in all patience and teaching." For our mouth ought not to be bound, but ought to be open to all, lest, according to the prophetic word, we be mute dogs, not able to bark. Whence our correction ought not to have been troublesome to you, but rather welcome, because a father reproves the son whom he loves, and God rebukes and chastises those whom he loves.

Debitum igitur pastoralis officii exsequimur, quum obsecramus, arguimus, increpamus, et non solum alios, sed imperatores et reges opportune et importune ad ea studemus inducere, quae divinae sunt placita voluntati. § 6. Nobis autem in B. Petro sunt oves Christi commissae; dicente Domino: "Pasce oves meas," non distinguens inter has oves et alias, ut alienum a suo demonstraret ovili, qui Petrum et successores ipsius magistros non recognosceret et pastores; ut illud tanquam notissimum omittamus, quod Dominus dixit ad Petrum, et in Petro dixit ad successores ipsius: "Quodcunque ligaveris super terram, erit ligatum et in coelis etc.," nihil excipiens, qui dixit: "quodcunque." Verum his diutius insistere nolumus, ne vel contendere videamur, vel in huiusmodi delectari, quum, si gloriari expediat, non in honore, sed in onere, non in magnitudine, sed in sollicitudine sit potius gloriandum, quum et Apostolus in infirmitatibus glorietur. Novimus esse scriptum: "Omnis qui se exaltat, humiliabitur, et qui se humiliat, exaltabitur;" et iterum: "Quanto maior es, humilia te in omnibus;" et alibi: "Deus superbis resistit, humilibus autem dat gratiam." Propter quod exaltationem nostram in humilitate ponimus, et humilitatem nostram exaltationem maximam reputamus.

Therefore we discharge the debt of the pastoral office, when we beseech, we argue, we rebuke, and we strive to induce not only others, but emperors and kings, opportunely and importunately, to those things which are pleasing to the divine will. § 6. Moreover, to us in B. Peter the sheep of Christ have been committed; the Lord saying: “Feed my sheep,” not distinguishing between these sheep and others, so that He might show as alien from His own fold whoever would not recognize Peter and his successors as teachers and pastors; to pass over as most well-known that which the Lord said to Peter, and in Peter said to his successors: “Whatever you shall bind upon earth shall be bound also in the heavens, etc.,” making no exception, He who said: “whatever.” Yet we do not wish to dwell longer on these things, lest we seem either to contend or to take delight in matters of this kind, since, if it be expedient to glory, one ought rather to glory not in honor but in burden, not in magnitude but in solicitude, since the Apostle also glories in infirmities. We know it is written: “Everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled, and he who humbles himself shall be exalted;” and again: “The greater you are, humble yourself in all things;” and elsewhere: “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” Wherefore we place our exaltation in humility, and we reckon our humility to be the greatest exaltation.

Unde etiam servos non solum Dei, sed etiam servorum Dei nos esse scribimus et fatemur, et tam sapientibus quam insipientibus secundum Apostolum sumus debitores. § 7. Utrum autem imperatoriam excellentiam ad bonum et utile per literas nostras duxerimus invitandam, utrum tibi iusta suggesserimus et honesta, tua sollicitudo discernat, quum non nisi ad utilitatem ecclesiae et terrae Hierosolymitanae subsidium nos te meminerimus invitasse. [Inspiret igitur etc.]

Whence also we both write and confess that we are servants not only of God, but even of the servants of God, and, according to the Apostle, we are debtors both to the wise and to the unwise. § 7. But whether we have considered that the imperial excellence should be invited to the good and the useful by our letters, whether we have suggested to you things just and honorable, let your solicitude discern, since we remember that we invited you to nothing except for the utility of the Church and for the aid of the land of Jerusalem. [May He inspire therefore, etc.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Ordinatus per Papam non per hoc eximitur a iurisdictione sui episcopi.

One ordained by the Pope is not by this exempted from the jurisdiction of his own bishop.

Idem episcopo Florentino.

The same to the Bishop of Florence.

Per tuas nobis literas intimasti, quod, quum aliqui ecclesiae Romanae subdiaconi praelationes in tua dioecesi assequuntur, pro quibus tibi tenentur obedientiam exhibere, si quando exigente iustitia te contigerit exercere in ipsos ecclesiasticam disciplinam, illi subdiaconatus privilegium allegantes, ea se asserunt non teneri, ac si per huiusmodi subdiaconatus officium ab obedientia, qua tibi tenentur, ratione obtenti beneficii sint exempti. Super quo Postulasti per sedis apostolicae oraculum edoceri, utrum quis per ordinem subdiaconatus, a Romano Pontifice susceptum, a debita tibi reverentia subtrahatur? Ad quod tibi breviter respondemus, quod, etsi decens sit, ut illis [specialiter], quantum convenit, a te inter alios tibi subditos deferatur, quos benignitas apostolica collatione ipsius ordinis honoravit, per eam tamen ab obedientia, quam alias tibi debent, minime absolvuntur.

Through your letters to us you intimated that, since some subdeacons of the Roman Church obtain prelacies in your diocese, for which they are held to exhibit obedience to you, if ever, justice requiring it, it should befall you to exercise ecclesiastical discipline upon them, they, alleging the privilege of the subdiaconate, assert that they are not bound by these, as if by this office of the subdiaconate they were exempt from the obedience by which they are held to you by reason of the benefice obtained. On which point you have asked to be instructed by the oracle of the Apostolic See whether someone, by the order of the subdiaconate received from the Roman Pontiff, is withdrawn from the reverence due to you. To which we briefly respond to you, that although it is decent that to them [in particular], so far as is fitting, there be shown deference by you among your other subjects, whom apostolic benignity has honored by the collation of that order, nevertheless by that they are in no way absolved from the obedience which otherwise they owe to you.

[Dat. Romae ap. S. Petrum VII. Id. Apr.

[Dated at Rome at St. Peter's Apr. 7.

Ao. IX. 1206.]

Year 9, 1206.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Quando de obedientia vel subiectione agitur, nihil attentari debet in praeiudicium rei, vel possessoris non citati.

When obedience or subjection is at issue, nothing ought to be attempted to the prejudice of the matter, or of a possessor not cited.

Idem Constantinopolitano Patriarchae.

The same, to the Patriarch of Constantinople.

Inter quatuor animalia quae in medio sedis et circuitu eius describuntur, facies aquilae ab Ezechiele desuper ipsorum quatuor memoratur, quia inter quatuor patriarchales ecclesias, Antiochenam, Alexandrinam, Hierosolymitanam, Constantinopolitanam, quae per animalia supradicta signantur, quas apostolica sedes in medio habens quasi filias amplectitur speciales, cui eaedem sunt in circuitu quasi famulae obsequentes, ipsa Constantinopolitana post apostolicam sedem excellentia praeeminet dignitatis, ad cuius exaltationem tanto libentius adspiramus, quanto ipsam tanquam honorabilius membrum sacrosanctae Romanae ecclesiae arctius amplexantes, ipsius auxilio temporibus istis eandem amplius noscimus indigere, ac tuas, qui eidem Domino disponente praeesse dignosceris, petitiones libentius promovere disponimus, quibus non repugnat honestas, nec aliis praeiudicium generatur, quum a nobis iniuriarum actio non debeat exoriri, a quibus iura tanquam a fonte ad ceteros derivantur. Licet igitur, in quantum cum Deo possumus, tuo velimus honori deferre, ac tuas preces effectui mancipare, petitionem tamen illam nequivimus exaudire, qua postulasti a nobis, ut donationes ecclesiarum et beneficiorum, a dilecto filio P. tit. S. Marcelli presbytero cardinali apostolicae sedis legato factas te praesente ac penitus inconsulto, quum nimiam multitudinem ecclesiarum contulerit, easque iure perpetuo absque tuo consensu et capituli maioris ecclesiae tradiderit possidendas, dignaremur auctoritate apostolica irritare etc.

Among the four
animals which are described in the midst of the throne and in its circuit, the face of the eagle is mentioned by Ezekiel as above those four, because among the four patriarchal churches—Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, Constantinople—which are signified by the aforesaid animals, whom the Apostolic See, having them in the midst, embraces as special daughters, and the same are in its circuit as handmaids attending, the Constantinopolitan itself, after the Apostolic See, preeminent in excellence of dignity; to whose exaltation we the more willingly aspire, the more closely we, embracing it as a more honorable member of the most sacred Roman Church, know that in these times we stand in greater need of its help, and we are disposed the more willingly to promote your petitions—you who, by the Lord’s disposition, are recognized to preside over the same—petitions to which uprightness does not object, nor is prejudice engendered to others, since from us there ought not to arise an action of injuries, from whom rights, as from a fountain, are derived to the rest. Therefore, although, in so far as with God we can, we would wish to defer to your honor and consign your prayers to effect, nevertheless we have not been able to hear that petition whereby you asked of us that we should deign by apostolic authority to annul the donations of churches and benefices made by our beloved son P., presbyter cardinal of the title of St. Marcellus, legate of the Apostolic See, with you present and altogether unconsulted—since he has conferred an excessive multitude of churches and has delivered them to be possessed by perpetual right without your consent and that of the chapter of the major church—etc.

Quamvis ergo tuam propter praemissa petitionem iuxta tuum desiderium nequivimus exaudire, tuo tamen, quantum cum nostra possumus honestate, volentes honori deferre, fraternitati tuae duximus concedendum, ut ii, qui ecclesias illas seu beneficia possident, obedientiam tibi debitam exhibeant et devotam, nisi forte aliqua illarum ecclesiarum ante captionem regiae civitatis a iurisdictione patriarchae legitime fuisset exempta. Subsequentem vero Petitionem contra ecclesias, quas tibi subiici postulabas, quae prius, quam Constantinopolis civitas caperetur, Constantinopolitano patriarchae minime respondebant, duplici ratione non duximus admittendam. Iuris namque ratio postulat, ut in eorum praeiudicium, quibus eaedem ecclesiae sunt subiectae nihil ordinemus de ipsis, quum nec citati sint, nec convicti, nec per contumaciam se absentent.

Although therefore on account of the aforesaid we were not able to hear your petition according to your desire, yet, wishing to defer to your honor as far as we can with our own propriety, we have judged it to be granted to your fraternity that those who possess those churches or benefices render to you the obedience due and devoted, unless perhaps any of those churches, before the capture of the royal city, had been legitimately exempted from the jurisdiction of the patriarch. But the subsequent Petition against the churches which you were asking to be subjected to you, which, before the city of Constantinople was taken, in no wise answered to the Constantinopolitan patriarch, we have judged not to be admitted for a twofold reason. For the rationale of law demands that, to the prejudice of those to whom those same churches are subject, we ordain nothing concerning them, since neither have they been cited, nor convicted, nor do they absent themselves through contumacy.

[Id etiam modo fieri providentia dissuasit, ne Pisani ac Veneti aliique quamplures, apud Constantinopolim huiusmodi habentes ecclesias, contra imperium provocarentur hoc tempore, qui sunt alliciendi potius blandimentis donec illud soliditate immobili roboretur. Quod si ius tuum contra illos prosequendum duxeris tempore opportuno, faciemus auctore Domino super ipsis iustitiae tibi plenitudinem exhiberi.] Super obedientia vero, quam ut tibi impendi faceremus ab archiepiscopo et episcopis regni Cypri similiter postulasti, fere idem, quod in praecedenti petitione, tibi duximus respondendum, quum et ipsi ante tuam promotionem fuerint exempti, quando videlicet Constantinopolitana ecclesia erat inobediens et rebellis, et in eorum absentia circa statum ipsorum non debuerimus aliquid immutare. Iustitiam tamen non negabimus tibi, quum eam duxeris postulandam.

[That, too, Providence has just now dissuaded from being done, lest the Pisans and Venetians and many others besides, who have churches of this sort at Constantinople, be provoked against the empire at this time—men who ought rather to be enticed by blandishments until it be strengthened with immovable solidity. But if you judge your right against them to be pursued at an opportune time, with the Lord as author we will cause the plenitude of justice to be exhibited to you concerning them.] As to the obedience, moreover, which you likewise requested that we cause to be rendered to you by the archbishop and bishops of the kingdom of Cyprus, we deemed that almost the same as in the preceding petition should be answered to you, since they also, before your promotion, had been exempt, when, namely, the Constantinopolitan church was disobedient and rebellious, and in their absence we ought not to have altered anything concerning their status. Nevertheless, we will not deny you justice, when you shall deem it to be requested.

[Ex parte tua etc. Dat. Ferentini IV. Non.

[On your part, etc. Given at Ferentino on the 4 Nones.

Aug. Ao. IX. 1206.]

Aug. Year 9. 1206.]

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Abbates et sacerdotes, qui sunt dioecesani episcopi, ad eius synodum venire et sibi obedire compelli possunt per censuram ecclesiasticam.

Abbots and priests who are diocesan bishops can be compelled by ecclesiastical censure to come to his synod and to obey him.

Idem.

The same.

Quod super his: (Et infra: cf. c. 5. de cons. et aff. IV. 14.) Similiter etiam Abbates et sacerdotes dioecesana tibi lege subditos, qui ad tuam synodum venire contemnunt [vocati], dummodo in ipsa synodo non ducas aliquid statuendum, quod forte canonicis obviet institutis, per censuras ecclesiasticas ad synodum ipsam venire compellas, et debitam tibi obedientiam et reverentiam exhibere.

As to these matters: (And below: cf. ch. 5 on de cons. et aff. 4. 14.) Likewise also Abbots and priests subject to you by diocesan law, who disdain to come to your synod [when summoned], provided that in that synod you do not deem anything to be established which perhaps might run counter to canonical institutes, you may compel by ecclesiastical censures to come to the synod itself, and to exhibit to you the due obedience and reverence.

[Capellanis etc. Dat. Lat.

[To the chaplains, etc. Given at the Lateran.

II. Kal. Ian. 1199.]

December 31, 1199.]

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Canonici regulares inobedientes priori suo per ipsum excommunicari possunt, et, si fuerint incorrigibiles, de fratrum consortio expelli debent.

Regular canons disobedient to their own prior can be excommunicated by that same prior, and, if they prove incorrigible, they ought to be expelled from the fellowship of the brethren.

Idem sancti Stephani et sancti Proculi abbatibus Bononiensibus.

The same. To the Bolognese Abbots of St. Stephen and St. Proculus.

Quum in ecclesiis sancti Victoris et S. Ioannis de Monte (Et infra:) Nos igitur ad reformationem earundem ecclesiarum, quae peccatis exigentibus et in temporalibus deminutae, et in spiritualibus sunt multipliciter collapsae, diligenti sollicitudine intendentes, universis canonicis dedimus firmiter in mandatis, ut priori suo in his, quae ad eum pertinent, obedirent. Quumque omnes, quatuor duntaxat exceptis, se obedire velle eius monitis et praeceptis concorditer respondissent, praedicti quatuor se contra priorem in superbiam erigentes, licet de obedientia suo priori praestanda praestitissent corporaliter iuramentum, tamen exhibiti iuramenti et districtae praeceptionis immemores, suo priori per omnia restiterunt, et, quum pro contumacia sua nequivissent ad debitam obedientiam revocari, dictus prior in eos dictante iustitia excommunicationis sententiam promulgavit. Quum igitur praefati canonici ad apostolicam sedem accessissent, per scripturas authenticas ex multorum testimonio praelatorum effecti de ipsorum contumacia certiores, recepto secundum formam ecclesiae ab eisdem corporaliter iuramento, ipsis fecimus absolutionis beneficium impendi, praecipientes eis sub debito iuramenti, ut ad suum claustrum, de quo exierant, redeuntes, priori suo secundum Deum devote ac humiliter obedirent.

When in the churches of Saint Victor and St. John of the Mountain (And below:) therefore we, intending with diligent solicitude the reformation of those same churches, which, sins demanding it, have been diminished in temporals and have in spirituals in many ways collapsed, firmly laid upon all the canons by mandates that they should obey their prior in those things which pertain to him. And when all, four only excepted, had answered in concord that they wished to obey his warnings and precepts, the aforesaid four, lifting themselves up in pride against the prior—although they had bodily sworn an oath to render obedience to their own prior—yet, unmindful of the oath they had taken and of the strict precept, resisted their prior in all things; and, since for their contumacy they could not be called back to due obedience, the said prior, justice dictating, promulgated against them the sentence of excommunication. When, therefore, the aforesaid canons had come to the Apostolic See, we, made more certain of their contumacy by authentic writings from the testimony of many prelates, having received from them bodily an oath according to the form of the Church, caused the benefit of absolution to be granted to them, enjoining upon them under the debt of the oath that, returning to their cloister from which they had gone out, they should devoutly and humbly obey their prior according to God.

Ideoque nolentes, quod iidem canonici tam effrenata deinceps libertate vagentur, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus nostra freti auctoritate praefatos canonicos, ut ad prioris sui obedientiam revertantur, sublato cuiusvis appellationis diffugio per censuras ecclesiasticas compellatis, et, ne de sua possint contumacia vel malitia gloriari, cogatis eos, si videritis expedire, ut iuramentum, quod de parendo mandatis prioris pro absolutionis beneficio impetrando superbe negaverant, humiliter praestare procurent; alioquin eos de fratrum ipsorum consortio penitus excludatis.

Therefore, not wishing that those same canons should henceforth roam with such unbridled liberty, we command your discretion by apostolic writings that, relying on our authority, you compel the aforesaid canons, by ecclesiastical censures with any evasion of appeal removed, to return to the obedience of their prior; and, lest they be able to glory in their contumacy or malice, you require them, if you shall see it expedient, to procure humbly to render the oath which, for obtaining the benefit of absolution, they had arrogantly refused concerning obeying the mandates of the prior; otherwise, you are to exclude them utterly from the fellowship of their brothers.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Presbyteri et clerici capellarum subditarum titulo cardinalatus debent cardinali obedientiam et reliqua, de quibus hic. Et vacante titulo succedit capitulum illius ecclesiae, nisi pro bono pacis aliquid sit exemptum.

The presbyters and clerics of the subordinate chapels, under the title of the cardinalate, owe the cardinal obedience and the rest, concerning which here. And with the title being vacant, the chapter of that church succeeds, unless something be exempted for the good of peace.

Honorius III. G. Presbytero cardinali, et Capitulo sancti Laurentii in Damaso.

Honorius 3. To G., cardinal presbyter, and to the Chapter of St. Lawrence in Damasus.

His, quae pro ecclesia S. Laurentii in Damaso ex parte una et capellis sibi subiectis ex altera super scrutinio, baptismo manuali obedientia, correctione, interdicio et excommunicatione aliisque articulis fuere coram nobis proposita, diligenter auditis, sententiando decrevimus, ut earundem capellarum presbyteri et clerici cardinali, qui nunc est in ipsa ecclesia, et qui fuerint per tempora, manualem obedientiam et reverentiam et honorificentiam omnem exhibeant, et ad ecclesiam ipsam pro scrutinio, baptismo et capitulo celebrandis conveniant temporibus consuetis, correctionem ipsius cardinalis recipientes humiliter, et excommunicationis, interdicti vel suspensionis sententias, quas tulerit in eos et ecclesias eorundem, inviolabiliter observantes. Quando autem ecclesia ipsa cardinali vacabit, capellani et clerici memorati nihilominus eidem ecclesiae reverenter exhibeant omnia supradicta, eo duntaxat excepto, quod de correctione, excommunicatione et suspensione ipsorum pro bono pacis nostrae providentiae reservamus.

Having diligently heard those matters which were set forth before us on behalf of the Church of St. Lawrence in Damaso on the one part, and on the other on behalf of the chapels subject to it, concerning scrutiny, manual baptism, obedience, correction, interdict and excommunication, and other articles, by giving sentence we decreed that the presbyters and clerics of the same chapels shall exhibit to the cardinal who is now in that church, and to those who shall be there in times to come, manual obedience and reverence and every honorification, and shall assemble at that church at the customary times for celebrating scrutiny, baptism, and chapter, humbly receiving the correction of the said cardinal, and inviolably observing the sentences of excommunication, interdict, or suspension which he shall have pronounced upon them and their churches. But when that church shall be vacant of a cardinal, the aforesaid chaplains and clerics shall nonetheless reverently exhibit to the same church all the aforesaid things, with this only excepted: that as to their correction, excommunication, and suspension, we reserve it to our providence for the good of peace.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Licet abbatissa subditos excommunicare non possit, ipsi tamen sibi obedire tenentur.

Although the abbess cannot excommunicate her subjects, they nevertheless are bound to obey her.

Idem Abbati S. Michaelis Abradensis dioecesis.

The same to the Abbot of St. Michael of the Abradensis diocese.

Dilecta in Christo filia abbatissa de Bubrigen. transmissa nobis petitione monstravit, quod, quum ipsa plerumque canonicas suas et clericos suae iurisdictioni subiectos propter inobedientias et culpas eorum officio beneficioque suspendat iidem confisi ex eo, quod eadem abbatissa excommunicare eos non potest, suspensionem huiusmodi non observant, propter quod ipsorum excessus remanent incorrecti. Quocirca discretioni tuae mandamus, quatenus dictas canonicas et clericos, ut abbatissae praefatae obedientiam et reverentiam debitam impendentes, eius salubria monita et mandata observent, monitione praemissa ecclesiastica censura appellatione remota compellas.

The beloved in Christ daughter, the abbess of Bubrigen, by a petition sent to us has shown that, since she for the most part suspends her canonesses and clerics subject to her jurisdiction from office and benefice on account of their disobediences and faults, the same, relying on the fact that the same abbess cannot excommunicate them, do not observe such suspension, on account of which their excesses remain uncorrected. Wherefore we command your discretion, that you compel the said canonesses and clerics, rendering to the aforesaid abbess the due obedience and reverence, to observe her healthful admonitions and mandates, with a warning premised, by ecclesiastical censure, appeal removed.

[Dat. Allatii II. Mens. Iun.

[Dated. Allatius 2. Month of June.

Pont. nostr. Ao. VI. 1222.]

In the 6th year of our pontificate, 1222.]

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Si metropolitanus a suffraganeo iuramentum exigit ultra formam statutam a canone, in eo, quod est ultra, suffraganeus non tenetur.

If the metropolitan exacts from a suffragan an oath beyond the form established by the canon, as to that which is beyond, the suffragan is not bound.

Gregorius IX. Patriarchae Grandensi.

Gregory 9. To the Patriarch of Grado.

Dilecti filii archidiaconus et capitulum Castellanum suam ad nos querimoniam detulerunt, quod, quum a Castellano episcopo exigeres iuramentum praeter formam canonicam, quam ceteri suffraganei metropolitanis suis consuevere praestare, iidem conspicientes ex hoc ecclesiae suae praeiudicium generari, ad sedem apostolicam appellarunt. (Et infra:) Quum igitur non deceat alii te fecisse quod ab alio fieri tibi nolles, mandamus, quatenus contentus forma canonica, quam nos a coepiscopis nostris nobis immediate subiectis recipimus, nil amplius a Castellano episcopo obtentu alicuius consuetudinis exigas praetextu praestiti iuramenti, sciens, nos eundem episcopum ab huiusmodi iuramento quoad alios articulos absolvisse, vel denunciasse potius non teneri.

The beloved sons, the archdeacon and the chapter of Castellanum, have brought their complaint to us, that, when you were demanding from the bishop of Castellanum an oath beyond the canonical form, which the other suffragans have been accustomed to render to their metropolitans, these same, perceiving that prejudice to their church was being generated from this, appealed to the Apostolic See. (And below:) Since, therefore, it is not fitting that you should have done to another what you would not wish to be done to you by another, we command that, being content with the canonical form which we ourselves receive from our fellow-bishops immediately subject to us, you demand nothing further from the bishop of Castellanum on the plea of any custom, under the pretext of the oath rendered, knowing that we have absolved that same bishop from an oath of this kind as regards the other articles, or rather have declared him not to be bound.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Vacante episcopatu capitulum confirmat et infirmat electiones.

With the episcopate vacant, the chapter confirms and invalidates elections.

Idem Priori fratrum Praedicatorum et archidiacono Rheginensi.

The same to the Prior of the Friars Preachers and to the archdeacon of Reggio.

Quum olim causa (Et infra:) Quocirca mandamus, quatenus, licet conventus monasterii sancti Salvatoris Messanensis sint ipso iure hac vice eligendi potestate privati, de gratia tamen eligendi seu postulandi detis ipsis auctoritate nostra liberam facultatem, mandantes eisdem, ut quum ecclesia Messanensis vacet ad praesens, electionem suam confirmandam, prout de iure fuerit, vel etiam infirmandam praesentent capitulo Messanensi.

Whereas formerly the case (And below:) Wherefore we mandate, to the extent that, although the convent of the monastery of Saint Savior of Messina are by the law itself on this occasion deprived of the power of electing, nevertheless, by grace, you grant to them by our authority the free faculty of electing or of postulating, mandating to the same, that, since the church of Messina is at present vacant, they present their election to the chapter of Messina to be confirmed, as shall be according to law, or even to be infirmed.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Qui maior est ordine, licet in ecclesia posterius receptus, in loco et portione praefertur. H. d. secundum veram lecturam.

He who is greater in order, although later received in the church, is preferred in place and portion. Here it is said, according to the true reading.

Idem Archipresbytero sanctae Mariae maioris de Urbe.

The same to the Archpriest of Saint Mary Major of the City.

Statuimus, ut presbyteri primum locum, diaconi secundum, subdiaconi tertium, et sic de reliquis obtineant ordinatim, etiamsi posterius admittantur. Et qui maior est ordine, etiamsi postea sit receptus, in portione percipienda esse volumus potiorem, ac minores facere servitia consueta.

We decree that presbyters hold the first place, deacons the second, subdeacons the third, and so for the rest in orderly fashion, even if they are admitted later. And he who is greater in order, even if he has been received afterwards, we will to be the superior in the portion to be received, and the lesser to perform the accustomed services.

CAP. XVI.

CHAPTER 16.

Si ecclesia sita in aliquo archidiaconatu erigitur in cathedralem, a iurisdictione archidiaconatus eximitur.

If a church situated in some archdeaconry is erected into a cathedral, it is exempted from the jurisdiction of the archdeaconry.

Idem Archiepiscopo Colocensi.

The same to the Archbishop of Kalocsa.

Quum inferior superiorem solvere nequeat vel ligare, sed superior inferiorem liget regulariter et absolvat, et satis [indignum et] absonum videatur, ut [maior subditus sit minori et] filius potestatem habeat in parentem, miramur [non modicum et movemur], quod quum tu monasterium de Cheur constitutum in Firmiensi archidiaconatu tuae dioecesis ecclesiam erexeris cathedralem, [venerabilem fratrem nostrum Sirmiensem episcopum ad titulum ipsius ecclesiae in episcopum consecrando], archidiaconus Firminensis in tantam prorupit temeritatis audaciam, ut in episcopum ibi consecratum et ecclesiam suam iurisdictionem exercere praesumat. [Quare idem episcopus nobis humiliter supplicavit ut quum eodem archidiacono in ipsum et dictam ecclesiam iurisdictionem huiusmodi exercente, ipse in eadem ecclesia episcopus quoddammodo non exsistat, provideri sibi super hoc salubriter dignaremur. Nos igitur eiusdem episcopi et ecclesiae paterno compatientes affectu, ipsos cum omnibus iuribus et pertinentiis eorundem, a iurisdictione ipsius archidiaconi penitus eximentes] Mandamus, quatenus praefato archidiacono [ne in eis iurisdictionem aliquam de cetero exercere praesumat, ex parte nostra districte studeas inhibere], a cuius iurisdictione dictum episcopum denunciamus exemptum, id districte studeas inhibere; provisio [prudenter] ut, si ex hoc archidiaconi Firmiensis iura laeduntur, in dioecesi tua, ubi expedire videris, absque alieni iuris praeiudicio recompensationem illi facias congruentem.

Since the inferior cannot loose or bind the superior, but the superior regularly binds and absolves the inferior, and it seems sufficiently [unworthy and] discordant, that [the greater be subject to the lesser and] a son have power over a parent, we marvel [not a little and are moved], that whereas you have erected as a cathedral the church of the monastery of Cheur constituted in the Firmian archdeaconry of your diocese, [consecrating our venerable brother, the bishop of Sirmium, as bishop to the title of that same church], the Firmian archdeacon burst forth into so great a boldness of temerity as to presume to exercise his jurisdiction over the bishop consecrated there and over his church. [Wherefore the same bishop humbly supplicated us that, since that same archdeacon, by exercising such jurisdiction over him and the said church, he himself in the same church is in a certain manner not existent as bishop, we would deign to provide for him in this matter to his healthful benefit. We therefore, compassionating with a fatherly affection the same bishop and church, wholly exempting them with all their rights and appurtenances from the jurisdiction of that archdeacon,] We command, to the extent that to the aforesaid archdeacon [you strive strictly on our part to prohibit that he presume henceforth to exercise any jurisdiction over them], from whose jurisdiction we declare the said bishop exempt, that you strive strictly to prohibit that; provision being made [prudently] that, if by this the rights of the Firmian archdeacon are injured, in your diocese, where you may see it to be expedient, without prejudice to another’s right you make to him fitting recompense.

[Contradictores etc. Dat. Reat.

[Contradictors, etc. Given at Rieti.

XII. Kal. April.

12 days before the Kalends of April.

ao. V. 1232.]

in the year 5, 1232.]

CAP. XVII.

CHAPTER 17.

Compositionem super iure primatiae unus solus, cuius interest, poterit impedire.

Only the one person whose interest it is will be able to impede a composition concerning the right of primacy.

Idem Lemovicensi Archidiacono et Priori sanctae Radegundis Pictaviensis.

The same, to the Archdeacon of Limoges and to the Prior of Saint Radegund of Poitiers.

Humilis doctrina magistra (Et infra:) Mandamus, quatenus praelatorum Burdegalensis provinciae in ea praesentium, et cathedralium capitulorum eiusdem, nec non Bituricensis capituli super provisione, quam inter Bituricensem et Burdegalensem archiepiscopos in causa primatiae duximus faciendam, requiratis assensum, quo habito providentiam nostram solenniter publicetis. Si qui vero consensum praestare noluerint, vos supersedentes publicationi praedictae, districte praecipiatis eisdem, ut personaliter, si praelati fuerint, vel si alii, per procuratores idoneos, nostro se conspectui repraesentent, prosecuturi coram nobis ius, si quod habere contendunt, et satisfacturi parti alteri, si succubuerint, in expensis.

Humility, the mistress of doctrine (And below:) We command, to this effect, that you require the assent of the prelates of the province of Bordeaux present therein, and of the cathedral chapters of the same, and also of the chapter of Bourges, concerning the provision which we have deemed should be made between the archbishops of Bourges and Bordeaux in the cause of primacy; and when this has been obtained, you shall solemnly publish our provision. But if any should be unwilling to render consent, you, refraining from the aforesaid publication, shall strictly enjoin the same that they present themselves to our sight in person, if they are prelates, or, if others, through suitable procurators, to prosecute before us the right, if any, which they claim to have, and to make satisfaction to the other party, if they shall have succumbed, in expenses.

TITULUS XXXIV. DE TREUGA ET PACE.

TITLE 34. ON TRUCE AND PEACE.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Statuit tempora treugarum et poenas violantium.

He establishes the times of truces and the penalties of violators.

Alexander III. in concilio Lateranensi.

Alexander 3. in the Lateran Council.

Treugas a quarta feria post occasum solis usque ad secundam feriam in ortu solis, [et] ab Adventu Domini usque ad octavas Epiphaniae, et a Septuagesima usque ad octavas Paschae ab omnibus inviolabiliter observari praecipimus. § 1. Si quis autem treugas frangere praesumpserit, post tertiam admonitionem si non satisfecerit, suus episcopus sententiam excommunicationis dictet in eum, et scriptam vicinis episcopis annunciet, quorum nullus excommunicatum in communione recipiat, immo scriptam sententiam quisque confirmet. Si quis autem haec violare praesumpserit, ordinis sui periculo subiaceat.

Truces from Wednesday after the setting of the sun up to Monday at the rising of the sun, [and] from the Advent of the Lord up to the Octave of the Epiphany, and from Septuagesima up to the Octave of Easter, we command to be observed inviolably by all. § 1. But if anyone shall have presumed to break the truces, after the third admonition, if he shall not have made satisfaction, let his bishop dictate the sentence of excommunication upon him, and announce it in writing to the neighboring bishops, of whom let none receive the excommunicated into communion; nay rather, let each confirm the written sentence. But if anyone shall have presumed to violate these things, let him be subject to the peril of his own order.

§ 2. Et quoniam funiculus triplex difficile rumpitur, praecipimus, ut episcopi ad solum Deum et ad salutem populi habentes respectum, omni trepidatione seposita ad pacem firmiter tenendam mutuum sibi consilium et auxilium praebeant, neque hoc alicuius amore vel odio praetermittant. Quod si quis in hoc Dei opere trepidus inventus fuerit, damnum propriae dignitatis incurrat.

§ 2. And since a triple cord is difficult to break, we prescribe that the bishops, having regard to God alone and to the salvation of the people, with all trepidation set aside, should afford one another mutual counsel and aid for the peace to be firmly maintained, nor should they omit this on account of anyone’s love or hatred. But if anyone shall be found timorous in this work of God, let him incur loss of his own dignity.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Personae hic enumeratae plena securitate gaudent tempore guerrae.

The persons enumerated here enjoy full security in time of war.

Idem.

The same.

Innovamus autem, ut presbyteri, [clerici], monachi, conversi, peregrini, mercatores, rustici, euntes et redeuntes, et in agricultura exsistentes, et animalia, quibus arant et quae semina portant ad agrum, congrua securitate laetentur. Nec quisquam etc. (cf. c. 10. de cens.

We renew, moreover, that presbyters, [clerics], monks, converts, pilgrims, merchants, peasants, those going and returning, and those engaged in agriculture, and the animals with which they plow and which carry seeds to the field, may enjoy fitting security. Nor let anyone, etc. (cf. c. 10. de cens.

III. 39.)

3. 39.)

TITULUS XXXV. DE PACTIS.

TITLE 35. ON PACTS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Pacta quantumcunque nuda servanda sunt.

Pacts, however nude, are to be kept.

Ex concilio Africano.

From the African council.

Antigonus episcopus Madaurensis dixit: Gravem iniuriam patior, et credo, dolere sanctitatem vestram contumeliam meam et computare communem iniuriam. Optantius quum se repraesentaret, pactum mecum habuit et divisimus [plebes; manuscriptiones nostrae tenentur et pittacia. Contra hoc pactum circuit plebes mihi attributas, et usurpat populos, ut illum patrem, me vitricum nominent.

Antigonus, bishop of Madaura, said: I suffer a grave injury, and I believe your sanctity grieves at my contumely and reckons it a common injury. When Optantius presented himself, he had a pact with me and we divided the plebes [plebes; our manuscripts and pittacia (slips) have it]. Against this pact he goes around the plebes assigned to me, and usurps the peoples, so that they name him father, me stepfather.

Gratus episcopus dixit: Factum hoc dolendum est,] ut in se illiciat populorum imperitorum animas contra disciplinam, contra evangelicam traditionem, contra pacis placita. Nam si id sibi posse contingere arbitraretur, nunquam profecto in fratrem aliquis deliquisset. Unde Aut inita pacta suam obtineant firmitatem, aut conventus, si se non cohibuerit, ecclesiasticam sentiat disciplinam.

Gratus the bishop said: This deed is to be lamented,] in that it allures to itself the souls of unskilled peoples against discipline, against evangelical tradition, against the placita of peace. For if he supposed that this could befall himself, surely no one would ever have transgressed against a brother. Whence either the pacts entered upon should obtain their own firmness, or the convener, if he does not restrain himself, should feel ecclesiastical discipline.

Dixerunt universi: Pax servetur, pacta custodiantur.

All said: Let peace be preserved, let the pacts be kept.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Conventio invalida per consensum superioris validatur.

An invalid convention is validated by the consent of the superior.

Gregorius.

Gregory.

Quoties in conventionibus quibusdam noster exspectatur assensus, ne in dubium veniant quae geruntur, ratihabitio eas debet pro securitate partium solidare. [Proinde etc.]

Whenever in certain conventions our assent is awaited, lest the things being transacted come into doubt, ratification ought to solidify them for the security of the parties. [Accordingly etc.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Iudex debet studiose agere, ut promissa adimpleantur.

The judge ought to act diligently, so that the promises may be fulfilled.

Idem.

The same.

Qualiter in Sardinia [minores vel pauperes ab eis, qiu illic maiores sunt, opprimantur, reverendissimi fratris nostri Dominici Carthaginensis episcopi atque eminentissimi filii nostri Innocentii praefecti epistolae testantur, a quibus, ut quae nobis scripta sunt noveritis, ipsarum vobis epistolarum exemplaria praevidimus transmittenda. Et ideo quia ea, quae petenda sunt, offeruntur,] Studiose agendum est, ut ea, quae promittuntur, opere compleantur.

How in Sardinia [the lesser or the poor are oppressed by those who there are the greater, the letters of our most reverend brother Dominic, bishop of Carthage, and of our most eminent son Innocent, the prefect, bear witness; from whom, so that you may know the things that have been written to us, we have provided that copies of the letters themselves be sent to you in advance. And therefore, since the things that ought to be asked are being offered,] It must be acted upon studiously, that the things which are promised be fulfilled in deed.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Non valet pactum, per quod beneficium ecclesiasticum debet pecunia resignari.

A pact is not valid, whereby an ecclesiastical benefice is to be resigned for money.

Alexander III. Exonensi et Wigornensi episcopis.

Alexander 3. To the bishops of Exeter and Worcester.

Quum pridem S. clericus procurator prioris et monachorum de Acra, et P. clericus pro causa, quae inter eos monachos et praedictum P. ac fratrem eius, pro cuius parte vicem se gerere dicebat, super ecclesia de S. et capella de L. vertebatur, ad nostram praesentiam pariter accessissent, ita inter se, non tamen nobis mediantibus, convenerunt, quod eidem P. pro expensis, quas fecerat, tres marchae argenti solverentur, et idem P. liti cederet, et a monachorum penitus infestatione cessaret. Quumque compositionem istam ad nostram pertulissent audientiam, eamque auctoritate apostolica peterent confirmari, nos eam non duximus admittendam pro eo, quod videbatur pravam illicitae pactionis speciem continere. Monuimus autem praedictum P., ut ipse tam pro se, quam pro fratre suo monachos in pace dimitteret, et eidem liti omnino abrenunciaret.

When formerly S., a cleric, procurator of the prior and the monks of Acre, and P., a cleric, on account of the case which was being contested between those monks and the aforesaid P. and his brother, for whose part he said he was acting in his stead, concerning the church of S. and the chapel of L., had together come into our presence, they agreed among themselves, yet not with us mediating, that to the same P., for the expenses which he had incurred, three marks of silver should be paid, and that the same P. should cede the suit, and should entirely cease from the infestation of the monks. And when they had brought this composition to our hearing, and sought that it be confirmed by apostolic authority, we did not deem it to be admitted, for the reason that it seemed to contain a depraved appearance of an illicit pact. We admonished, moreover, the aforesaid P., that he, both for himself and for his brother, should dismiss the monks in peace, and utterly renounce the same suit.

Ille igitur nostris monitis acquiescens, et eidem liti pro se ac pro fratre suo penitus renuncians, authentica instrumenta, quae super hoc habebat in nostris manibus resignavit, quae nos priori et monachis praedictis scilicet destinantes, mandavimus, ut, ex quo praedictus P. nostris super hoc monitis acqiuevit, ipsi quoque benignis nostris precibus intenderent, et eidem P. et fratri eius in aliquo studerent beneficio providere, de quo maius lucrum valeant apostolica intercessione percipere, quam eis deberet ex illa pactione illicita provenire. Ceterum quia saepe dicti prior et fratres sicut accepimus, acquiescere noluerunt, nos eorundem clericorum laboribus paterna pietate compatientes vobis per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus priorem et monachos moneatis eosdem, ut praefato P. et fratri eius decens et competens beneficium conferant et assignent; alioquin, si vobis constiterit, saepe dictos clericos, prout ipsi asseverant, a praenominata ecclesia de Sintonia et capella de Lintona iniuste et absque ordine iudiciario violenter fuisse eiectos, ipsas eisdem restitui faciatis, non obstantibus literis nostrae confirmationis, quas praedicti prior et monachi a nobis impetrasse noscuntur.

He therefore, acquiescing in our monitions and utterly renouncing the same suit for himself and for his brother, surrendered into our hands the authentic instruments which he had in this matter; which, delivering namely to the aforesaid prior and monks, we commanded that, since the aforesaid P. had acquiesced in our monitions herein, they too would attend to our kindly prayers, and would strive to provide some benefice to the same P. and to his brother, from which they may be able by apostolic intercession to receive a greater gain than ought to have accrued to them from that illicit pact. Moreover, because the often-said prior and brethren, as we have received, were unwilling to acquiesce, we, commiserating with paternal piety the labors of those same clerics, by apostolic writings command you by way of precept to admonish that same prior and monks, that they confer and assign to the aforesaid P. and his brother a decent and fitting benefice; otherwise, if it shall be established to you that the often-said clerics, as they assert, were unjustly and without judicial order violently ejected from the aforesaid church of Sintonia and the chapel of Lintona, you are to cause those same places to be restored to them, notwithstanding the letters of our confirmation which the aforesaid prior and monks are known to have obtained from us.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Idem Archiepiscopo Eboracensi.

The same to the Archbishop of York.

Accepimus, quod quaedam ecclesiae clericis sint tali tenore concessae, quod post eorum obitum alii nominatim succedant. Verum quoniam hoc iniquum est et sacris canonibus inimicum, et ideo non debet aliquatenus tolerari, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus huiusmodi successiones tam detestabiles et iniquas contradictione et appellatione cessante prohibeas, et omnino frivolas et inanes esse decernas.

We have received that certain churches have been conceded to clerics with such a tenor that, after their death, others named explicitly should succeed. But since this is iniquitous and inimical to the sacred canons, and therefore ought not in any wise to be tolerated, we command your fraternity by apostolic writings, by way of precept, that you prohibit, with contradiction and appeal ceasing, such successions so detestable and unjust, and decree that they are altogether frivolous and void.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Qui per pactum augendae pensionis consecutus est ecclesiam, debet ea privari, et alias canonice puniri.

He who has obtained a church through a pact for augmenting the pension ought to be deprived of it, and otherwise canonically punished.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Suffragans.

Quum clerici vestrae iurisdictionis, sicut accepimus, decedentibus ecclesiarum personis paciscantur ex ipsis ecclesiis maiores solito solvere pensiones, ut facilius possint easdem ecclesias adipisci, nos quidem ad tam detestabile vitium exstirpandum attentam volumus curam et sollicitudinem adhihere. Inde est, quod fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus clericis omnibus vestris, ne id attentare praesumant, publice districtius prohibentes, si quidem contra prohibitionem vestram venire praesumpserint, appellatione cessante eos taliter adeptis ecclesiis quantocius spolietis, alias pro tantae praesumptionis excessu severitate ecclesiastica punientes eosdem. Adhaec etc.

When the clerics of your jurisdiction, as we have received, upon the death of the persons of the churches, make a pact from the churches themselves to pay pensions greater than customary, so that they may more easily be able to acquire those same churches, we indeed wish to apply attentive care and solicitude to extirpate so detestable a vice. Therefore it is that we, by apostolic writings, command your fraternity by way of precept, that, publicly and more strictly forbidding all your clerics lest they presume to attempt this, if indeed they shall have presumed to go against your prohibition, with appeal ceasing, you should despoil them as soon as possible of churches thus obtained, otherwise punishing those same with ecclesiastical severity for the excess of so great a presumption. Furthermore, etc.

(cf. c. 11. de cens. III. 39.)

(cf. ch. 11, On Censuses, 3. 39.)

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Si eeclesia rem suam locando vel in feudum concedendo apponit pactum in praeiudicium iuris parochialis alterius ecclesiae, non tenet, et quicquid hac occasione perceperit reddere cogitur illi ecclesiae.

If a church, by leasing its property or by conceding it in fief, appends a pact to the prejudice of the parochial right of another church, it does not hold, and it is compelled to render to that church whatever it has received on this occasion.

Innocentius III. in concilio generali.

Innocent 3. in the general council.

Plerique, sicut accepimus, regulares clerici et saeculares interdum, quum vel domos locant, vel feuda concedunt, in praeiudicium parochialium ecclesiarum pactum adiiciunt, ut conductores et feudatarii decimas eis solvant, et apud eosdem eligant sepulturam. Quum autem id de avaritiae radice procedat, pactum huiusmodi penitus reprobamus, statuentes, ut quicquid fuerit occasione huiusmodi pacti perceptum ecclesiae parochiali reddatur.

Very many, as we have received, regular clerics and sometimes seculars, when either they lease out houses or grant fiefs, add a pact to the prejudice of parochial churches, that the lessees and feudatories pay tithes to them and choose burial with those same. But since this proceeds from the root of avarice, we utterly reprobate a pact of this sort, decreeing that whatever has been received on the occasion of such a pact be restored to the parochial church.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Non valet pactio in spiritualibus, vel quae peccatum inducit, vel turpis, seu de re turpi, vel impossibilis de iure vel de facto.

A pact in spiritual matters is not valid, nor one that induces sin, or is base, or about a base matter, or impossible in law or in fact.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory 9.

Pactiones factae a vobis, ut audivimus, pro quibusdam spiritualibus obtinendis, quum in huiusmodi omnis pactio omnisque conventio debeat omnino cessare, nullius penitus sunt momenti. Quod etiam de aliis est dicendum, quae observatae vergunt in animae detrimentum. Nam etiam iuxta legitimas sanctiones pactum turpe, vel rei turpis aut impossibilis de iure vel de facto, nullam obligationem inducit.

Pacts made by you, as we have heard, for obtaining certain spirituals, since in matters of this sort every pact and every convention ought altogether to cease, are of no moment whatsoever. The same must also be said of others which, if observed, incline toward the soul’s detriment. For even according to legitimate sanctions, a base pact, or one concerning a base thing, or a thing impossible by law or in fact, induces no obligation.

TITULUS XXXVI. DE TRANSACTIONIBUS.

TITLE 36. ON TRANSACTIONS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Instrumenta et alia iura partium contraria transactione tolluntur.

Instruments and the other rights of the parties are extinguished by a contrary transaction.

Gregorius I. A. Subdiacono et Dom. Abbati.

Gregory I. To the Subdeacon A. and to the Lord Abbot.

Sicut grave [et plenum vituperationis est, inter personas omnipotenti Deo militantes de saecularibus negotiis ortam diu controversiam permanere, ita laudabile et studio est religioso conveniens, terrenis gratam Deo pacem praeferre compendiis, et ex rebus transitoriis mansura semper caritatis lucra mercari. Et ideo, qiua de possessionibus Faiano, Nasoniano et Libiniano, positis in provincia Sicilia territorio Panormitano, de quibus inter praepositos monasterii sanctorum Maximi et Agathae, quod Lucuscanum dicitur, et e diverso administratores xenodochii in hac urbe Roma constituti, quod Valerii nuncupatur, longa se traxit contentio, nunc vero inter te Antonium subdiaconum nostrum memorati xenodochii praepositum, et e diverso dilectissimum filium nostrum Dometium abbatem atque presbyterum praedicti monasterii pactis intervenientibus salubris processit Deo auctore decisio, necesse est, ut omnis discordiae possit occasio praeveniri, et quae gesta sunt interveniente auctoritate firmari.] Proinde Post salubrem decisionem de controversia vestra factam decrevimus, ut omnia instrumenta, vel quicquid aliud est, quod partibus, [quod absit, ad invicem contra se venire cupientibus] quoquo modo, vel ex temporis praescriptione seu aliter opem de lege aut quocunque privilegio ferre poterat, sit, sicut [et] vos poscitis, vacuum et omni virtute cassatum, et sola pactorum inter vos nunc habitorum pagina validum perpetuumque robur obtineat. Cui si quid forte incuria vel imperitia minus firmitatis insertum est, vires plenissimae notionis ex hac nostra auctoritate suscipiat, [nec superesse etc.

Just as it is grievous [and full of vituperation, that among persons warring for the almighty God a controversy arisen from secular businesses should long persist, so it is laudable and suitable to religious zeal to prefer to earthly profits the peace pleasing to God, and from transitory things to traffic in the gains of charity that will always endure. And therefore, since concerning the possessions Faianus, Nasonianus, and Libinianus, situated in the province of Sicily in the Panormitan territory, about which between the provosts of the monastery of the saints Maximus and Agatha, which is called Lucuscanum, and, on the other hand, the administrators of the xenodochium established in this city Rome, which is named of Valerius, a long contention dragged on, but now between you, Antoninus our subdeacon, provost of the aforesaid xenodochium, and, on the other hand, our most beloved son Dometius, abbot and presbyter of the aforesaid monastery, with pacts intervening, a healthful decision has proceeded by God as author, it is necessary that every occasion of discord be forestalled, and that the things which have been done be confirmed by intervening authority.] Therefore After the healthful decision made concerning your controversy we have decreed that all instruments, or whatever else there is which for the parties, [God forbid, wishing to come against one another] in whatever way, either from prescription of time or otherwise, could bring aid from law or from any privilege whatsoever, be, just as [also] you request, void and quashed of all force, and that the single page of the pacts now had between you obtain valid and perpetual strength. To which, if perchance through negligence or inexperience something less of firmness has been inserted, let it receive the powers of most full validity from this our authority, [nor to remain over, etc.

Mense Ianuar. Ind. II. 598.]

In the month of Jan. Indiction 2. 598.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Tenet compositio super decimis facta cum assensu superioris.

The composition concerning tithes, made with the assent of the superior, holds.

Alexander III.

Alexander 3.

Statuimus, ut, si super decimis inter vos et aliquam personam ecclesiasticam de assensu episcopi vel archiepiscopi sui compositio facta fuerit, rata perpetuis temporibus et inconcussa persistat.

We decree that, if concerning tithes between you and any ecclesiastical person, with the assent of his bishop or archbishop, a composition shall have been made, it shall remain ratified for perpetual times and unshaken.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Si capitulum consensit transactioni, quam fecit praelatus nomine ecclesiae, ulterius dissentire non potest.

If the chapter has consented to the transaction which the prelate made in the name of the church, it cannot further dissent.

Idem Dulmensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Dulmen.

Contingit interdum, quod, licet abbas vel prior alicuius conventualis ecclesiae cum ecclesiastica vel saeculari persona super his, de quibus inter eos controversia vertitur coram delegato vel ordinario iudice transigat, literis capituli sui de ratihabitione monstratis, ipsum capitulum tamen eandem transactionem nititur revocare. Unde quia nos super hoc consulere voluisti, tibi respondemus, quod, si abbas vel prior a capitulo suo de ratihabitione literas habuerit, transactionem, quam fecit, si fuerit aliquot annis servata, capitulum, ac si non consenserit in eam, non poterit revocare.

It happens sometimes that, although the abbot or prior of a certain conventual church transacts with an ecclesiastical or secular person concerning those matters about which controversy is waged between them before a delegated or ordinary judge, the letters of his chapter concerning ratihabition having been shown, nevertheless that same chapter strives to revoke the transaction. Wherefore, because you wished to consult us on this, we answer to you that, if the abbot or prior has had letters of ratihabition from his chapter, the transaction which he made—if it has been observed for several years—the chapter, as if it had not consented to it, will not be able to revoke.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Super ecclesiastico beneficio transigi non potest etiam cum iuramenti interpositione.

Concerning an ecclesiastical benefice, a transaction cannot be effected even with the interposition of an oath.

Idem Abbati de Strat. et Priori sancti Eusebii.

The same to the Abbot of Strat. and to the Prior of Saint Eusebius.

Constitutus in nostra praesentia G. clericus sua nobis assertione monstravit, quod, quum inter ipsum, et A. clericum super capella de Stratis controversia emersisset, tandem per transactionem sopita fuit, et, licet transactio ipsa hinc inde fide praestita firmata fuisset, eam tamen praefatus A. servare recusat. Quia igitur huiusmodi transactiones speciem nonnunquam continent simoniae, et non solum a malo, sed etiam a specie mali secundum Apostolum nos convenit abstinere, devotioni vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, quum propter hoc fueritis requisiti, partes ante vestram praesentiam convocetis, et, revocata transactione in irritum, causam diligentius audiatis etc.

Set in our presence, G., a cleric, showed us by his own assertion that, when a controversy had arisen between him and A., a cleric, over the chapel of Strats, at length it was lulled by a transaction (a settlement), and, although the transaction itself had been confirmed on both sides by faith pledged, nevertheless the aforesaid A. refuses to observe it. Therefore, since transactions of this sort sometimes contain an appearance of simony, and it befits us to abstain not only from evil but also from the appearance of evil, according to the Apostle, we command your devotion by apostolic writings with precept, that, when you have been requested for this, you convene the parties before your presence, and, the transaction revoked into nullity, you hear the cause more diligently, etc.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Per transactionem factam sine auctoritate episcopi potest praelatus, sed non ecclesia constitui censualis.

By a transaction made without the authority of the bishop, a prelate can be established as censual, but not the church.

Idem Carnotensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Chartres.

De cetero noveris, quod, quum aliquis ad extraordinarium iudicem literis impetratis cum adversario suo componit, postmodum in ecclesia, de qua agitur, ius aliquod habiturus, si compositio non est iuri contraria, non est a loci episcopo aliquatenus reprobanda; sed census absque episcopali auctoritate cui praeest ecclesiae sub hoc praetextu solutus, vitam eius, qui solverit, non excedit.

For the rest, know that, when someone, having obtained letters, settles with his adversary before an extraordinary judge, and is thereafter to have some right in the church in question, if the composition is not contrary to right, it is not in any way to be disapproved by the bishop of the place; but a census paid without episcopal authority by the one who presides over the church under this pretext does not outlast the life of him who has paid it.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Si beneficium, quod per transactionem habetur, impetratur ut vacans, ab eo, qui fuit transactionis mediator, non valet impetratio. H. d. quoad titulum.

If a benefice, which is held through a transaction, is obtained as vacant by him who was the mediator of the transaction, the obtaining is not valid. This is said as regards the title.

Idem Eboracensi Archiepiscopo et Wigorensi Episcopo.

The same to the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of Worcester.

Ex literis vestris accepimus, quod, quum olim inter R. et A. clericos super ecclesia de Vult. et capella de Torhec ad eandem ecclesiam pertinente coram te, frater episcope, qui iudex fueras delegatus, auctoritate G., qui tunc eidem A. patrocinabatur in causa, et testis inscriptus fuerat, transactio iam pridem facta fuisset, postmodum idem G. veniens ad praesentiam nostram, et se mentiens clericum, quum nondum esset in clericum tonsuratus, ad Dunelmensem episcopum et decanum Eboracensem, si bene meminimus, super eadem ecclesia et capella tacito de transactione ipsa literas nostras impetravit. Quum autem idem G. et responsales praedicti R. in nostra demum praesentia fuissent constituti, nos ex literis vestris veritatem super his cognoscentes, et attendentes etiam, quomodo praefatus G. non inficiaretur, se transactioni interfuisse, et nondum fuisse tonsuratum, quum literas istas obtinuit, ei super praedicta ecclesia et capella auctoritate apostolica silentium duximus imponendum.

From your letters we have received that, whereas formerly between R. and A., clerics, concerning the church of Vult. and the chapel of Torhec, pertaining to the same church, before you, brother bishop, who had been a delegated judge, by the authority of G., who at that time was advocating for that same A. in the case and had been enrolled as a witness, a transaction had long since been made; afterwards the same G., coming into our presence and lying himself to be a cleric, when he had not yet been tonsured into the clerical order, obtained our letters to the Bishop of Durham and the Dean of York, if we remember well, concerning the same church and chapel, with the transaction itself kept silent. But when the same G. and the aforesaid R.’s respondents had at length been set in our presence, we, learning the truth about these matters from your letters, and also considering how the aforesaid G. did not deny that he had been present at the transaction, and that he had not yet been tonsured when he obtained those letters, judged that, by apostolic authority, silence should be imposed upon him concerning the aforesaid church and chapel.

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Super ecclesiastico beneficio non potest transigi, sed amicabiliter componi. H. d. et quotidie allegatur.

Concerning an ecclesiastical benefice, it cannot be transacted, but it can be composed amicably. This is said, and is alleged daily.

Idem.

The same.

Super eo, quod quaesivisti, utrum de ecclesiastico beneficio in litigium deducto possit fieri transactio, tale damus, sicut iam pridem, si bene meminimus, alii non absimile quaerenti dedimus responsum, quod secundum formam a canonibus in aliis transactionibus adscriptam transigi super re sacra litigiosa non potest. Etenim res sacrae, ut possideantur aliquo dato, vel retento sive promisso, speciem credimus habere simoniae. Alias autem, si gratis et amicabiliter inter se litigantes componant, sacris canonibus nequaquam dicimus obviare.

On the matter which you asked—whether, regarding an ecclesiastical benefice brought into litigation, a transaction/settlement can be made—we give such an answer, as already long ago, if we remember well, we gave to another asking something not dissimilar: that, according to the form ascribed by the canons in other transactions, it cannot be transacted/settled over a sacred thing that is in dispute. For sacred things, to be possessed by means of something given, or retained/withheld, or promised, we believe to bear the appearance of simony. Otherwise, however, if the litigants compose/settle among themselves gratis and amicably, we say that this by no means runs counter to the sacred canons.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Transactio facta de rebus ecclesiae per praelatum sine superioris consensu non obligat successorem.

A transaction made concerning the goods of the church by a prelate without the consent of his superior does not bind his successor.

Idem Abbati de Straphor, et Priori de Phe.

The same to the Abbot of Straphor, and to the Prior of Phe.

Veniens ad apostolicae sedis clementiam dilectus filius magister G. de Favill. sua nobis insinuatione monstravit, quod monachi maioris monasterii terras in parochia sanctae M. de Marchia excolunt, et ab eadem ecclesia coloni eorum omnia ecclesiastica tam necessaria quam voluntaria suscipiunt sacramenta, et tamen eidem ecclesiae suas a canonibus constitutas decimas solvere contradicunt. Sed de frugibus tertiam partem solvunt ei, et duas sibi retinere praesumunt, de reliquis autem minutis decimis, utpote nutrimentis animalium et fructibus hortorum, nil penitus praestare non erubescunt.

Coming to the clemency of the Apostolic See, the beloved son Master G. of Favill., by his own insinuation showed to us that the monks of the greater monastery cultivate lands in the parish of Saint M. of the March, and from that same church their tenants receive all the ecclesiastical sacraments, both necessary and voluntary, and yet they refuse to pay to the same church their tithes constituted by the canons. But of the crops they pay a third part to it, and presume to retain two for themselves; moreover, of the remaining smaller tithes, such as the nourishments of animals and the fruits of gardens, they are not ashamed to render nothing at all.

Arbitrantur autem, ad hoc se posse tueri cuiusdam transactionis praetextu inter praefatos monachos, et quendam sacerdotem memorati G. praedecessorem factae ita videlicet, ut de duabus carruatis terrae, quas in dominio suo monachi tenent, tertiam tantum decimarum partem [frugum] exsolvant, reliquas sibi retinendo. Quo fit, ut, inde occasionem sumentes malignandi, praedia ex agricolarum defectu ad eos devoluta monachi in suum magis astute quam provide dominium convertant, et quatuor vel forte plures carrucatas duabus aggregant, non aliter decimas praestantes de illis, quam de duabus praestitissent, quum secundum compositionis tenorem integras de illis decimationes solvere tenerentur. Quoniam igitur nos convenit ecclesiis providere, ne sua cuilibet videantur iura deperire, fraternitati vestrae per apostolica scripta Mandamus, quatenus, quum exinde fueritis requisiti, utraque parte ante praesentiam vestram convocata, rei veritatem diligentius inquiratis, et, nisi privilegium [clementia] apostolicae sedis sibi super hoc indultum coram vobis praefati monachi palam produxerint, vel nisi praefati monachi transactionem praescriptam auctoritate apostolica confirmatam esse docuerint, quum alias inter personas [ita] facta potius quam inter ecclesias videatur, nec pacta inter alios acta aliis obesse patiamur, omni dilatione et appellatione remota ipsos et agricolas [eorum] decimationes [universas] ex quibuslibet rebus provenientes ex integro, absque [omni] diminutione ecclesiae S. Mariae de Marturen.

They suppose, moreover, that they can defend themselves in this matter under the pretext of a certain transaction made between the aforesaid monks and a certain priest, predecessor of the aforesaid G., namely thus: that from two carucates of land, which the monks hold in their own demesne, they pay only the third part of the tithes [of the crops], retaining the rest to themselves. Whereby it comes about that, taking from this an occasion for maligning, the monks, the estates devolved to them through the want of farmers, convert them into their own dominion more astutely than providently, and add four or perhaps more carucates to the two, paying tithes from those no otherwise than they would have paid from the two, whereas according to the tenor of the composition they would be bound to pay entire tithes from those. Since therefore it befits us to provide for churches, lest their rights seem to perish to anyone, we command your fraternity by apostolic writings, that, when you shall have been required concerning this, both parties having been summoned before your presence, you diligently inquire the truth of the matter, and, unless the aforesaid monks openly produce before you a privilege [by the clemency] of the apostolic see granted to them concerning this, or unless the aforesaid monks shall show that the aforesaid transaction has been confirmed by apostolic authority, since otherwise it seems to have been done rather between persons [thus] than between churches, nor do we allow pacts transacted among others to prejudice others, with every delay and appeal removed, you shall compel them and their farmers [their] to render the tithes [all] arising from whatsoever things in full, without [any] diminution, to the church of St. Mary of Marturen.

iugi praestatione singulis annis praestare, et [etiam] illarum, quas illicite detinuerant, iustam aestimationem restituere eidem ecclesiae cum omni districtione compellatis. Quodsi discretioni vestrae, secundum ea quae proponuntur nobis, in iudicio visum fuerit, praefatos monachos, non nisi ad tertiae partis decimationum praestationem, secundum iustitiam urgeri posse; tunc omnium eorum, quae canones decimanda decreverint, appellatione remota, saepedictos monachos tertiam partem ecclesiae iam dictae, auctoritate apostolica decimas praestare cogatis.

to render by continuous payment every single year, and [also] to restore to the same church the just estimation of those which they had unlawfully detained, do you compel with all distraint. But if it shall seem to your discretion, in judgment, according to the things that are set forth to us, that the aforesaid monks can, according to justice, be urged only to the payment of a third part of the tithes; then, with appeal set aside, you shall compel the oft-said monks, by apostolic authority, to render to the already-said church the third part of the tithes of all those things which the canons have decreed to be tithed.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Sicut super iure praesentandi, ita super annexo non potest transigi, ut recedatur a lite interveniente aliqua temporalitate.

Just as concerning the right of presenting, so concerning the annex it cannot be compromised, such that, with some temporality intervening, there be a withdrawal from the litigation.

Lucius III. Ormensi Episcopo.

Lucius III. To the Bishop of Ormensis.

Praeterea, quando inter laicos et viros religiosos de praesentatione alicuius ecclesiae quaestione suborta transigitur inter eos ita, quod praesentationem laicus obtineat, religiosi vero novam vel maiorem percipiant in ecclesia, in qua prius nullam vel minorem habere consueverant portionem, an huiusmodi transactio teneat, quaesivisti. Quum igitur ipsa pactio simoniaca merito videatur, respondemus, quod de iure non tenet, nec ex ea religiosi ullum debent commodum obtinere.

Moreover, when between laymen and religious men, concerning the presentation of some church, a question having arisen, it is transacted between them in such a way that the layman obtains the presentation, while the religious, for their part, receive a new or greater portion in the church in which previously they had been accustomed to have none or a lesser one, you have inquired whether a transaction of this kind holds. Since therefore the pact itself seems deservedly simoniacal, we respond that in law it does not hold, nor ought the religious to obtain any benefit from it.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Super spirituali subiectione non licet transigi.

Concerning spiritual subjection, it is not permitted to make a settlement.

Coelestinus III.

Celestine III.

Praeterea quarto loco quaestio talis accessit, quod quaedam cella eximi voluit a subiectione, qua matrici domui tenebatur. Quumque causa debito Marte percurreret, fratres illius cellae, se confitentes in iure illi domui quondam fuisse subiectos, referebant quaestionem olim de hac subiectione fuisse motam, et transactione sopitam, videlicet eatenus, ut quendam annuum censum ecclesiae matrici reddendo fratres memoratae cellulae penitus essent a subiectione principalis domus exempti. Ceterum ex adverso prior maioris domus duo pariter allegabat, unum scilicet quod, ex quo confessi fuerant, se dudum illi domui fuisse subiectos, et non ante transactionem illam exemptos, constabat, illos fuisse rebelles eo ipso, quod ante transactionem et exceptionem se contendebant ab eiusdem iurisdictione esse subtractos, nec transactio subsequens eos poterat a tanto crimine inobedientiae relaxare.

Moreover, in the fourth place, such a question arose: that a certain cell wished to be taken out from the subjection by which it was held to the mother-house. And when the cause was running its course with due contest, the brothers of that cell, confessing that in law they had once been subject to that house, reported that the question had formerly been stirred about this subjection, and had been lulled by a transaction, namely to this extent: that by rendering a certain annual cens (rent) to the mother church, the brothers of the aforesaid cell would be wholly exempt from the subjection of the principal house. But, on the other side, the prior of the greater house alleged two things together: one, namely, that, since they had confessed that they had long ago been subject to that house, and not exempt before that transaction, it was evident that they were rebels by that very fact, that before the transaction and the exception they were contending that they had been withdrawn from the same jurisdiction; nor could the subsequent transaction relax them from so great a crime of disobedience.

Alterum quoque Prior consequenter pro maiori ecclesia proponebat, quod de spirituali subiectione contra votum professionis transigere non liceret. Respondemus igitur, quod ex praedicta fratrum de cella confessione contra eos sententia procedere debeat, praesertim quum illa transactio, licet nobis de illo, quod cella determinate reddere tenebatur, clare constare nequiverit, iniquitatem simoniacam continuisse putetur.

The Prior also, consequently, proposed on behalf of the greater church a second point, namely that it was not lawful to transact (compromise) about spiritual subjection contrary to the vow of profession. We answer, therefore, that from the aforesaid confession of the brothers of the cell a sentence ought to proceed against them, especially since that transaction—although it could not be made clear to us as to that which the cell was determinately bound to render—is thought to have contained simoniacal iniquity.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Iudex potest et debet se interponere pro transactione inter partes facienda, praeterquam in casibus, in quibus iura hoc non admittunt, ut super matrimonio. H. d.

A judge can and ought to interpose himself for a settlement to be made between the parties, except in cases in which the laws do not admit this, as concerning marriage. Here it is said.

Honorius III. I. tituli sanctae Praxedis Presbytero cardinali.

Honorius 3. To I., Cardinal Priest of the Title of Saint Praxedes.

Ex parte tua fuit propositum coram nobis, quod nonnulli Graeci furtive sacros ordines a non suis episcopis receperunt, quidam etiam excommunicati celebrant in ecclesiis interdictis, et Graecis ritibus pertinaciter inhaerentes in nullo volunt obedire praelatis Latinis. Praeterea quidam Graeci et Latini episcopi consecrationes faciunt in episcopatibus alienis, et decimas percipiunt in eisdem in episcoporum eorundem locorum praeiudicium et gravamen, licet episcopi Graecorum nec percipere decimas, nec consecrationes huiusmodi consueverint celebrare. Ad hoc laici Graeci uxores suas secundum motum propriae voluntatis dimittere et alias superducere non verentur, ac operari dominicis et festivis diebus quemadmodum in profestis.

On your part it was set forth before us, that some Greeks have furtively received sacred orders from bishops not their own; certain, even excommunicated, celebrate in churches under interdict; and, pertinaciously adhering to Greek rites, are unwilling in any respect to obey Latin prelates. Furthermore, certain Greek and Latin bishops perform consecrations in others’ episcopates, and receive tithes therein, to the prejudice and burden of the bishops of those places, although the bishops of the Greeks have been accustomed neither to receive tithes nor to celebrate consecrations of this kind. To this is added that Greek laymen do not fear to dismiss their wives according to the impulse of their own will and to bring in others, and to work on Sundays and festal days just as on weekdays.

Porro quidam barones et milites tam Latini quam Graeci abbatias et ecclesias alias cum hominibus et bonis aliis earundem contra iustitiam detinentes, decimas non exsolvunt, et alios solvere recusantes in suo errore defendunt, et, si pro his aut aliis excessibus feratur excommunicationis sententia in eosdem, eam in animarum suarum periculum et aliorum scandalum vilipendunt. Unde a nobis desideras edoceri, quid tibi agendum sit in omnibus supradictis, et qualiter puniendus sit Neoportensis archidiaconus, qui quibusdam eundi cum mercibus in Alexandriam contra statutum concilii generalis licentiam de facto tribuere non expavit. Nos ergo discretioni tuae breviter respondemus, ut, quum iura canonica et civilia edita sint super omnibus fere articulis praenotatis, procedas in his, quum necesse fuerit, secundum canonicas et legitimas sanctiones.

Moreover, certain barons and knights, both Latins and Greeks, detaining abbeys and other churches together with the men and other goods belonging to them against justice, do not pay tithes, and they defend others who refuse to pay, in their error; and if for these or other excesses a sentence of excommunication is brought against them, they make light of it to the peril of their souls and to the scandal of others. Whence you desire to be instructed by us what you ought to do in all the aforesaid matters, and how the Archdeacon of Neoportus is to be punished, who did not shrink from granting de facto to certain persons a license to go with merchandise to Alexandria against the statute of the general council. We therefore briefly reply to your discretion that, since the canonical and civil laws have been issued on almost all the above-noted articles, you should proceed in these, when it shall be necessary, according to canonical and legitimate sanctions.

Poteris etiam ad componendum interponere partes tuas, et interdum aliquid severitati detrahere, prout, statu imperii et excedentium multitudine provida deliberatione pensatis, videris expedire: exceptis nimirum casibus, qui compositionis sive dispensationis remedium non admittunt, utpote coniugii sacramentum, quod, quum non solum apud Latinos et Graecos, sed etiam apud fideles et infideles exsistat, a severitate canonica circa illud recedere non licebit. In his vero, super quibus ius non invenitur expressum, procedas, aequitate servata, semper in humaniorem partem maxime propter statum imperii adhuc debilem declinando, secundum quod personas et causas, loca et tempora videris postulare.

You will also be able to interpose your offices for composing matters, and at times to subtract something from severity, as, the state of the empire and the multitude of those exceeding the bounds being weighed with prudent deliberation, you shall see to be expedient: with the cases excepted, to wit, which do not admit the remedy of composition or dispensation, such as the sacrament of marriage, which, since it exists not only among Latins and Greeks, but even among the faithful and the unfaithful, it will not be permitted to depart from canonical severity concerning it. But in those matters with respect to which law is not found expressed, proceed, equity being preserved, always inclining to the more humane part, especially on account of the state of the empire as yet weak, according as you shall see persons and causes, places and times to require.

TITULUS XXXVII. DE POSTULANDO.

TITLE 37. ON POSTULATING.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Clericus in sacris vel minoribus beneficiatus in saeculari foro postulare non debet, nisi pro se, vel sua ecclesia, vel miserabilibus personis.

A cleric beneficed in sacred or in minor orders ought not to plead in the secular forum, unless for himself, or his own church, or for miserable persons.

Ex concilio Lateranensi.

From the Lateran council.

Clerici in subdiaconatu, et supra, [et] in ordinibus quoque minoribus, si stipendiis ecclesiasticis sustententur, coram saeculari iudice advocati in negotiis saecularibus fieri non praesumant, nisi propriam causam vel ecclesiae suae fuerint prosecuti, aut pro miserabilibus forte personis, quae proprias causas administrare non possunt. [Sed nec procurationes etc.]

Clerics in the subdiaconate, and above, [and] in the minor orders as well, if they are sustained by ecclesiastical stipends, should not presume to become advocates before a secular judge in secular affairs, unless they have prosecuted their own cause or that of their church, or perhaps for pitiable persons who are not able to administer their own causes. [But neither procurations etc.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Canonici regulares postulare non possunt, sicut monachi, nisi pro utilitate ecclesiae, vel sui monasterii, et praecepto abbatis.

Canons regular cannot petition, like monks, except for the utility of the church, or of their own monastery, and at the precept of the abbot.

Innocentius III. Compostellano Archiepiscopo.

Innocent 3. To the Archbishop of Compostela.

Ex parte tua coram nobis fuit propositum, quod quidam canonici regulares, ut se forte peritos in iure valeant demonstrare, ac extra claustrum materiam habeant evagandi, non solum in ecclesiasticis, verum etiam in forensibus causis praesumunt advocati officium exercere. Quumque obiicitur eis, quod iuxta canonicas sanctiones non debent esse forensis vel ecclesiastici negotii susceptores vel exsecutores etiam, nisi forte id monasterii exposcat utilitas, abbate nihilominus imperante, ipsi ad suam proponunt insolertiam excusandam, quod capitulum illud, per quod praedicta prohiberi videntur, de monachis, non de canonicis regularibus loquitur manifeste. Unde nos consulere voluisti, utrum tales sint ad patrocinium admittendi.

On your part it was proposed before us that certain canons regular, so that they may perhaps be able to demonstrate themselves experienced in law, and may have matter for wandering outside the cloister, presume to exercise the office of advocate not only in ecclesiastical but also in forensic causes. And when it is objected to them that, according to canonical sanctions, they ought not to be undertakers or even executors of forensic or ecclesiastical business, unless perhaps the utility of the monastery should demand it, the abbot likewise commanding, they put forward, to excuse their own inexpertness, that that chapter, by which the aforesaid things seem to be prohibited, speaks manifestly of monks, not of canons regular. Wherefore you wished to consult us whether such persons are to be admitted to patronage.

Ad quod consultationi tuae taliter, respondemus, quod idem iudicium de canonicis regularibus, quod et de monachis, quantum ad supradicta credimus observandum, licet de monachis in canone specialiter sit expressum. [Dat. Rom.

To this, in answer to your consultation, we thus respond: that the same judgment concerning canons regular as concerning monks, with respect to the aforesaid, we believe is to be observed, although concerning monks it is specially expressed in the canon. [Given at Rome.

ap. S. Petr. Id. Mart. Ao. IX. 1206.]

at St. Peter's, on the Ides of March, in the 9th year, 1206.]

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Se summat.

Let him take it upon himself.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory 9.

Quum sacerdotis sit officium nulli nocere, omnibus autem velle prodesse, non nisi pro se ipso, vel ecclesia sua, vel, si necessitas immineat, pro personis coniunctis aut miserabilibus sibi licitum est postulare. (Et infra:) Clericus autem, qui contra ecclesiam, a qua beneficium obtinet, pro extraneis advocatus vel procurator esse praesumit, tanquam ingratus potest, maxime si clericus sit eiusdem ecclesiae, beneficio huiusmodi spoliari.

Since it is the office of a priest to harm no one, and to wish to benefit all, it is licit for him to petition only for himself, or for his own church, or, if necessity looms, for persons connected to him or pitiable. (And below:) A cleric, however, who, against the church from which he obtains a benefice, presumes to be an advocate or procurator for outsiders, may, as ungrateful, be despoiled of a benefice of this kind, especially if he is a cleric of the same church.

TITULUS XXXVIII. DE PROCURATORIBUS.

TITLE 38. ON PROCURATORS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Non auditur quis tanquam alterius procurator, nisi habeat mandatum legitime factum.

No one is heard as another’s procurator, unless he has a mandate legitimately made.

Gregorius Maximo Salonensi Episcopo.

Gregory to Maximus, Bishop of Salona.

Alia quidem [scripta ad fraternitatem tuam antea feceramus, sed tempore, quo homines tuos, quos ad nos misisti, relaxare voluimus.] Scripsisse te quibusdam nostris comperimus, quod praedictos viros tunc ad causam non miseris, et ideo ea, quae cum ipsis facta sunt, subsistere non debere; sed et Thomas [ecclesiae tuae defensor] sibi hoc verbo a te dictum perhibuit, ex qua re iam nec praesentium portitoribus iudicavimus esse credendum, ne de ipsis quoque post haec similiter diceretur. Quia ergo hoc cautiores nos esse debere praemonuit, si causam vultis dicere, instructam [de cetero] personam cum mandato legaliter facto, tuis et presbyterorum seu diaconorum testiumque subscriptionibus roborato, gestisque ex more indicto transmitte, ut quicquid cum ea actum fuerit iure subsistat. [Nam nos non solum etc.]

Other things indeed [we had previously written to your fraternity, but at the time when we wished to release your men whom you sent to us.] We have ascertained that you wrote to certain of ours that you had not then sent the aforesaid men for the cause, and therefore that the things which were done with them ought not to subsist; but Thomas [defender of your church] also asserted that this was said to him by you in so many words, from which matter we have now judged that not even the bearers of the present letters are to be believed, lest after this the same be said about them as well. Since therefore this has forewarned us that we ought to be more cautious, if you wish to plead the cause, send an instructed [henceforth] person with a mandate legally made, strengthened by your subscription and by those of presbyters or deacons and witnesses, and transmit the proceedings indicated according to custom, so that whatever shall have been done with that person may in law subsist. [For we not only etc.]

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Non valet sententia, etiam expensarum condemnatoria, lata contra absentem, ex probabili causa legitime per nuncium excusatum. H. d. quantum ad verum intellectum.

Not valid is a sentence, even a condemnatory one for expenses, rendered against an absent person legitimately excused by a messenger for a probable cause. On this point, as to the true understanding.

Alexander III.

Alexander 3.

Querelam A. clerici accepimus, quod, quum venerabilis frater noster Wigorniensis episcopus causam, quae vertitur inter ipsum et Salesberiensem episcopum super ecclesia de Bribec., de mandato nostro suscepisset fine debito terminandam, tandem, quia idem clericus termino constituto suam ei exhibere praesentiam non potuit pro eo, quod erat infirmitate detentus, sicut per quendam presbyterum et diaconum, quos ad praesentiam ipsius episcopi miserat, paratus erat probare, eundem A. in restitutione expensarum, quas R. Lexoviensis archidiaconus pro ipsa causa ad diem ipsum tunc veniendo fecerat, condemnavit. Mandamus itaque discretioni vestrae atque praecipimus, quatenus, si praefatus episcopus eundem A. iuxta mandatum nostrum a praescripta sententia non absolverit, vos, rei veritate diligentius inquisita, si vobis constiterit, quod Vigorensis episcopus praefatum A. in restitutione expensarum pro nulla alia rationabili causa condemnaverit, nisi pro eo tantum, quod in termino constituto ad eius praesentiam non accessit infirmitate detentus, quum non possit quis cogi, nisi velit, in gravibus causis procuratorem constituere, et quum ipse ad probandum infirmitatem suam presbyterum et diaconum destinaverit, auctoritate nostra sublato appellationis remedio eum absolvere ab eadem sententia minime differatis.

We have received the complaint of A., a cleric, that, when our venerable brother the Bishop of Worcester had, by our mandate, undertaken the case which is pending between him and the Bishop of Salisbury over the church of Bribec., to be brought to a due conclusion, then, because the same cleric at the appointed term could not present himself before him, for this reason, that he was detained by infirmity, as he was prepared to prove through a certain presbyter and deacon whom he had sent to that bishop’s presence, he condemned the same A. to the restitution of the expenses which R., the Archdeacon of Lisieux, had incurred for that very case by coming on that very day. We therefore command to your discretion and we enjoin, that, if the aforesaid bishop shall not have absolved the same A., according to our mandate, from the aforesaid sentence, you—once the truth of the matter has been more diligently inquired into—if it is established to you that the Bishop of Worcester condemned the aforesaid A. to the restitution of expenses for no other reasonable cause except only because at the appointed term he did not come into his presence, being detained by infirmity, since one cannot be compelled, unless he is willing, to constitute a procurator in grave causes, and since he himself had dispatched a presbyter and a deacon to prove his infirmity—by our authority, the remedy of appeal removed, you should by no means delay to absolve him from the same sentence.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Sententia lata cum procuratore revocato et de hoc certificato non praeiudicat domino. H. d. secundum communem intellectum.

A sentence delivered, with the procurator revoked and this certified, does not prejudice the principal. In this matter, according to the common understanding.

Clemens III.

Clement III.

Ex insinuatione dilecti filii nostri I. archidiaconi Sagiensis accepimus, quod, quum inter ipsum et magistrum G. de Sang. super quadum praebenda Lexonensis ecclesiae, quae de Pomeria dicitur, controversia mota fuisset, eidem magistro propter hoc ad sedem apostolicam accedenti G. de Tortona, procuratorem ipsius archidiaconi se gerens ad illam causam constitutum, cum quibusdum literis de ratihabitione, prout dicebat, se opposuit. Quum autem aliquantulum in causae cognitione processum fuisset, Licet praedicto G. ab eodem archidiacono procuratori suo, duobus clericis praesentibus et assistentibus expresse fuisset inhibitum, ne causae cognitionem susciperet, et ne ad iudicium suscipiendum in iure suis literis uteretur, ipse nihilominus in ipsa causa procedens, sententiam, sicut dicitur, contrariam reportavit.

From the insinuation of our beloved son I., archdeacon of Sées, we received that, when between him and Master G. de Sang. over a certain prebend of the Church of Lisieux, which is called de Pomeria, a controversy had been set in motion, to that same master, approaching the apostolic see on this account, G. of Tortona—carrying himself as the procurator of the archdeacon aforesaid, appointed for that case—set himself in opposition with certain letters of ratihabition, as he said. But when there had been some little progress in the cognition of the cause, although to the aforesaid G., by the same archdeacon, his procurator, two clerics being present and assisting, it had been expressly inhibited that he should not undertake the cognition of the cause, and that he should not use his letters in law for undertaking the judgment, nevertheless he, proceeding in that very cause, delivered, as it is said, an adverse sentence.

Ceterum, quia alter de praedictis clericis dicitur obiisse, [nos tamen] attendentes, quod idem G. contra ipsius archidiaconi prohibitionem in suscipiendo iudicio ipsius causae procedere non debuerit, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si, sicut ratio dicta, per ipsius archidiaconi et superstitis illius clerici iuramentum constiterit de praemissis, eundem archidiaconum expresse prohibuisse, ne dictus procurator illius controversiae diffinitionem susciperet, et ne in iure ad suscipiendum iudicium suis literis de ratihabitione aliquatenus uteretur, sententia contra eum lata nequaquam obstante, praedictae praebendae possessionem cum fructibus inde perceptis, a quocunque detineatur, archidiacono eidem, sublato contradictionis et appellationis obstaculo, si eius restitutioni aliud canonicum non obsistat, auctoritate nostra restitui faciatis eidem. Restitutione vero facta, si archidiaconus ipse suam canonicam institutionem probare potuerit, ipsam ratam et inviolabilem permanere, sicut iustum fuerit, appellatione postposita decernatis.

Furthermore, because one of the aforesaid clerics is said to have died, [we nevertheless], considering that the same G., against the prohibition of the archdeacon himself, ought not to have proceeded in undertaking the judgment of that cause, we command by apostolic writings to your discretion, that, if, as has been said, it shall have been established concerning the aforesaid matters by the oath of the archdeacon himself and of that surviving cleric, that the same archdeacon expressly prohibited that the said procurator should assume the definition of that controversy, and that he should nowise use his letters of ratihabition in law for undertaking judgment, the sentence pronounced against him notwithstanding in no wise, you are to cause the possession of the aforesaid prebend, with the fruits therefrom perceived, by whomever it is detained, to be restored by our authority to that same archdeacon, the obstacle of contradiction and appeal having been removed, if nothing else canonical stands in the way of his restitution. But, restitution having indeed been made, if the archdeacon himself shall be able to prove his canonical institution, you are to decree, appeal set aside, that it remain ratified and inviolable, as shall be just.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Rescriptum super consecutivis iudiciis impetratum a procuratore revocato, et de hoc certificato, non valet, nec processus vel sententia lata per ipsum, si revocatio pervenit ad adversarium. H. d. secundum glossam.

A rescript concerning consecutive proceedings, obtained by a procurator who has been revoked, and with this having been certified, is not valid, nor are the proceeding or the sentence pronounced by him, if the revocation has reached the adversary. This is the holding according to the gloss.

Innocentius III. Cabilonensi et Catalanensi Episcopis.

Innocent III. To the Bishops of Chalon and Châlons.

In nostra praesentia constitutus venerabilis frater noster Tullensis episcopus lacrimabiliter est conquestus, quod, quum olim ad procurandam causam, quae inter ipsum et bonae memoriae decanum Tullensem super dilapidatione, excommunicatione et periurio, ac quibusdam aliis criminibus vertebatur, T. et G. presbyteros procuratores instituens, ipsos ad sedem apostolicam duxerit destinandos, quum de ipsorum fide postmodum titubasset, mandatum, quod eis dederat, infra modicum temporis spatium revocavit, sed ipsi, licet mandati literas revocatorias recepissent, nihilominus in negotio processerunt, et pro procuratoribus se gerentes, cum adversario [suo], Ioffrido scilicet, archidiacono Tullensi, sunt ingressi iudicium, cum eo, demum ad dilectum filium G. Parisiensem archidiaconum et collegas suos in eiusdem praeiudicium nostras literas impetrarunt. Quorum citatio licet eidem episcopo minime fuerit praesentata, quum tamen ad eius notitiam devenisset, quod eisdem erat causa commissa, quae inter ipsos et dictos decanum et archidiaconum vertebatur, ad eorum praesentiam properavit. Quumque praedictus episcopus per multam instantiam nostri rescripti copiam habuisset, et eiusdem tenorem cum viris prudentibus inspiceret diligenter, admirans plurimum, quod supradicti presbyteri tanquam procuratores huiusmodi literas impetrarant, ad probandum, quod falsi procuratores fuerunt, ab ipsis iudicibus inducias postulasset, ipsi exceptionem oppositam inutilem et supervacuam reputantes, ad probationem ipsius dilationem concedere noluerunt, propter quod idem episcopus ad appellationis beneficium convolavit, et ab ipsorum iudicum praesentia recessit appellans.

Set in our presence, our venerable brother the bishop of Toul lamentably complained that, when once, for prosecuting the cause which was pending between him and the dean of Toul of good memory concerning dilapidation, excommunication, and perjury, and certain other crimes, appointing T. and G., presbyters, as procurators, he had arranged that they be sent to the apostolic see to be deputed, when afterward he had wavered about their good faith, he revoked, within a small span of time, the mandate which he had given them; but they, although they had received revocatory letters of the mandate, nonetheless proceeded in the business, and, conducting themselves as procurators, with his adversary [his], namely Geoffrey, archdeacon of Toul, entered into judgment with him, and finally procured our letters to our beloved son G., archdeacon of Paris, and his colleagues, to the prejudice of the same. The citation of whom, although it had by no means been presented to the same bishop, yet when it had come to his notice that the cause which was pending between him and the aforesaid dean and archdeacon had been committed to them, he hastened to their presence. And when the aforesaid bishop, by much insistence, had obtained a copy of our rescript, and was diligently inspecting the tenor of the same with prudent men, marveling greatly that the above-said presbyters, as procurators, had obtained letters of this sort, in order to prove that they were false procurators he had asked from those judges an adjournment; but they, accounting the exception set up to be useless and superfluous, were unwilling to grant a delay for the proof thereof, on account of which the same bishop flew to the benefit of appeal, and withdrew from the presence of those judges, appealing.

Sed iidem appellationi minime deferentes, in negotio ipso procedere, ac nihilominus lite non contestata et iuris ordine praetermisso testes contra eum episcopum recipere praesumpserunt, [et,] ipsum a Tullensi ecclesia per sententiam removendo [praeter formam mandati nostri Tullensi capitulo concesserunt eligendi sibi pontificem liberam facultatem. Quum autem dicti episcopus et P. archidiaconus propter hoc ad nostram nuper praesentiam accessissent, et super ipsorum processu iudicum coram nobis aliquamdiu litigassent, idem episcopus XIII. testes, quosdam abbates et monachos nigri et albi ordinis, et quosdam clericos saeculares induxit, quibus diligenter examinatis, ex ipsorum depositionibus apparuit evidenter, quod quum supradictus episcopus ad probandam exceptionem praescriptam petiisset inducias, ipsas praetaxati iudices negaverunt eidem, et quod, licet idem episcopus propter hoc ad sedem apostolicam provocasset, ipsi tamen in negotio post appellationem ad nos interpositam processerunt.] Nos vero, licet vix fidem adhibere potuerimus, quod saepe dicti iudices, utpote viri literati, providi et honesti, taliter, ut dictum est, processissent, maxime quum in sua relatione, quam ad nostram praesentiam transmisere, de huiusmodi exceptione proposita nullam fecerint mentionem, quia tamen episcopus per viros religiosos, providos et honestos, de quibus non est verisimile, quod suae salutis obliti ac iuramenti religione contempta falsum testimonium tulerint, nobis fecit super iis, quae sunt proposita, plenam fidem, attendentes etiam, quod falsi procuratoris exceptio non solum ante sententiam, verum etiam postea potest obiici iuxta canonicas et legitimas sanctiones, utpote qua probata iudicium nullum et nullius momenti controversiae reputantur de consilio fratrum nostrorum processum supradictorum iudicum sententialiter duximus irritandum, [in eum statum negotium reducentes etc.

But these same men, paying no heed at all to the appeal, presumed to proceed in the matter itself and nonetheless, with the suit not contested and the order of law passed over, to receive witnesses against that bishop, [and,] by removing him from the church of Toul by sentence, [contrary to the form of our mandate they granted to the chapter of Toul the free faculty of choosing for themselves a pontiff. But when the said bishop and P., the archdeacon, had lately come into our presence for this, and had for some time litigated before us about the judges’ process against them, that same bishop produced 13. witnesses, certain abbots and monks of the black and white order, and certain secular clerics; and when these had been diligently examined, from their depositions it plainly appeared that when the aforesaid bishop had asked delays to prove the aforesaid exception, those aforementioned judges denied them to him, and that, although that same bishop had for this appealed to the Apostolic See, they nonetheless proceeded in the business after the appeal had been interposed to us.] We indeed, although we could scarcely have given credence that the oft-mentioned judges—being men lettered, provident, and honest—had proceeded in such a manner as has been said, especially since in their report, which they sent to our presence, they made no mention of such a proposed exception; yet because the bishop, through religious, provident, and honest men, of whom it is not likely that, forgetful of their own salvation and with the religion of an oath contemned, they would bear false testimony, gave us full faith concerning the things that have been put forward, taking into account also that the exception of a false procurator can be objected not only before sentence but even afterward according to canonical and legal sanctions, inasmuch as, when it is proved, the judgment is reckoned null and of no moment to the controversy, by the counsel of our brothers we have deemed the process of the aforesaid judges to be annulled by sentence, [reducing the business into that state, etc.

Dat. Rom. ap. S. Petr.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s.

Kal. Febr. Ao. IX. 1207.]

Kalends of February. Year 9. 1207.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Si agitur de adulterio coram iudice saeculari ad poenam legalem, non intervenit procurator; secus si coram ecclesiastico ad separationem.

If a matter of adultery is handled before a secular judge for the legal penalty, a procurator does not intervene; otherwise, if before an ecclesiastical judge for separation.

Idem Brixiensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Brescia.

Tuae fraternitatis (Et infra: [cf. c. 10. de eo, qui cogn. IV. 13.]) Consultationi tuae taliter respondemus, quod, si vir accuset uxorem de crimine adulterii coram iudice saeculari ad poenam legitimam infligendam, quia tunc inscriptionis vinculum debet arripere, seque ad poenam talionis adstringere, non per procuratorem, sed per se ipsum praesentem oportet praesentialiter accusare. Si vero vir accusare velit uxorem de adulterio coram ecclestiastico iudice, ut ab eius cohabitatione discedat, quia tunc, etsi forsan oporteat eum inscribere, ut designet in scriptis nomen, locum et tempus, et omnia, quae comprehenduntur in lege civili, ad talionem tamen non debet se aliquatenus obligare, ne forte, quum etiam in probatione defecerit, intentionis suae consequatur effectum, sustineri potest, si necessitas id postulaverit, ut per procuratorem accuset, quoniam huiusmodi accusatio, etsi de crimine fiat, non est tamen criminalis, sed quasi mixta inter civilem et criminalem, quanquam in praesentia principalium personarum securius procedatur.

To your fraternity’s (And below: [cf. c. 10. on him who knows 4. 13.]) consultation we thus respond, that, if a husband accuses his wife of the crime of adultery before a secular judge for the infliction of the lawful penalty, since then he ought to take up the bond of inscription and bind himself to the penalty of talion, he must accuse not through a procurator, but by himself, present in person. But if the husband should wish to accuse his wife of adultery before an ecclesiastical judge, so that she may depart from cohabitation with him, since then, although perhaps it may be necessary for him to inscribe, that he designate in writings the name, place, and time, and all things which are comprehended in the civil law, nevertheless he ought in no way to bind himself to talion, lest perhaps, even when he has failed in proof, he should obtain the effect of his intention; it can be sustained, if necessity should demand it, that he accuse through a procurator, because an accusation of this sort, although it is made about a crime, is nevertheless not criminal, but as it were mixed between civil and criminal, although in the presence of the principal persons it is safer to proceed.

[Postulasti etc. (cf. c. 25. de spons. IV. 1.) Dat.

[You have requested, etc. (cf. c. 25. on sponsals 4. 1.) Given.

Rom. etc. 1206.]

Rome, etc. 1206.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Qui de mandato domini causam procuravit, ab eo repetit expensas propter hoc factas.

He who has managed a cause by the mandate of the principal recovers from him the expenses incurred on this account.

Idem.

The same.

Quum pro causa, quae inter dilectos filios G. et F. Gabilonensis ecclesiae archidiaconos vertebatur, procuratores utriusque partis ad nostram praesentiam accessissent, [nos eis dilectum filium nostrum G. S. Adriani diaconum cardinalem concessimus auditorem, coram quo ipsius F. archidiaconi procurator proposuit, quod, quum olim pro variis gravaminibus, quae adversarii eius Cabilonensi ecclesiae inferebant, ad sedem apostolicam accessisset, ad dilectos filios abbatem S. Martini, cantorem Eduensem, archidiaconum Flaviniacensem literas impetravit, ut dictum G. archidiaconum canonica districtione compellerent, ut ab Cabilonensis ecclesiae et hominum cuiusdam obedientiae eius, quae Potestas Boiaci dicitur, molestatione cessaret, et de iniuriis illatis ipsum eidem ecclesiae satisfactionem cogerent debitam exhibere. Quumque iudices secundum mandatum apostolicum vellent in causa procedere, pars adversa, ut iudicium declinaret, sedem apostolicam appellavit. Adiecit etiam], quod a bonae memoriae Coelestino Papa praedecessore nostro confirmationis literas impetrarat super quibusdam institutionibus [eiusdem] ecclesiae de communi assensu capituli constitutis, ex quarum inobservantia ecclesia [ipsa] debito servitio fraudabatur.

When, for the cause which was pending between the beloved sons G. and F., archdeacons of the Gabilonensis church, the procurators of each party had come into our presence, [we granted to them our beloved son G., cardinal deacon of St. Adrian, as auditor, before whom the procurator of the said archdeacon F. set forth that, when once, on account of various grievances which his adversaries were inflicting upon the Cabilonensis church, he had come to the apostolic see, he obtained letters to the beloved sons the abbot of St. Martin, the Euduan cantor, and the archdeacon of Flavigny, that they should compel the said archdeacon G. by canonical constraint to cease from molesting the Cabilonensis church and the men of a certain obedience of his which is called the Potestas of Boiaci, and should force him to exhibit the due satisfaction for the injuries inflicted upon that same church. And when the judges, according to the apostolic mandate, wished to proceed in the cause, the opposing party, in order to decline the judgment, appealed to the apostolic see. He added also], that from our predecessor of good memory, Pope Celestine, he had obtained letters of confirmation concerning certain institutions [of the same] church established by the common assent of the chapter, from the nonobservance of which the church [itself] was being defrauded of the due service.

[Licet autem idem praedecessor noster venerabili fratri nostro Eduensi episcopo ad eiusdem archidiaconi postulationem mandasset, ut eas faceret observari, ipse tamen semel solummodo Cabilonensi capitulo pro his servandis suas literas destinavit, nec super hoc ultra processit.] Petebat itaque procurator ipse pro archidiacono memorato [priorem] causam committi, confirmari constitutiones praedictas, et ea sibi restitui, quae ad utilitatem eiusdem ecclesiae coactus fuerat expendisse. [Ceterum procurator partis alterius ex adverso respondit, quod, quum dictus F. archidiaconus etc. (cf. c. 27. de sent.

[Although indeed that same predecessor of ours, at the petition of the same archdeacon, had mandated to our venerable brother the bishop of Autun that he should cause them to be observed, nevertheless he himself only once sent his letters to the chapter of Chalon for the keeping of these, and did not proceed further on this.] Therefore the procurator himself, on behalf of the aforesaid archdeacon, was requesting that the [earlier] cause be committed, that the aforesaid constitutions be confirmed, and that those things be restored to him which he had been compelled to expend for the utility of the same church. [Moreover, the procurator of the other party responded in opposition that, since the said F., archdeacon, etc. (cf. c. 27. on sent.).

exc. V. 39.) Ipse vero ad apostolicam sedem accedens, confessus est, quod in clericum manus iniecerat violentas; supprimens autem, quod immunitatem violasset ecclesiae, super absolutione sua literas impetravit; sed nihilominus in excommunicatione remansit, quum alteram causarum, pro quibus excommunicatus fuerat, tacuisset. Unde ipsum nec in iure stare posse dicebat, nec procuratorem constituere; praesertim quum is, cui causae suae procurationem commiserat, ob excessum similem eadem innodatus sententia teneretur.

(exc. 5. 39.) But he himself, approaching the apostolic see, confessed that he had laid violent hands upon a cleric; yet suppressing that he had violated the immunity of the Church, he obtained letters concerning his absolution; but nonetheless he remained in excommunication, since he had kept silent about the other of the causes for which he had been excommunicated. Whence he said that he could neither stand in law nor appoint a procurator; especially since the man to whom he had committed the procuration of his cause, on account of a similar excess, was held bound by the same sentence.

Ea etiam carere viribus allegabat, quae in excommunicatione positus a sede apostolica impetrarat. Licet autem per hoc dictus G. archidiaconus ei non teneretur, nisi obtento prius absolutionis beneficio, respondere, nihilominus tamen se dictorum iudicum conspectui praesentarat, et per literas venerabilis fratris episcopi et dilecti filii decani ipsius ecclesiae ostenderat, quod nec ipse adversus eandem ecclesiam, nec ecclesia adversus eum haberet aliquam quaestionem, et literae, quas adversarius eius obtinuerat ab apostolica sede, impetratae non fuerant de capituli voluntate. Accedente igitur die altera, quae ipsis fuerat assignata, quum super eo quaereretur a partibus, utrum renitente capitulo dictus F. archidiaconus esset pro Cabilonensi ecclesia contra eundem G. archidiaconum admittendus, ipse G. propter suspicionem iudicum ad sedem apostolicam appellavit.

He alleged also that those instruments which, while placed in excommunication, he had obtained from the apostolic see lacked force. Although by this the said G., archdeacon, would not be bound to answer him unless the benefit of absolution had first been obtained, nonetheless he presented himself to the presence of the aforesaid judges, and by letters of the venerable brother bishop and the beloved son, the dean of that church, he showed that neither he had any question against the same church nor the church against him, and that the letters which his adversary had obtained from the apostolic see had not been procured by the will of the chapter. Accordingly, when the next day approached which had been assigned to them, when it was asked by the parties concerning this, whether, the chapter resisting, the said F., archdeacon, should be admitted on behalf of the Cabilonensian church against the same G., archdeacon, G. himself, on account of suspicion of the judges, appealed to the apostolic see.

Ad ea vero, quae super servandis consuetudinibus ecclesiae proposita fuerant, sic respondit, quod, quum memoratus episcopus dictis decano et capitulo mandavisset memoratas consuetudines observari, responderunt, se ipsas libentius servaturos, nisi paupertas ecclesiae impediret, adiicientes, ut statum Cabilonensis ecclesiae per suas literas sedi apostolicae nunciarent. Ex his igitur concludebat, nec expensas, quas dictus F. archidiaconus fecerat, ipsi debere restitui, quum potius, ut ab excommunicationis vinculo solveretur, ad sedem apostolicam assessisset, nec eum esse super confirmandis ecclesiae consuetudinibus audiendum, cuius non poterat literas procurationis ostendere, immo ipse procurator esset a capitulo institutus. Propter quod cum instantia postulabat ordinationem ecclesiae dictis episcopo et decano committi ita, quod quicquid de maiori et saniori parte capituli tam super instituendis canonicis quam super aliis ad ordinationem eiusdem ecclesiae pertinentibus constituerent, non obstante contradictione paucorum, inviolabiliter servaretur, nec obstantibus literis super servandis praedictis consuetudinibus ad dictum Eduensem episcopum destinatis.

As to the matters that had been proposed concerning the keeping of the church’s customs, he replied thus: that, when the aforesaid bishop had commanded the said dean and chapter that the aforesaid customs be observed, they answered that they would the more willingly keep them, unless the poverty of the church should hinder, adding that they should notify by their letters to the apostolic see the condition of the Cabilonensian church. From these things, therefore, he concluded that the expenses which the said F., archdeacon, had incurred ought not to be restored to him, since rather, in order that he might be loosed from the bond of excommunication, he had resorted to the apostolic see; nor should he be heard on the confirming of the church’s customs, who could not show letters of procuration, nay rather that he himself had been appointed procurator by the chapter. Wherefore he urgently requested that the ordering of the church be committed to the said bishop and dean, in such wise that whatever the greater and sounder part of the chapter should determine, both concerning the instituting of canons and concerning other matters pertaining to the ordering of the same church, should, notwithstanding the contradiction of a few, be inviolably observed, and notwithstanding also the letters sent to the said Eduensian bishop concerning the keeping of the aforesaid customs.

Petebat etiam dictum F. archidiaconum excommunicatum denunciari, quum nec satisfecisset passo iniuriam, et de violatione immunitatis ecclesiae non fecisset aliquam mentionem. Ex parte vero praedicti F. archidiaconi taliter fuit ad obiecta responsum, quod licet super violenta manuum iniectione accusatus fuisset, ei fuit ecclesiae solummodo introitus interdictus; sed postmodum ad apostolicam sedem accedens sine contradictione qualibet fuerat absolutus.] Nos igitur causam ipsam vestro examini committentes Discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, [si vobis etc. (cf. c. 27. de sent.

He also petitioned that the said F., the archdeacon, be denounced as excommunicated, since he had not made satisfaction to the one who suffered the injury, and had made no mention of the violation of the immunity of the church. But on the part of the aforesaid F., the archdeacon, it was thus answered to the objections, that although he had been accused concerning the violent laying-on of hands, only entry to the church had been interdicted to him; but afterward, approaching the apostolic see, he had been absolved without any contradiction.] We therefore, committing that cause to your examination, command to your Discretion through apostolic writings, that, [if to you etc. (cf. c. 27. de sent.

exc. V. 39.)] Praedictas [vero] constitutiones, si eas de assensu capituli minoris vel sanioris partis sine pravitate qualibet inveneritis esse factas, et possibilitas ecclesiae patitur, faciatis inviolabiliter observari. [In aliis ordinationem ecclesiae praedictis episcopo et decano auctoritate apostolica committatis ita, ut quae cum maiori parte capituli tam super canonicis instituendis quam super aliis canonice duxerint statuenda, non obstante contradictione vel appellatione paucorum, obtineat firmitatem] expensas vero ante dicto archidiacono restitui faciatis, si legitime probare potuerit, se de mandato capituli suscepisse praedicta negotia promovenda, et propter hoc ad sedem apostolicam accessisse.

exc. 5. 39.)] The aforesaid [indeed] constitutions, if you shall have found them to have been made with the assent of the chapter, of the lesser or the sounder part, without any depravity whatsoever, and the capability of the church allows, you shall cause to be observed inviolably. [In other matters you shall commit the ordination of the church to the aforesaid bishop and dean by apostolic authority in such wise that the things which, with the greater part of the chapter, both concerning canons to be instituted and concerning other things which they shall judge ought to be established canonically, may obtain firmness, notwithstanding the contradiction or appeal of a few,] but as to the expenses you shall cause them to be restored to the aforesaid archdeacon, if he shall have been able lawfully to prove that he undertook, by mandate of the chapter, to advance the aforesaid affairs, and on this account approached the apostolic see.

[Nullus literis etc. Datum etc. 1198.]

[No one by letters etc. Given etc. 1198.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Universitas etiam scholarium potest ad agendum et defendendum procuratorem constituere.

The universitas of the scholars can also appoint a procurator for suing and for defending.

Idem Scholaribus Parisiensibus.

The same to the Parisian Scholars.

Quia in causis, quae contra vos et pro vobis moventur, interdum vestra universitas ad agendum et respondendum commode interesse non potest, postulastis a nobis, ut procuratorem instituere super hoc vobis de nostra permissione liceret. Licet igitur de iure communi hoc facere valeatis, instituendi tamen procuratorem super his auctoritate praesentium vobis concedimus facultatem.

Because in the cases which are brought against you and on your behalf, at times your universitas cannot conveniently be present to act and to respond, you have petitioned from us that it be permitted to you, by our permission, to appoint a procurator in this matter. Therefore, although by the ius commune you are able to do this, nevertheless by the authority of these presents we grant to you the faculty of appointing a procurator over these matters.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Si citatus ad totam causam constituit procuratorem, quem postea revocat, potest nihilominus contra eum procedi, in quantum status causae patitur, sine alia citatione. H. d. quoad intellectum.

If a person summoned for the whole case appoints a procurator, whom he later revokes, nonetheless proceedings may be carried on against him, insofar as the status of the case permits, without another summons. H. d., as to the interpretation.

Honorius III. Episcopo Egitanensi.

Honorius 3. To the Bishop of Egitania.

Auditis et intellectis quae super Ioannis Colimbriensis et Bartholomaei Egitanensis canonicorum, nec non et decani Civitatensis suorumque coniudicum delegatorum nostrorum proccessibus in causa, quae inter te et venerabilem fratrem nostrum Colimbriensem episcopum super limitatone dioecesium ac rebus aliis vertitur, a procuratoribus partium fuere proposita coram nobis, processus ipsos, et quaecunque secuta sunt ex eis vel ob eos, noveris nos de consensu fratrum nostrorum irrita iudicasse, non obstantibus literis, quas de revocatione mandati procuratori suo praedictus Colubriensis episcopus destinavit, quum, antequam ad illum literae huiusmodi pervenirent, fuisset super eisdem processibus hinc inde conclusum. Ceterum memoratum Colubriensem episcopum, qui procuraverat totum negotium ad examen sedis apostolicae advocari, et postmodum mandatum factum procuratori non sine nostro contemptu et tuo dispendio revocavit, condemnandum tibi duximus in expensis, quas fecisti a tempore, quo ad procuratorem ipsius revocatoriae literae pervenerunt, et facies etiam usque ad diem, quo per se idem episcopus vel per procuratorem idoneum se nostro conspectui praesentabit, in principali negotio et contingentibus ipsum legitime processurus. Ne igitur super his possit aliquatenus dubitari has literas duximus concedendas.

Having heard and understood the matters which, concerning the proceedings of John, canon of Colimbria, and Bartholomew, canon of Egitania, as well as of the dean of Civitatensis and their co-judges, our delegates, in the case which is being contested between you and our venerable brother the bishop of Colimbria regarding the delimitation of dioceses and other things, were set forth before us by the procurators of the parties, you should know that we, with the consent of our brothers, have judged the proceedings themselves, and whatever followed from them or on account of them, to be null, notwithstanding the letters which the aforesaid bishop of Colimbria sent to his procurator concerning the revocation of the mandate, since, before letters of this sort had reached him, the pleadings on those same proceedings had been closed on both sides. Moreover, we have deemed that the aforesaid bishop of Colimbria—who had procured that the whole business be called to the examination of the Apostolic See, and afterwards revoked the mandate given to the procurator, not without our contempt and to your detriment—be condemned to you in costs, which you have incurred from the time when the letters of revocation reached his procurator, and which you will also incur up to the day on which the same bishop, either in person or through a suitable procurator, shall present himself to our sight, you proceeding lawfully against him in the principal matter and the contingents thereof. Therefore, lest there can be any doubt about these things, we have deemed these letters to be granted.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Procurator episcopi causas episcopatus agit et defendit, licet non fuerit datus sub nomine syndici vel actoris.

The procurator of the bishop prosecutes and defends the causes of the episcopate, although he may not have been appointed under the name of syndic or actor.

Idem M. et R. Canonicis Mutinensibus.

The same to M. and R., Canons of Modena.

Petitio vestra nobis exhibita continebat, quod quum venerabilis frater noster Mutinensis episcopus in Livoniam profecturus vos vicarios suos et procuratores constituerit generales, vobis volentibus agere contra detentores bonorum episcopi Mutinensis vel contra illum agentibus respondere, frequenter opponitur, quod hoc facere non potestis, pro eo, quod in instrumento vicariae sive procurationis huiusmodi non exprimitur, quod episcopus ipse constituerit vos syndicos vel actores. Quare humiliter postulastis, ut, quum per exceptiones huiusmodi frequenter impediatur utilitas episcopii supradicti, super hoc providere salubriter dignaremur. Nos igitur ex tenore ipsius instrumenti liquido cognoscentes, quod intentio fuerit ipsius episcopi dare vobis agendi et respondendi pro ipso episcopo liberam potestatem, exceptionem huiusmodi penitus reprobamus.

Your petition exhibited to us contained that, when our venerable brother the Bishop of Modena, about to set out to Livonia, had constituted you his vicars and general procurators, when you wished to act against the detainers of the goods of the Bishop of Modena or to respond to those proceeding against him, it is frequently objected that you cannot do this, for the reason that in the instrument of such vicarage or procuration it is not expressed that the bishop himself constituted you syndics or actors (agents). Wherefore you humbly petitioned that, since by such exceptions the utility of the aforesaid bishopric is frequently impeded, we would deign to provide healthfully in this matter. We therefore, from the tenor of the instrument itself clearly recognizing that it was the intention of the bishop himself to give you free power of acting and answering on behalf of the bishop himself, utterly reject such an exception.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Providere debet iudex, maxime in causa matrimoniali, quod constituens procuratorem gaudeat plena libertate.

The judge ought to provide, especially in a matrimonial cause, that the one constituting a procurator enjoy full liberty.

Gregorius IX. nobili viro Ubaldo Civi Pisano.

Gregory 9. to the noble man Ubaldo, a Pisan citizen.

Accedens ad apostolicam sedem (Et infra:) Mandamus, quatenus D. nobilem mulierem, quae sub tua potestate tenetur, plenae restituas libertati, faciens ipsam ad castrum de Massa Lucanae dioecesis secure perduci, ut existens ibi libera procuratorem libere ordinare valeat, qui suam coram nobis iustitiam prosequatur. Tu ergo super sponsalibus, quae inter natam tuam et filium eiusdem nobilis contracta proponuntur, procuratorem idoneum ad praesentiam nostram mittas, qui ad agendum et respondendum plenam habeat potestatem.

Approaching the apostolic see (And below:) We mandate, that you restore D., a noble woman, who is held under your power, to full liberty, causing her to be led securely to the castle of Massa of the diocese of Lucania, so that, being there free, she may be able freely to ordain a procurator, who may prosecute her justice before us. Do you therefore, concerning the sponsals which are proposed as contracted between your daughter and the son of the same noblewoman, send a suitable procurator to our presence, who may have full power to act and to respond.

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Si procuratori generali denegantur induciae ad consulendum dominum, ex causa probabili absentem, poterit procurator appellare.

If a continuance to consult his lord—absent for a probable cause—is denied to the general procurator, the procurator will be able to appeal.

Idem Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo.

The same to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Dilectus filius magister L. rector ecclesiae de Auna transmissa nobis petitione monstravit, quod, quum R. presbyter contra ipsum, causa studii Bononiae commorantem, super eadem ecclesia ad iudices nostras literas impetrasset, earum auctoritate a iudicibus ipsis eodem rectore citato, procurator ipsius generalis ad omnia eius tractanda negotia, pro eo, quod competentem terminum, infra quem rectorem ipsum consuleret, utrum deberet contendere vel cedere quaestioni, sibi concedere denegabant, pro eodem nostram audientiam appellavit. Quocirca mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, revocato in irritum, etc.

The beloved son, Master L., rector of the church of Auna, by a petition transmitted to us, showed that, when R., a presbyter, against him—he residing at Bologna for the sake of study—had procured our letters to judges concerning the same church, and, under their authority, after the same rector had been cited by the judges themselves, his general procurator for handling all his affairs, because they were refusing to grant to him a competent term within which he might consult that rector whether he ought to contend or yield to the question, appealed to our audience on his behalf. Wherefore we command that, if it is so, [the proceedings], having been revoked into nullity, etc.

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Si reus recedit a iudicio, dimisso procuratore solummodo ad agendum, contumax est, et condemnatur in expensis.

If the defendant withdraws from the court, having dismissed the procurator appointed only to act, he is contumacious and is condemned in expenses.

Idem Episcopo Lexonensi.

The same to the Bishop of Lisieux.

Constitutis in praesentia nostra H. priore Sagiensi et T. laico dilectum filium O. subdiaconum nostrum super causa, quae inter ipsos super quadam summa pecuniae vertitur, concessimus auditorem (Et infra:) Quia prior super ipsa pecunia, in qua dictus T. eum sibi suae uxoris nomine teneri dicebat, recepto libello illicentiatus recessit, quendam procuratorem dimittens solummodo ad agendum, quem, quum auditor ipse per mandatum procuratorium sibi datum ad defendendum priorem sufficientem non viderit, eum ex hoc reputans contumacem, ipsum praefato T. in unam marcham sterlingorum condemnavit taxatione praehabita in expensis. (Et infra:) Nos autem finem litibus imponere cupientes, et quod ab auditore praefato factum esse dignoscitur approbantes, mandamus, quatenus partibus convocatis, etc.

With H., prior of Séez, and T., a layman, having been set in our presence, we appointed as auditor our beloved son O., our subdeacon, concerning the case which is in dispute between them over a certain sum of money. (And below:) Because the prior, with respect to the very money in which the said T. was saying that he was held to him in his wife’s name, after the libellus had been received, withdrew without license, leaving behind a certain procurator solely to act; whom, since the auditor himself, by the procuratorial mandate given to him, did not see to be sufficient for defending the prior, reckoning him on this account contumacious, he condemned him, in favor of the aforesaid T., to one mark of sterlings, with a prior taxation in expenses. (And below:) But we, wishing to impose an end to the lawsuits, and approving what is recognized to have been done by the aforesaid auditor, command that, the parties having been convoked, etc.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Tenet iudicium agitatum cum procuratore revocato, si revocationem iudex et adversarius ignoraverunt. H. d. secundum communem intellectum et verum.

The proceeding carried on with a revoked procurator holds, if the judge and the adversary were ignorant of the revocation. This, according to the common understanding, is true.

Idem.

The same.

Mandato procuratoris post litem contestatam a domino revocato, si hoc ignorante iudice vel adversario factum fuerit, iudicium, quod idem quasi procurator postmodum expertus est, ratum esse debebit.

With the procurator’s mandate, after the suit has been joined, having been revoked by the principal, if this has been done with the judge or the adversary ignorant of it, the proceeding which the same person thereafter, as if procurator, has prosecuted ought to be valid.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Filius familias potest esse procurator in iudicio, etiam ad futuras lites; et procurator datus cum pluribus simul in solidum praefertur, si praeoccupavit negotium; secus, si diverso tempore fuit datus. Item procurator appellare debet a sententia, nisi ex causa excusetur; quo casu debet domino nunciare de sententia; appellationem tamen prosequi non tenetur.

A son of the household can be a procurator in court, even for future lawsuits; and a procurator appointed together with several others at the same time, in solidum, is preferred, if he has preoccupied the matter; otherwise, if he was appointed at a different time. Likewise, a procurator ought to appeal from the judgment, unless he is excused for cause; in which case he ought to notify the master about the judgment; nevertheless, he is not bound to prosecute the appeal.

Idem.

The same.

Non iniuste iudex processit, qui filiumfamilias in procuratorem admisit, quamvis ad futuras controversias constitutum, qui, licet simul cum aliis datus fuerit, prius tamen procurationis officium occupavit. Quod fieri nequivisset in procuratoribus diversis temporibus constitutis, quoniam dato posteriori prioris esset procuratio revocata. Potuit quoque is et debuit a sententia in eo, quod lata exstitit contra ipsum, nostram audientiam appellare, vel, si iusta causa excusabat eundem, saltem domino contestari, ut ad appellationis beneficium convolaret, licet appellationem prosequi non teneretur invitus.

Not unjustly did the judge proceed, who admitted a son under paternal power as procurator, although appointed for future controversies, who, albeit he had been given at the same time with others, nevertheless first occupied the office of procuration. Which could not have been done in procurators appointed at different times, since, upon the later being appointed, the procuration of the earlier would have been revoked. He could also, and ought, from the sentence, insofar as it was delivered against him, to appeal to our audience; or, if a just cause excused the same, at least to make formal protest to his lord, that he might hasten to the benefit of appellation, although he was not bound, if unwilling, to prosecute the appeal.

CAP. XV.

CHAPTER 15.

Procurator universitatis, cuius maiores et iurati sunt excommunicati, non repellitur ab impetrando; nisi illi in procuratorio sint expressi, vel eorum auctoritate factum sit, vel ad id scienter sint admissi. H. d. et est decisio notabilis et subtilis.

The procurator of a universitas, whose mayors and jurats are excommunicated, is not repelled from obtaining by petition; unless they are expressly named in the procuratorial instrument, or it has been done by their authority, or they have knowingly been admitted to that. On this point, it is a notable and subtle decision.

Idem.

The same.

Consulti sumus an constitutus ad impetrandum a communitate aliqua procurator ab impetrando deberet excludi pro eo, quod maiores et iurati, per quos eadem communitas regebatur, tempore, quo iniunctum fuit procurationis officium, erant excommunicationis sententia innodati. Taliter respondemus, quod, nisi essent illi in literis procurationis expressi, vel alias eorum auctoritate procuratoris institutio facta fuisset, aut sciens, eos esse tales, ipsa communitas una cum eis constituisset eundem, non est procurator huiusmodi repellendus.

We have been consulted whether a procurator constituted by some community for impetrating ought to be excluded from impetrating, for the reason that the elders and jurates, by whom the same community was governed, at the time when the office of procuration was enjoined, were bound by a sentence of excommunication. We answer thus: unless those men were expressly named in the letters of procuration, or otherwise the institution (appointment) of the procurator had been done by their authority, or the community itself, knowing them to be such, together with them had appointed the same, a procurator of this sort is not to be repelled.

TITULUS XXXIX. DE SYNDICO.

TITLE 39. ON THE SYNDIC.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Religiosi debent habere syndicum, qui causas monasterii agat, et defendat, etiam, si oportuerit, constituto illi salario.

Religious ought to have a syndic, who may prosecute and defend the causes of the monastery, even, if it shall be necessary, with a salary appointed to him.

Gregorius Papa Subdiacono Defensori Siciliae.

Gregory the Pope to the Subdeacon, Defender of Sicily.

Sicut studii nostri esse debet a litigiis forensibus monachos submovere, [ut divinis ministeriis pie ac sollerter invigilent:] ita necesse est nostra provisione, quemadmodum negotia eorum disponi debeant, ordinare, [ne distenta mens per varias causarum curas defluat, et ad celebrandum opus consuetum enervata torpescat. Praesentium itaque lator abbas Ioannes plurima se monasterii sui asserit habere negotia.] Pro qua re tibi praecipimus, quatenus cum Fausto, [qui Romani viri magnifici ex praetore cancellarius fuerat,] loqui debeas, cui, si voluerit, constituto salario, monasterii ipsius generaliter debeas negotia commendare. Expedit enim pro parvo incommodo a strepitu causarum servos Dei esse quietos.

Just as it ought to belong to our zeal to remove monks from forensic litigations, [so that they may keep watch piously and skillfully over the divine ministries:] so it is necessary by our provision to arrange how their affairs ought to be managed, [lest a mind stretched thin through the various cares of causes should run off, and, unnerved, grow torpid for celebrating the accustomed work. Therefore the bearer of these presents, Abbot John, avers that he has very many affairs of his monastery.] For which reason we command you, that you must speak with Faustus, [who had been the chancellor of a Roman vir magnificus, an ex‑praetor,] to whom, if he is willing, with a salary established, you ought to commend in general the business of that monastery. For it is expedient, at the cost of a small inconvenience, that the servants of God be quiet from the din of suits.

TITULUS XL. DE HIS, QUAE VI METUSVE CAUSA FIUNT.

TITLE 40. ON THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE DONE BY FORCE OR BY CAUSE OF FEAR.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Si quis timore mortis, postea ratum non habens, religionem profitetur, exire, et matrimonium contrahere potest; secus si a principio vel ex post facto libere consensisset.

If anyone, through fear of death, and not afterwards holding it ratified, professes religion, he can go out and contract marriage; otherwise, if from the beginning or ex post facto he had freely consented.

Alexander III. Oscensi Episcopo, et Priori sanctae Mariae Caesaraugustanae.

Alexander 3. To the Bishop of Huesca, and to the Prior of Saint Mary of Zaragoza.

Perlatum est ad audientiam nostram, quod, quum quidam vir nobilis et potens Atorelia nomine M. uxorem suam suspectam haberet, milites sui, eius praecepto eam ad quandam silvam ducentes, evaginato gladio occidere voluerunt; sed tandem pietate ducti sub tali conditione pepercerunt eidem, quod in monasterio de Colobris habitum susciperet monachalem. Quo audito maritus eius, quia reservata erat ad vitam, grave plurimum tulit, sed tamen postmodum acquievit. Sicque factum est, quod duos episcopos Caesaraugustanum et Turiasonensem, ut eam benedicerent et illi velum imponerent, ad monasterium ipsum adduxit.

It has been reported to our hearing that, when a certain noble and powerful man, by the name M., of Atorelia, held his wife as suspect, his soldiers, at his command leading her to a certain forest, with sword unsheathed wished to kill her; but at length, moved by pity, they spared her on this condition: that in the monastery of Colobris she should assume the monastic habit. On hearing this, her husband, because she had been reserved to life, took it very grievously, but nevertheless afterwards acquiesced. And so it came about that he brought two bishops—the Caesaraugustan and the Turiasonensian—to that same monastery, that they might bless her and impose the veil upon her.

Episcopi vero rem ignorantes, missi a viro, ut ei velum imponerent, et, quia iuvenis erat, et filium parvulum habebat, mutationem vitae suae suspectam habentes, seorsum convenerunt eandem, quae utique ipsis rem per ordinem patefaciens, quod mortis timore et non bono animo monasterium intrabat, proposuit, et quod inde, quandocunque posset, exiret, nihilominus adiecit. Sed tunc episcopis de morte ipsius timentibus, et, quod ab ea audierant propalare nolentibus, alter episcoporum Turiasonensis scilicet, ut viri illius tyrannidi satisfacere videretur, mulieri velum imponere simulavit, tandem autem viro de medio sublato, praedicta mulier de monasterio exiens, alium maritum accepit, quos Calaguritanensis episcopus ad instantiam sororum vinculo excommunicationis adstrinxit, et totam terram eius interdixit, ignorans penitus, quomodo res processisset, quam utique sententiam venerabilis frater noster Tarraconensis archiepiscopus postmodum confirmavit. Nos igitur de prudentia et honestate vestra confidentes, causam ipsam experientiae vestrae duximus committendam, et fine debito terminandam.

Indeed, the bishops, ignorant of the matter, having been sent by the husband to impose the veil upon her, and, because she was young and had a little son, holding the change of her life in suspicion, met with her separately; and she, to be sure, laying the matter open to them in order, declared that she was entering the monastery from fear of death and with no good disposition, and nonetheless added that she would leave from there whenever she could. But then, as the bishops feared for her death and were unwilling to divulge what they had heard from her, one of the bishops, namely the Turiasonensian, so that he might seem to satisfy that man’s tyranny, pretended to impose the veil upon the woman; however, when at length the husband had been removed from the midst, the aforesaid woman, going out from the monastery, took another husband, whom the bishop of Calagurris, at the instance of the sisters, bound with the bond of excommunication,
and he interdicted all his land, being utterly ignorant of how the matter had proceeded; which sentence our venerable brother, the archbishop of Tarragona, afterwards confirmed. We therefore, trusting in your prudence and honesty, have judged that the case itself should be committed to your experience and brought to its due conclusion.

Ideoque discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus praedictam mulierem et virum, recepto sacramento, quod vestro debeant stare mandato, ab excommunicationis vinculo absolvatis; deinde tam mulierem, quam priorissam et moniales praescripti monasterii ante vestram praesentiam convocantes, causam diligentissime audiatis, et fine canonico terminetis. Quod si legitime probatum fuerit, non timore mortis praedictam mulierem religionem intrasse, aut quod fecit postmodum ratum habuisse, ipsam ad monasterium redire, et habitum depositum reassumere censura ecclesiastica compellatis. [Dat.

And so we command your discretion by apostolic writings, by way of precept, that you absolve the aforesaid woman and the man, upon receiving an oath that they must stand to your mandate, from the bond of excommunication; then, summoning before your presence both the woman and the prioress and the nuns of the aforesaid monastery, you hear the case most diligently and terminate it with a canonical end. But if it shall have been lawfully proved that the aforesaid woman did not enter religion by fear of death, or that she afterwards held valid what she had done, you compel her by ecclesiastical censure to return to the monastery and to reassume the habit laid aside. [Dated.

Beneventi].

at Benevento].

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Qui per metum amissionis patrimonii suo beneficio renunciat illud repetere potest.

He who, through fear of the loss of his patrimony, renounces his own benefit, can seek to recover it.

Idem Episcopo Vigorniensi.

The same to the Bishop of Worcester.

Abbas sancti Cadmundi, a quo R. praesentium lator patrimonium suum tenere dignoscitur, milites suos et burgenses ad domum eius, sicut accepimus, destinavit, qui eum a domo et universa possessione sua expellerent, nisi ecclesiam suam penitus abiuraret. Quod quum idem R. tali modo coactus fecisset, abbas alii concessit supradictam ecclesiam. Unde, quia quae metu et vi fiunt de iure debent in irritum revocari, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus praedicto R., [si ita constiterit], cum integritate restituas universa.

The abbot of Saint Cadmund, by whom R., the bearer of the present letters, is recognized to hold his patrimony, dispatched his soldiers and burgesses to his house, as we have received, to expel him from his house and his entire possession unless he should utterly abjure his church. And when the same R., compelled in such a manner, had done this, the abbot granted the aforesaid church to another. Wherefore, since things which are done by fear and by force ought by law to be recalled into nullity, we command to your fraternity through apostolic writings that you restore to the aforesaid R., [if it shall thus be established], all things with integrity.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Qui terrore laicorum electioni de se factae renunciat, si renunciatio iuramento vel fide firmata non sit, regimini, ad quod electus erat, praefici poterit.

He who, by the terror of the laity, renounces the election made concerning himself, if the renunciation be not confirmed by oath or pledge, may be appointed to the governance to which he had been elected.

Clemens III.

Clement 3.

Ad aures nostras te significante pervenit, quod electus quidam in plebanum cuiusdam ecclesiae, quae ad tuam dispositionem pertinet, ad terrorem laicorum renunciavit electioni, quae de ipso fuerat a clericis, uno excepto, unanimiter celebrata; is autem, qui dissensit, ante electionem ad sedem apostolicam appellationis vocem emisit. Ideoque consulere voluisti, si renunciatio facta ad terrorem laicorum impediat, quo minus ad regimen praedictae ecclesiae is, qui fuerit prius electus, possit assumi, et si eius appellatio valeat, qui, non electurum iuravit, et ne alii eligerent, appellavit. Tuae igitur discretioni literis praesentibus innotescat, quod renunciatio facta ad terrorem laicorum, nisi forte iuramento vel fide interposita sit confirmata, non impedit, quo minus is, qui renunciavit ecclesiae, ad cuius regimen prius erat electus, praeficiatur eidem.

By your signifying it, it has reached our ears that a certain man elected as parish priest of a certain church, which pertains to your disposition, renounced the election on account of the terror of the laity, which had been celebrated concerning him by the clerics, one excepted, unanimously; but the one who dissented, before the election, issued a voice of appeal to the Apostolic See. And so you wished to consult whether a renunciation made on account of the terror of the laity hinders, so that the one who had previously been elected might be taken up to the governance of the aforesaid church, and whether the appeal avails of him who swore he would not elect and appealed lest others elect. Therefore let it be made known to your discretion by the present letters that a renunciation made on account of the terror of the laity, unless perhaps it be confirmed by an oath or pledged faith interposed, does not impede the one who had renounced from being set over the same church, to whose governance he had previously been elected.

Pro contradictione autem vel appellatione eius, qui se non electurum publice confessus est iurasse non est electio ab aliis celebrata canonice irritanda. [Super eo etc. (cf. c. 12. de elect.

However, on account of the contradiction or the appeal of him who has publicly confessed that he swore he would not elect, the election celebrated by others canonically is not to be annulled. [On this matter, etc. (cf. c. 12. on elections.

I. 6.)]

1. 6.)]

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Qui per metum, qui cadere potuit in constantem virum, beneficio suo renunciare iuravit, et renunciavit, illud repetere poterit.

He who, through fear, which could befall even a constant man, swore to renounce his benefit, and did renounce it, will be able to recover it.

Innocentius III. Decano et Subdiacono Linconensibus.

Innocent III. To the Dean and the Subdeacon of Lincoln.

Ad audientiam nostram dilecto filio magistro de Chevell. significante pervenit, quod, quum ecclesiam de Chevell. auctoritate sedis apostolicae canonice fuisset adeptus, et aliquamdiu pacifice possedisset, gravissimo tandem metu regis, quod eam resignaret iurare coactus, eam in eorum, ad quos pertinebat, manibus resignavit.

It has come to our hearing, our beloved son, Master of Chevell., making it known, that, when he had canonically obtained the church of Chevell. by authority of the Apostolic See, and had for some time possessed it peaceably, at length, under the most grievous fear of the king, being compelled to swear that he would resign it, he resigned it into the hands of those to whom it pertained.

Quia vero quae vi metusve causa fiunt carere debent robore firmitatis, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus, si eundem magistrum ad resignationem faciendam constiterit vobis per talem metum fuisse coactum, qui potuerit et debuerit cadere in virum constantem, non obstante iuramento praedicto, quo non ad repetendum, sed ad resignandum solummodo tenebatur, praefatam ecclesiam ei per censuram ecclesiasticam sublato cuiuslibet appellationis obstaculo restitui faciatis. [Nullis literis etc. Dat.

Since indeed the things that are done by force or by fear ought to lack the strength of firmness, we mandate to your discretion through apostolic writings that, if it shall have been established to you that the same master was compelled to make the resignation by such a fear as could and ought to fall upon a constant man, notwithstanding the aforesaid oath, by which he was bound not to reclaim, but solely to resign, you are to cause the aforesaid church to be restored to him through ecclesiastical censure, the obstacle of any appeal being removed. [With no letters etc. Given.]

Lat. Non. Febr.

Lateran, Nones of February.

1200.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Excommunicatus non est qui absolute coactus excommunicato communicat; secus si coactio fuit conditionalis.

He is not excommunicated who, being absolutely compelled, communicates with an excommunicated person; otherwise, if the coaction was conditional.

Idem Vidronensi Archiepiscopo.

The same. To the Archbishop of Vidrona.

Sacris est canonibus (Et infra:) Distinguimus autem utrum is, qui communicat excommunicatis invitus, sit per coactionem adstrictus aut per metum inductus. In primo siquidem casu talem non credimus excommunicatione teneri, quum magis pati, quam agere convincatur. In secundo vero licet metus attenuet culpam, quia tamen non eam prorsus excludit, quum pro nullo metu debeat quis mortale peccatum incurrere, talem excommunicationis labe credimus inquinari.

By the sacred canons (And below:) We distinguish, however, whether he who communicates with the excommunicated unwillingly is bound by compulsion or induced by fear. In the first case indeed, we do not believe such a one to be held by excommunication, since he is proved rather to suffer than to act. In the second, however, although fear attenuates the fault, yet because it does not altogether exclude it—for for no fear ought anyone to incur mortal sin—we believe such a one to be stained by the taint of excommunication.

[Licet autem etc. (cf. c. 38. de sent. exc.

[However it is permitted, etc. (cf. ch. 38, on the sentence of excommunication

V. 39.)]

5. 39.)]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Metum passo non subvenitur, si non fuit talis, qui cadere potuit in constantem virum.

No succor is given to one who has suffered fear, if it was not of such a kind as could befall a constant man.

Idem Marsiliensi et Agathensi Episcopis.

The same to the Bishops of Marseilles and Agde.

Quum dilectus filius [abbas de Floreia nuper ad nostram praesentiam accessisset, nobis exposuit diligenter, et hoc ipsum abbatis Insularum et aliorum quorundam literae continebant, quod in insulis Arearum fratres Cistercienses quondum fuerant commorati; sed eis in captivitatem paganorum deductis, quoniam locus mari erat vicinus, illuc se quidam regulares canonici transtulerunt, qui, licet iam per annos triginta canonicorum regularium habitum portavissent, opera tamen contraria regularibus faciebant; sed ad se Domino inspirante reversi, monasticum ordinem ibidem plantari volebant secundum Cisterciensium instituta. Quod etiam dioecesanus episcopus affectabat. Unde nos ad abbatis ipsius instantiam venerabili fratri nostro Arelatensi archiepiscopo dedimus in mandatis, ut, si dioecesani episcopi et eorundem fratrum in id ipsum desideria convenirent, Cistercienses monachos institueret in insula memorata, facturus de canonicis quod crederet expedire secundum canonicam honestatem.

When the beloved son [the abbot of Floreia had recently come into our presence, he diligently set forth to us, and this very thing the letters of the abbot of the Islands and of certain others contained: that in the islands of Arearum the Cistercian brothers had once resided; but when they had been led into captivity by the pagans, since the place was near to the sea, certain regular canons transferred themselves thither, who, although now for thirty years they had borne the habit of the regular canons, nevertheless were doing works contrary to the regulars; but, having returned to themselves, the Lord inspiring, they wished the monastic order to be planted there according to the institutes of the Cistercians. Which the diocesan bishop also was desiring. Wherefore, at the instance of that same abbot, we gave in mandate to our venerable brother the archbishop of Arles, that, if the desires of the diocesan bishop and of those same brothers should agree to that very thing, he should institute Cistercian monks on the aforesaid island, to do with respect to the canons what he would judge to be expedient according to canonical propriety.

His igitur literis impetratis, idem abbas de Floreia reversus ad propria, prius, quam eas ad dictum archiepiscopum detulisset, cum venerabili fratri nostro Tolonensi episcopo ad locum memoratum accessit, et omnium fratrum ibidem manentium in tantum obtinuerunt assensum pariter et favorem, quod abbas insularum claves domus et se ipsum in manibus alterius abbatis tradidit, professione facta cum quibusdam ex canonicis de Cisterciensi ordine in posterum observando. Quod et quidam canonicorum in manibus eiusdem abbatis de Floreia sacramento praestito firmaverunt, osculo dato eidem, quod usque in finem in eodem ordine permanerent; aliis promittentibus per iuratoriam cautionem, quod per se vel alios contra factum istud de cetero non venirent; iurantibus reliquis quod super provisione sua starent arbitrio episcopi memorati, et nobilis viri G. de Fossa Sacristae, qui aberat, assensu probato per testes. Quod postmodum rediens est confessus.

Accordingly, these letters having been obtained, the same abbot of Floreia, having returned to his own, before he had delivered them to the said archbishop, went with our venerable brother, the Bishop of Toulon, to the aforesaid place; and they obtained to such a degree the assent and likewise the favor of all the brothers dwelling there, that the abbot of the islands handed over the keys of the house and himself into the hands of the other abbot, a profession being made, along with certain of the canons, to observe the Cistercian order henceforth. And some of the canons confirmed this in the hands of that same abbot of Floreia, an oath having been taken, a kiss having been given to him, that they would remain to the end in the same order; others promising by a juratory caution that hereafter they would not come against this deed, either by themselves or by others; the remaining swearing that, concerning their provision, they would abide by the arbitration of the aforesaid bishop; and the assent of the noble man G. de Fossa, Sacrist, who was absent, was proved by witnesses. Which afterwards, on returning, he confessed.

Consequenter vero idem episcopus et abbas de Floreia dicto archiepiscopo Arelatensi per suas literas intimarunt, quod dioecesanus episcopus et canonici memorati translationem Cisterciensium fratrum illuc fieri unanimiter appetebant, quod acceptans archiepiscopus memoratus, factum eorum auctoritate, qua fungebatur, apostolica confirmavit, vices suas eis in hac parte committens, ut quae bene inceperant de instituendo ibi ordine Cisterciensi, vice ipsius perducerent ad effectum. Cuius mandatis parentes humiliter et devote, quae ipsis iniuncta fuerant curaverunt ducere ad effectum, dantes generali Cisterciensi capitulo in mandatis, ut in praedicto loco suum ordinem instituere procurarent. Petebatur itaque pro iam dicto abbate de Floreia translationem factam ratam a nobis haberi, et auctoritate sedis apostolicae confirmari, transgressores etiam et contradictores omnes, qui contra vota et iuramenta praestita nitebantur quod ab iis factum fuerat impedire, canonica poena percelli.

Consequently, the same bishop and the abbot of Floreia, by their letters, made known to the said archbishop of Arles that the diocesan bishop and the aforesaid canons were unanimously desiring that the transfer of the Cistercian brothers be made thither; which the aforesaid archbishop, accepting their action, confirmed by the apostolic authority with which he was vested, committing his delegated powers to them in this matter, that what they had well begun, namely the instituting there of the Cistercian order, they might, in his stead, bring to effect. Humbly and devoutly obeying his mandates, they took care to carry out what had been enjoined upon them, giving orders to the General Chapter of the Cistercians to procure the establishment of their order in the aforesaid place. It was therefore requested, on behalf of the already-mentioned abbot of Floreia, that the transfer made be held as ratified by us and be confirmed by the authority of the Apostolic See, and that all transgressors and contradictors, who, against the vows and oaths taken, were striving to impede what had been done by them, be struck down with canonical penalty.

Ceterum F. Sacrista, P. Warardi, et P. Guil. coram venerabili fratre nostro P. Portuensi episcopo, quem ipsis et parti alteri dedimus auditorem, processum negotii aliter proponebant. Quum enim praedicto Arelatensi archiepiscopo causa fuerit a nobis sub forma, quam praemisimus, delegata, praefatus, abbas accedens ad locum cum episcopo Tolonensi prius, quam literas nostras archiepiscopo praesentasset, qui iuxta tenorem ipsarum de singulis debebat inquirere diligenter, motu proprio cum socia multitudine insulam occupavit, constanter affirmans, quod eis volentibus vel nolentibus locus idem pure ac simpliciter a nobis sibi fuerat assignatus.

Moreover, F. the Sacrist, P. Warardi, and P. Guil., before our venerable brother P., bishop of Porto, whom we gave to them and to the other party as auditor, were proposing the progress of the business otherwise. For when to the aforesaid archbishop of Arles the cause had been delegated by us under the form which we have set forth above, the aforesaid abbot, coming to the place with the bishop of Toulon before he had presented our letters to the archbishop, who according to their tenor ought to have inquired diligently into each particular, of his own motion, with an accompanying multitude, occupied the island, constantly affirming that, whether they were willing or unwilling, that same place had been purely and simply assigned by us to himself.

Quumque se in his gravari sentirent, abbate ipsorum eis omne auxilium denegante, qui contra quosdam de canonicis odium dicebatur et ingratitudinem concepisse, (unde in ipsorum dispendium super munitione armatos ponere non expavit, amota inde scala, ne facultas esset canonicis ascendendi) sedem apostolicam appellarunt. Sed dicti abbates nihilo minus ab incepta violentia desistentes, quum quosdam ex ipsis non possent corrumpere pecuniae sponsione, quod super his starent mandatis episcopi Tolonensis, per violentiam cogere voluerunt. Quum autem nec quindecim dierum possent inducias obtinere, quas quidam ex ipsis ad deliberandum plenarie postularant, iurare compulsi fuerunt mandato dicti episcopi et G. de Fossa laici, qui eis arduae rupis praecipitium fuerat comminatus, se super praemissis quaestionibus parituros.

And when they felt themselves to be aggrieved in these matters, their abbot denying them all assistance, who was said to have conceived hatred and ingratitude against certain of the canons (whence, to their detriment, he did not shrink from posting armed men upon the fortification, the ladder having been removed from there, lest there be the ability for the canons to ascend), they appealed to the apostolic see. But the said abbots, nonetheless not desisting from the initiated violence, since they could not corrupt some of them by a pledge of money, in that concerning these things they would stand by the mandates of the bishop of Toulon, wished to compel them by violence. And when they were not able to obtain even a respite of fifteen days, which some of them had requested in order to deliberate fully, they were compelled to swear, by the mandate of the said bishop and of G. de Fossa, a layman, who had threatened them with the precipice of a steep crag, that they would obey in regard to the aforesaid questions.

Alii promiserunt in manu abbatis, probatione sibi annua reservata, quod regulam Cisterciensem observarent. Aliqui vero nec iuraverunt, nec promissionem aliquam facere voluerunt. Horum ergo tacita veritate, nominati episcopus et abbas de Floreia dicto archiepiscopo suggesserunt, quod dioecesanus episcopus et omnes loci canonici super institutione Cisterciensium unanimiter concordabant, et ita fuit eius confirmatio impetrata.

Others promised into the hand of the abbot, with an annual probation reserved to themselves, that they would observe the Cistercian rule. Some, however, neither swore nor were willing to make any promise. Therefore, with the truth about these men kept silent, the named bishop and the abbot of Floreia suggested to the said archbishop that the diocesan bishop and all the canons of the place were unanimously agreeing concerning the institution of the Cistercians, and thus his confirmation was impetrated.

Sed quum paucis diebus elapsis praefati canonici archiepiscopo cuncta, quae gesta fuerant, intimassent, ipse quod in praeiudicium eorum factum fuerat, ipsis compatiens, revocavit, restituens eos ad omnia, quae habuerant tempore illo, quo literae fuerant impetratae; licet postmodum possessionem eorum praetermisso iuris ordine sequestrarit, contradictores omnes excommunicationis gladio percellendo. Et quum, canonicis ad restitutionem instantibus, confessiones et attestationes utriusque partis audisset, ad nos duxit ipsum negotium remittendum. Partibus itaque apud sedem apostolicam constitutis, canonici spoliati saepedicti abbatem de Floreia multipliciter arguebant.

But when, a few days having elapsed, the aforesaid canons had intimated to the archbishop all that had been done, he, sympathizing with them, revoked what had been done to their prejudice, restoring them to all the things which they had had at the time when the letters had been obtained; although afterward he sequestered their possession with the order of law set aside, smiting all contradictors with the sword of excommunication. And when, the canons pressing for restitution, he had heard the confessions and attestations of both parties, he decided that the matter itself should be remitted to us. The parties therefore having been set before the apostolic see, the despoiled canons were accusing in many ways the oft-mentioned abbot of Floreia.

Primo, quod literas a nobis per veritatis suppressionem et expressionem falsitatis studuerat impetrare. Suppressum enim fuerat in illis, quod ecclesia de insulis Arearum ad Romanam ecclesiam solummodo pertineret; sicut ipsius privilegia, quorum ad nos transscripta praefatus archiepiscopus destinavit, indicant evidenter. Falsitatis vero suggestio inde perpenditur, quod omnes canonici translationem ordinis cum dioecesano episcopo pariter affectabant, quod aliter esse ipsorum contradictio liquido arguebat.

First, that he had endeavored to obtain letters from us by the suppression of truth and the expression of falsehood. For it had been suppressed therein that the church of the Isles of Arearum pertained solely to the Roman Church; as its privileges, transcripts of which the aforesaid archbishop sent to us, plainly indicate. But the suggestion of falsehood is weighed moreover from this: that all the canons, together with the diocesan bishop, were equally aiming at a translation of the order, which to be otherwise their own contradiction plainly argued.

Sed neque saepe dictus Tolonensis episcopus dioecesanus erat ipsorum, qui nullo mediante ad Romanam ecclesiam pertinebant; unde ipsius consensus in hac parte pro nullo erat penitus reputandus. Secundo, quod per vim et dolum eos seduxit pariter et coegit, ut quidam eorum votum emitterent, alii iuramenta praestarent.] Nos ergo rationibus et allegationibus partium per iam dictum episcopum Portuensem, qui eas in scriptis nobis exhibuit, plenius intellectis, Quia constitit nobis de voto emisso, et de praestito iuramento a canonicis Insularum, quod regulam Cisterciensium observarent, vel quod translationem ipsius ecclesiae ad ordinem illorum nullatenus impedirent, quum utrumque servatum non vergat in dispendium salutis aeternae, nolentes viam periuriis aperire, non obstante violentia, quae proponebatur illata, quum neque metum mortis, neque cruciatum corporis contineret, et ideo non debuerat cadere in constantes, nec obstante dolo, quo se proponebant fuisse seductos quum talis dolus non tam ad circumventionem praedictorum Cisterciensium, quam ad fatuitatem eorum debeat retorqueri, super restitutione petita silentium eis de consilio fratrum nostrorum duximus sententialiter imponendum. [Verum quoniam etc.

But neither was the oft-mentioned Bishop of Toulon their diocesan, they who, with no intermediary, pertained to the Roman Church; whence his consent in this matter was to be accounted utterly as nothing. Secondly, that by force and by guile he both seduced and compelled them, so that some of them should make a vow, others should take oaths.] We therefore, the reasons and allegations of the parties having been more fully understood through the already-said Bishop of Porto, who presented them to us in writings, since it was established to us concerning the vow made and the oath taken by the canons of the Islands, that they would observe the rule of the Cistercians, or that they would in no wise impede the translation of that church to their order, since the keeping of either does not verge toward the loss of eternal salvation, not wishing to open a road to perjuries, notwithstanding the violence that was alleged to have been inflicted, since it contained neither fear of death nor torment of the body and therefore ought not to have overcome the steadfast, nor notwithstanding the deceit by which they proposed that they had been seduced, since such deceit ought to be retorted not so much to the circumvention of the aforesaid Cistercians as to their own fatuity, upon the restoration sought we judged, by the counsel of our brothers, that silence should be imposed upon them by sentence. [But since etc.

Dat. Lat. IV. Id. Iun.

Given at the Lateran, 10 June.

1199.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Probata violentia per testes res amissae probantur per iuramentum. Et super valore rerum amissarum taxatione iudicis praemissa, et secuto petentis iuramento fit condemnatio.

With the violence proven through witnesses, the lost goods are proven by oath. And, with the judge’s taxation premised concerning the value of the lost goods, and the petitioner’s oath following, condemnation ensues.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory IX.

Super eo, quod adversarius vester se conquerebatur a vobis per violentiam spoliatum, arbitramini, contra vos fuisse iniuste processum, quum non nisi proprio iuramento probaverit singula, quae amisit. Verum, postquam de violentia per testes, et de amissis rebus per ipsius constitit sacramentum, potuit iudex, taxatione ab ipso facta, pro personarum ac negotii qualitate vos in aestimatione rerum amissarum iuramento adversarii declarata rationabiliter condemnare.

Concerning this, that your adversary was complaining that he was despoiled by you through violence, you suppose that there was an unjust process against you, since he proved only by his own oath the individual items which he lost. However, after the matter of the violence was established through witnesses, and as to the lost things it was established by his own oath, the judge could, an assessment (taxation) having been made by himself, according to the quality of the persons and of the business, reasonably condemn you in the valuation of the things lost as declared by the adversary’s oath.

TITULUS XLI. DE IN INTEGRUM RESTITUTIONE.

TITLE 41. ON RESTITUTION IN FULL.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Si in contractu venditionis vel locationis ecclesia fuit enormiter laesa, potest adversus talem contractum petere restitutionem in integrum; emptor tamen sive conductor non debet fraudari in pretio suo, vel in sumptibus per eum factis.

If in a contract of sale or of lease the Church was enormously prejudiced, it may seek restitution in integrum against such a contract; nevertheless the buyer or lessee ought not to be defrauded of his price, or of the expenses incurred by him.

Alexander III. Alphanensi Episcopo.

Alexander III. To the Bishop of Alphanum.

Requisivit a nobis tua fraternitas, quid agendum sit de possessionibus laicis sub modico censu concessis? Noveris itaque, quod, si ecclesia laesa est, et manifeste apparet detrimentum ipsius, quum episcopo eiusdem ecclesiae conditionem facere deteriorem non liceat, et ecclesia iure minoris debeat semper illaesa servari, quae in damnum eius data constiterit ad ipsius convenit ius proprietatemque redire. Providendum est tamen, ne, si forte coloni possessiones illas expensis ac labore suo reddiderint meliores, sumptibus, quos bona fide fecerunt, debeant defraudari.

Your fraternity has inquired of us what is to be done concerning possessions granted to laymen under a modest census (rent)? Know, therefore, that if the church is injured and its detriment plainly appears, since it is not permitted to the bishop of the same church to make the condition worse, and the church, by the right of a minor, ought always to be kept unharmed, whatever shall have been given to its damage, it is fitting that the right and ownership return to it. Care must, however, be taken, lest, if perchance the tenants (coloni) have rendered those possessions better by their expenses and labor, they be defrauded of the expenses which they made in good faith.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Restituitur ecclesia laesa propter negligentiam procuratoris, qui iura ecclesiae non produxit.

The injured church is restored on account of the negligence of the procurator, who did not produce the rights of the church.

Innocentius III. sancti Georgii et sancti Sergii Abbatibus.

Innocent III. To the Abbots of St. George and St. Sergius.

Quum venissent ad apostolicam sedem dilecti filii electus et monachi Rothonenses pro se ac pro monasterio suo, ac dilectus filius magister A. pro venerabili fratre nostro episcopo Venetensi, eis dilectum filium nostrum G. sancti Georgii ad Velum aureum diaconum cardinalem dedimus auditorem. Coram quo idem magister pro episcopi parte proposuit, quod, quum monasterium Rothonense esset situm in dioecesi Venetensi et ecclesiae Venetensi subiectum, praedictus episcopus possessione subiectionis usus est hactenus inconcusse. Sed quum occasione cuiusdam electionis, quae ibidem facta fuerat, partes de communi assensu ad venerabilem fratrem nostrum Natensem episcopum et eius collegas dilectos filios de Mallen.

When the beloved sons, the elect and the monks of Redon, had come to the apostolic see on their own behalf and on behalf of their monastery, and the beloved son Master A. on behalf of our venerable brother, the bishop of Vannes, we gave to them our beloved son G., cardinal deacon of Saint George at the Golden Veil, as auditor. Before whom the same master, on the bishop’s part, proposed that, since the monastery of Redon was situated in the diocese of Vannes and subject to the Church of Vannes, the aforesaid bishop has hitherto enjoyed the possession of subjection unshaken. But when, on the occasion of a certain election which had been held there, the parties by common assent [went] to our venerable brother the bishop of Nantes and his colleagues, beloved sons of Mallen.

et de Granont abbates super his et multis aliis commissionis literas impetrassent, duo eorum, assignatis induciis ad instantiam monachorum, tandem ad monasterium accesserunt, quorum adventum intrusus praesentiens, renunciavit huiusmodi electioni, et se a monasterio absentavit. Sed iudices auctoritate apostolica monachis iniunxerunt, ut syndicum vel procuratorem eligerent, qui in causis monasterii et consulte ageret, et utiliter responderet, districtius inhibentes eisdem, ne aliquem eligerent in abbatem, donec plenius cognosceretur de iure, quod episcopus se habere in abbatis electione dicebat. Monachi vero; etsi procuratorem ad mandatum iudicum elegissent, abbatem tamen in monasterio interdicto excommunicati nihilominus contra inhibitionem eorum eligere praesumpserunt, cuius electionem episcopus petiit infirmari, et se ad possessionem restitui, qua eum monachi spoliarant.

and the abbots of Granont had obtained letters of commission concerning these matters and many others, two of them, with adjournments assigned at the instance of the monks, at length approached the monastery, whose arrival the intruded man, anticipating, renounced the election of this kind and withdrew himself from the monastery. But the judges, by apostolic authority, enjoined upon the monks that they should elect a syndic or a procurator, who would act in the causes of the monastery with deliberation and would respond usefully, more strictly forbidding them to elect anyone as abbot, until it should be more fully ascertained concerning the right which the bishop said that he had in the election of an abbot. But the monks; although they had elected a procurator at the mandate of the judges, nevertheless, with the monastery interdicted, being excommunicated, they presumed to elect an abbot contrary to their inhibition, whose election the bishop sought to have invalidated, and that he be restored to the possession of which the monks had despoiled him.

Deinde vero iudices, auditis quaecunque partes proponere voluerunt et plenius intellectis, post dilationes multiplices tam ad testes quam ad instrumenta partibus producenda concessas, receptis testibus et attestationibus publicatis, pro eodem episcopo super praemissis articulis diffinitivam sententiam protulerunt, electionem apostolica freti auctoritate cassantes eandem, quam sententiam dictus magister a nobis cum instantia petiit confirmari. Ad hoc fuit inter alia ex adverso responsum, quod dictus episcopus et abbas de Malegio, absente abbate de Gnanter, qui in iudicem fuerat ab ipsis electus, quum nec absentiae suae causas, vel quod alii in causa sine eo procederent, mandavisset, licet per procuratorem ex parte monachorum fuisset propositum, quod monasterium ipsum ad Romanam ecclesiam nullo medio pertineret, et esset sedi apostolicae censuale, dicti tamen iudices contra eos procedere nimis animose coeperunt. (Et infra:) Nos igitur auditis per cardinalem eundem, quae fuerant hinc inde proposita coram eo, et inspectis privilegiis praedecessorum nostrorum Leonis, Gregorii et Clementis, quae monasterium illud ad ius et proprietatem indicant sedis apostolicae pertinere, intelligentes, quod monasterii procurator, etsi eadem privilegia coram praedictis iudicibus exhibere omiserit negligenter, ius tamen non tam suum, quam nostrum fuerit protestatus, videlicet, quod monasterium ipsum ad Romanam ecclesiam nullo medio pertineret, ne ipsius negligentia in damnum tam nostrum, quam monasterii redundaret, ad audientiam restituimus monachos Rothonenses.

Then indeed the judges, after hearing whatever the parties wished to propose and understanding it more fully, after multiple dilations granted to the parties for producing both witnesses and instruments, the witnesses having been received and the attestations published, for that same bishop upon the aforesaid articles delivered a definitive sentence, annulling that election, relying on apostolic authority; which sentence the said master sought from us with urgency to be confirmed. To this it was answered on the opposing side, among other things, that the said bishop and the abbot of Malegium, the abbot of Gnanter being absent—who had been elected by them as judge—since he had sent word neither of the causes of his absence nor that others should proceed in the case without him, although it had been proposed through a procurator on the part of the monks that the monastery itself pertained to the Roman Church by no intermediary, and was censual to the Apostolic See, nevertheless the said judges began to proceed against them too vehemently. (And below:) We therefore, after the same cardinal had heard the things that had been proposed on this side and that before him, and after inspecting the privileges of our predecessors Leo, Gregory, and Clement, which indicate that that monastery pertains to the right and property of the Apostolic See, understanding that the procurator of the monastery, although he negligently omitted to exhibit those same privileges before the aforesaid judges, yet had protested not so much his own right as ours—namely, that the monastery itself pertained to the Roman Church by no intermediary—lest his negligence redound to the harm both of us and of the monastery, restore the Rothonense monks to a hearing.

(Et infra:) Electionem autem a monachis, sicut dicitur, concorditer factam, pendente controversia, ex qua pendet, nec confirmandam duximus, nec etiam infirmandam.

(And below:) However, the election made, as it is said, concordantly by the monks, with the controversy pending, on which it depends, we have deemed neither to be confirmed nor even to be invalidated.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Ecclesia laesa in probatione necessaria omissa potest petere restitutionem in integrum, non obstante termino iuris probationis exclusivo. Et restitutionem petere potest, non solum contra privatum, sed etiam contra ecclesiam. H. d.

The church, injured, with the necessary proof omitted, can seek full restitution, notwithstanding the exclusive term of the law of proof. And it can seek restitution, not only against a private person, but even against a church. H. d.

Idem Heliensi et Florensi Episcopis.

The same to the Bishops of Ely and Florence.

Auditis et intellectis causae meritis in quaestione, quae vertitur inter venerabilem fratrem nostrum Vigoriensem episcopum et dilectum filium abbatem de Evescam super ecclesiis in valle de Evescam constitutis, quas episcopus asseruit ad se dioecesana lege spectare, abbas autem eas esse ab eius iurisdictione prorsus exemptas, cognovimus evidenter, ecclesias illas per privilegia Romanorum Pontificum non esse ab episcopali iurisdictione subtractas, nisi forte vallis de Evescam sit ille locus, qui fuit a duobus regibus, Roe videlicet et Offa libertati donatus, et quem bonae memoriae Coelestinus Papa libertati donavit, sicut in ipsius privilegiis continetur. Verum tanto tempore probantur per testes ab abbatibus de Evescam pleno iure possessae, ut videatur in eis ius episcopale legitime praescripsisse, nisi forte per tantum temporis spatium Vigoriensis ecclesia interim vacavisset, ut tempore vacationis subducto praescriptio minime sit completa. (Et infra:) Licet autem utrinque sit in causa conclusum, quia tamen utraque pars necessariam, ut asserit, probationem omisit, nos attendentes, quod utraque ecclesia fungatur iure minoris, aequitate pensata utramque restituimus contra reliquam ad probandam rationem omissam, ne alterutra pars propter huiusmodi negligentiam gravi iactura laedatur.

Having heard and understood the merits of the cause in the question which is being turned between our venerable brother, the Bishop of Worcester, and our beloved son, the abbot of Evesham, concerning the churches established in the valley of Evesham, which the bishop asserted to pertain to himself by diocesan law, but the abbot that they are altogether exempt from his jurisdiction, we have clearly come to know that those churches, by the privileges of the Roman Pontiffs, are not withdrawn from episcopal jurisdiction, unless perhaps the valley of Evesham is that place which was granted to liberty by two kings, namely Roe and Offa, and which Pope Celestine of good memory granted to liberty, as is contained in his privileges. However, for so long a time they are proven by witnesses to have been possessed in full right by the abbots of Evesham, that the episcopal right seems in their regard to have been legitimately prescribed (i.e., to have lapsed by prescription), unless perhaps during so great a span of time the church of Worcester had meanwhile been vacant, so that, the time of vacancy being subtracted, the prescription is by no means complete. (Et infra:) Although, moreover, on both sides the case has been concluded, yet because each party, as it asserts, has omitted the necessary proof, we, considering that each church is exercising the right of a minor, with equity weighed restore each against the other to prove the omitted ground, lest either party be injured by serious loss on account of negligence of this kind.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

Restitutio ex iusta causa etiam maiori est concedenda, dummodo iusta causa petendi probetur; si autem non probatur plene vel semiplene conceditur restitutio in causa favorabili. H. d.

Restitution on a just cause is to be granted even to one of full age, provided that the just cause of petitioning is proven; but if it is not proven fully or half‑fully, restitution is granted in a favorable case. On this matter.

Idem Priori sanctae Mariae ad Carceres, et L. Canonico sanctae Mariae de Mandria.

The same to the Prior of St. Mary ad Carceres, and to L., a canon of St. Mary of Mandria.

Ex literis dilecti filii abbatis de Calven. didicimus, quod, quum dilecti filii Ramisane et Grimol. archipresbyteri inter I. virum et L. mulierem ex delegatione nostra sententiam divortii protulissent, et appellatione interposita cognitionem sententiae ipsi abbati et archipresbytero Paduano sublato cuiusvis appellationis obstaculo duxerimus committendam, archipresbyter ipse, qui non poterat his exsequendis interesse, commisit suo coniudici vices suas.

From the letters of our beloved son, the abbot of Calven., we have learned that, when our beloved sons Ramisane and Grimol., archpresbyters, between I., the man, and L., the woman, by our delegation had pronounced a sentence of divorce, and an appellation having been interposed, we have deemed that the cognition of the sentence should be committed to the abbot himself and to the archpresbyter of Padua, the obstacle of any appellation being removed, the archpresbyter himself, who could not be present for executing these things, entrusted his functions to his co-judge.

Quumque abbas partibus peremptorium terminum assignasset, quia pars mulieris ad peremptorium terminum non accesserat, abbas ipse, cui alter coniudex commiserat vices suas, allegationibus viri diligenter inspectis latam a iudicibus praedictis confirmavit sententiam. Sed post octo dies pater puellae accedens ad ipsum, intellecto, quod sententiam protulisset, firmavit proprio iuramento, quod quidam ad eum et filiam eius accedens fraudulenter sub ipsius abbatis nomine falsas eis literas praesentavit, quibus mandabatur eidem, ut, quia iudex ad diem, quam assignaverat, venire non poterat, post octo dies a termino constituto ipsius se conspectui praesentaret; et postmodum appellavit ad sedem apostolicam, et etiam supplicavit. Licet autem de fraude taliter perpetrata per huiusmodi iuramentum non constet ad plenum, in favorem tamen matrimonii de benignitate canonica contra fraudem propositam supplicationem mulieris admisimus, et ad audientiam restituimus eam pro matrimonio postulantem.

And when the abbot had assigned to the parties a peremptory term, because the woman’s side had not come to the peremptory term, the abbot himself—unto whom the other co-judge had committed his functions—after diligently inspecting the man’s allegations, confirmed the sentence delivered by the aforesaid judges. But after eight days the girl’s father, approaching him and understanding that he had pronounced the sentence, affirmed by his own oath that a certain person, coming to him and to his daughter, had fraudulently, under the name of that abbot, presented to them false letters, by which it was mandated to him that, since the judge could not come on the day which he had assigned, after eight days from the fixed term he should present himself to his presence; and afterward he appealed to the Apostolic See, and also supplicated. Although, however, it does not stand fully proven by such an oath concerning the fraud thus perpetrated, nevertheless, in favor of matrimony, from canonical benignity, against the proposed fraud we admitted the woman’s supplication, and restored her to audience as petitioning for the marriage.

Ideoque discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus de causa prioris appellationis ordine iudiciario cognoscentes, confirmetis vel infirmetis, sicut iustum fuerit, appellatione remota sententiam a primis iudicibus promulgatam facientes quod decreveritis per censuram ecclesiasticam observari.

Therefore we command to your discretion by apostolic writings, that, taking cognizance in judicial order concerning the cause of the prior appeal, you confirm or infirm, as shall be just, the sentence promulgated by the first judges, the appeal being removed, causing that which you shall have decreed to be observed through ecclesiastical censure.

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Etiam contra sententiam Papae restituitur ecclesia. Hoc primo. Et causa restitutionis in integrum debet praesentibus partibus tractari.

Even against the Pope’s sentence the church is restored. This, first. And the cause of restitution in entirety ought to be handled with the parties present.

Hoc secundo. Haec duo dicit quoad titulum.

This secondly. He says these two things as to the title.

Idem Episcopo et Capitulo Oscensi.

The same to the Bishop and Chapter of Huesca.

Tum ex literis bonae memoriae Coelestini Papae praedecessoris nostri, tum ex iis, quae ipsius temporibus in tua praesentia frater episcope et venerabilis fratris nostri Ilerdensis episcopi apud apostolicam sedem gesta fuerunt, gravem Ilerdensis ecclesiae intelleximus quaestionem per sententiam felicis recordationis Eugenii Papae praedecessoris nostri super ecclesiis quibusdam prolatam, se laesam enormiter et olim et nunc etiam conquerentis. Unde quum idem Coelestinus praedecessor noster tempore piae recordationis Anastasii Papae praedecessoris nostri proximi successoris eiusdem Eugenii in minori adhuc officio constitutus in partibus Hispaniae legationis officio fungeretur, et ex delegatione ipsius cognoscere coepit de controversia memorata, cui etiam Alexander successor ipsius Anastasii, officio legationis denuo in partibus eisdem fungenti, causam commisit eandem, quam etiam fine debito terminasset, nisi ab eo fuisset ex parte Oscensis ecclesiae provocatum; quae quidem omnia in suis literis ipse et viva voce coram nobis et fratribus nostris est saepius protestatus; idem quoque Coelestinus, ad apicem summi Pontificatus promotus, dilecto filio nostro G. sancti Angeli diacono cardinali tunc apostolicae sedis legato dictam controversiam sub eo tenore commisit, ut, inspectis diligenter Ilerdensis ecclesiae privilegiis, auditis etiam partium rationibus et allegationibus, memorata sententia non obstante, vel quibuscunque rescriptis, tam occasione illius sententiae, quam alio modo in praeiudicium iuris Ilerdensis ecclesiae quondam a sede apostolica vel a quocunque impetratis, omni contradictione et appellatione cessantibus, tam super principali quam super incidenti quaestione remotis, diffinitivam proferret sententiam, eamque sine difficultate qualibet exsecutioni mandando faceret per censuram ecclesiasticam firmiter observari. Verum quoniam per ipsum legatum, aut per alios, quibus sub eodem tenore causa eadem commissa exstitit, licet testes producti ex parte Ilerdensis episcopi recepti fuerint, mandatum tamen apostolicum in hac parte non exstitit adimpletum, dilectus filius magister A. canonicus Ilerdensis ad praesentiam nostram accedens, praemissam querelam nomine Ilerdensis ecclesiae replicavit, obnixe deposcens postulavit per officium nostrum iam dictam sententiam in melius reformari, et contra eam restitui ecclesiam Ilerdensem.

Then both from the letters of good memory of Pope Celestine, our predecessor, and from those things which in his times in your presence, brother bishop, and in the presence of our venerable brother the bishop of Ilerda, were transacted at the apostolic see, we understood that the Ilerdan church has a grave question, complaining that it has been enormously injured both of old and now as well, by a sentence of happy remembrance Pope Eugene, our predecessor, pronounced concerning certain churches. Whence, when the same Celestine, our predecessor, in the time of pious remembrance Pope Anastasius, our predecessor, the one next successor of that same Eugene, while still constituted in a lesser office, was discharging the office of legation in the parts of Spain, and by his delegation began to take cognizance of the aforesaid controversy, to whom also Alexander, successor of that Anastasius, while again discharging the office of legation in those same parts, committed the same cause—which likewise he would have brought to its due end, had there not been an appeal from him on the part of the Oscan church—all which things in his letters he himself, and by living voice before us and our brothers, has very often protested; the same Celestine also, having been promoted to the apex of the Supreme Pontificate, committed the said controversy to our beloved son G., deacon cardinal of St. Angel, then legate of the apostolic see, under this tenor: that, the privileges of the Ilerdan church having been diligently inspected, and the reasons and allegations of the parties also having been heard, the aforesaid sentence notwithstanding, or whatsoever rescripts, whether on the occasion of that sentence or in some other way, obtained formerly from the apostolic see or from anyone to the prejudice of the right of the Ilerdan church, all contradiction and appeal ceasing, both upon the principal and upon the incidental question removed, he should pronounce a definitive sentence, and that, by mandating it to be put into execution without any difficulty, he should cause it to be firmly observed by ecclesiastical censure. But since by the same legate, or by others to whom under the same tenor the same cause stood committed, although the witnesses produced on the part of the Ilerdan bishop were received, nevertheless the apostolic mandate in this part has not been fulfilled, our beloved son Master A., canon of Ilerda, approaching our presence, repeated in the name of the Ilerdan church the aforesaid complaint, earnestly beseeching and petitioning that by our office the already-mentioned sentence be reformed for the better, and that against it the Ilerdan church be restored.

Nos igitur cum fratribus nostris et aliis viris prudentibus et in utroque iure peritis, canonico videlicet et civili, super ipsa supplicatione deliberavimus diligenter, nonnullis firmiter asserentibus, quod, quum praedictus C. praedecessor noster contra iam dictam sententiam visus fuerit Ilerdensi ecclesiae restitutionis beneficium indulsisse, quum, ea non obstante duxerit negotium committendum, et nos supplicationem eiusdem ecclesiae admittere debebamus, praesertim quia in hoc canonica et civilia iura pariter concordarent. Nam et per statuta canonica sententia Romanae sedis non negatur posse in melius commutari, quum aut surreptum aliquid fuerit, aut ipsa pro consideratione aetatum et temporum seu gravium necessitatum dispensative quicquam ordinare decrevit, et secundum iura civilia principes etiam contra res bis iudicatas in auditorio suo examinari restitutionem in integrum permiserunt. Perspeximus quoque ex data sententiae in registro iam dicti Eugenii Papae praedecessoris nostri repertae, quod sententia illa primo mense sui pontificatus fuerit promulgata, quando non plene de meritis ipsius causae fuisse videbatur instructus, illa nitens praecipue ratione, quod privilegium Urbani secundi ex parte vestra productum subiectum fuerat falsitati, cuius tenorem nos in registro ipsius subtiliter intuendo integrum invenimus et penitus incorruptum.

Therefore we, together with our brothers and other prudent men and those skilled in both laws, namely canonical and civil, deliberated diligently upon that very supplication, certain persons asserting firmly that, since the aforesaid C., our predecessor, seemed to have indulged to the Ilerdense church the benefice of restitution against the already mentioned sentence, since, that notwithstanding, he judged the matter ought to be committed, we ought to admit the supplication of the same church, especially because in this the canonical and civil laws alike concord. For both by canonical statutes it is not denied that a sentence of the Roman See can be changed for the better, whenever either something has been surreptitiously obtained, or the See itself, in consideration of ages and times or of grave necessities, decreed to ordain something by way of dispensation; and according to the civil laws princes even against matters twice adjudged permitted restitution in integrum to be examined in their auditorium. We also perceived from the date of the sentence found in the register of the already mentioned Pope Eugene, our predecessor, that that sentence was promulgated in the first month of his pontificate, when he did not seem to have been fully instructed concerning the merits of that cause, relying chiefly on this reasoning: that the privilege of Urban II, produced on your side, had been subjected to falsity, whose tenor we, looking carefully into his register, found whole and utterly uncorrupted.

Ceterum licet iura Ilerdensis ecclesiae illaesa servare velimus, quia tamen et ecclesiam vestram in sua volumus iustitia confovere: Tandem deliberatio nostra in hoc resedit ut, an data sit restitutio, an danda contra praemissam sententiam, partibus praesentibus decernatur, quarum assertione merita causarum panduntur, iuxta legitimas sanctiones, ut, quum nihil de contingentibus omiserimus, neutra partium habeat quod nobis merito valeat imputare. Quocirca discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus usque ad festum B. Lucae proximo venturum vel in propriis personis, vel per sufficientem et idoneum responsalem nostro vos conspectui praesentetis, quod ante dicta sententia retractari non debeat, si poteritis, ostensuri; vel, si forte exigente iustitia fuerit retractanda, vel per vos, vel per responsalem idoneum appareatis sufficienter instructi, ut in principali negotio canonice procedatur, pro certo scituri, quod, quum finem litibus imponere cupiamus, et in quaestione praemissa propter multam locorum distantiam non possit ad nos sine magnis laboribus et expensis saepius haberi recursus, si ad praemissum terminum, quem vobis peremptorium assignamus, iniuncta vobis contempseritis adimplere, nos nihilominus in ipso negotio, quantum de iure poterimus, procedemus. Miramur autem non modicum et movemur, quod confirmationem eiusdem sententiae et revocationem omnium, quae saepedictus praedecessor noster C. egit pro ecclesia Ilerdensi, tanquam subrepta fuerint, tu frater episcope, diceris impetrasse, quum vix de ipso possumus suspicari, ut contra scripturas et assertiones suas, quas frequenter coram nobis, et aliis fratribus nostris viva voce proposuit, subito venerit, nisi fuerit circumventus.

Moreover, although we wish to preserve unharmed the rights of the Ilerdan church, yet because we also wish to foster your church in its own justice: At length our deliberation settled on this, that whether a restitution has been granted, or is to be granted against the aforesaid sentence, be determined with the parties present, by whose assertion the merits of the cases are laid open, according to legitimate sanctions, so that, since we shall have omitted nothing of the incidents, neither party may have anything that can justly avail to impute to us. Wherefore by apostolic writings we command to your discretion, that by the feast of B. Luke next to come, either in your own persons, or by a sufficient and suitable responsal, you present yourselves to our presence, intending to show, if you can, that the aforesaid sentence ought not to be retracted; or, if perchance, justice demanding it, it must be retracted, appear either yourselves or by a suitable responsal sufficiently instructed, so that in the principal business it may proceed canonically, knowing for certain that, since we desire to impose an end to lawsuits, and in the aforesaid question, on account of the great distance of places, recourse cannot often be had to us without great labors and expenses, if by the aforesaid deadline, which we assign to you as peremptory, you should disdain to fulfill what has been enjoined on you, we nonetheless will proceed in the matter itself, as far as we can in law. We marvel not a little and are moved, moreover, that you, brother bishop, are said to have obtained the confirmation of that same sentence and the revocation of all the things which our oft-mentioned predecessor C. did for the Ilerdan church, as though they had been surreptitiously procured, since we can scarcely suspect of him that he would have come suddenly against his own writings and assertions, which he frequently set forth viva voce before us and our other brothers, unless he had been circumvented.

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Petitio restitutionis in integrum contra sententiam suspendit regulariter exsecutionem sententiae in eventu istius causae restitutionis; fallit, si contra petentem restitutionem est praesumptio malitiae, quod causa differendi exsecutionem hoc petat; quo casu exsecutio fit praestita cautione de restituendo, si petens restitutionem obtinebit in causa. H. d. secundum mentem iuncta gloss. pen.

A petition for restitution in integrum against a judgment as a rule suspends the execution of the judgment pending the outcome of this restitution case; it fails, if there is a presumption of malice against the one seeking restitution—that he requests this for the purpose of delaying execution; in which case execution proceeds upon security being furnished for restoring, if the petitioner for restitution shall prevail in the case. H. d. according to the intent, with the penultimate gloss joined.

et in hoc ultimo est iste textus valde singularis respectu utriusque iuris.

and in this last point this text is very singular with respect to both laws.

Idem.

The same.

Suscitata super diversis articulis inter venerabilem fratrem nostrum Burgensem episcopum et Oviense monasterium quaestione, [quum venerabilis frater noster Segobiensis episcopus et dilectus filius T. Palentinus electus, quibus auctoritate nostra dicta fuit causa commissa, eam sufficienter instructam ad nostram praesentiam remisissent, nos eidem episcopo et L. monacho monasterii procuratori, qui propter hoc ad sedem apostolicam venerant, audientiam concessimus liberam et benignam, Qui quum coepissent principaliter litigare super statu monasterii memorati, quod ad se de iure communi spectare dictus episcopus proponebat, utpote in sua dioecesi constitutum, cuius iuris usum Burgensem ecclesiam longis retroactis temporibus habuisse firmabat, et ex parte monasterii diceretur illud per principes saeculares et Romanos Pontifices ab antiquo libertate donatum, et ipsum longissimo tempore usum fuisse plenaria libertate, nos auditis utrinque propositis, de voluntate partium demum ex providentia inter eas duximus componendum, prout in aliis nostris literis super hoc confectis plenius continetur. Postmodum vero partibus super subiectione ac libertate membrorum eiusdem loci, monasteriorum videlicet, capellarum, cellarum et prioratuum, persequentibus quaestionem, quatuor sibi dictus episcopus in praefatis locis ad se de iure communi speciantibus, ut dicebat, cuius iuris usum habuerat ab antiquo, specialiter vendicabat, eorundem locorum clericos asserendo teneri ad episcoporum, archidiaconorum et archipresbyterorum Burgensium accedere synodos, excommunicationis vel interdicti servare sententias promulgatas ab eis, procurationes annuas exhibere, ac singulos aureos solvere Burgensi episcopo noviter substituto; ad intentionem propriam roborandam super primis tribus articulis ius commune, secundum quod dictos clericos, sicut et alios suae dioecesis, ad praedicta teneri dicebat, ac iuris ipsius usum liberum ab antiquo, et super quarto antiquam et approbatam consuetudinem allegando. De quibus omnibus per depositiones testium fidem factam esse dicebat.

A question having been stirred up over diverse articles between our venerable brother the Bishop of Burgos and the Monastery of Oviedo, [when our venerable brother the Bishop of Segovia and our beloved son T., bishop-elect of Palencia, to whom by our authority the said case had been committed, had sent it, sufficiently prepared, back to our presence, we granted to that same bishop and to L., a monk, procurator of the monastery, who for this had come to the Apostolic See, a free and benign hearing. When they had begun principally to litigate over the status of the aforesaid monastery—which the said bishop was proposing to pertain to himself by common law, inasmuch as it was situated in his diocese, and he affirmed that the church of Burgos had had the use of that right in times long past—and on the part of the monastery it was being said that it had from of old been endowed with liberty by secular princes and Roman Pontiffs, and that it had for a very long time enjoyed plenary liberty, we, the submissions on both sides having been heard, by the will of the parties at length, by a provident decision judged that a settlement should be made between them, as is more fully contained in our other letters drawn up on this. Afterwards indeed, the parties prosecuting the question concerning the subjection and liberty of the members of that same place—namely monasteries, chapels, cells, and priories—the said bishop was particularly claiming for himself, in the aforesaid places, four things as pertaining to himself by common law, as he said, the use of which right he had had from of old: asserting that the clerics of those same places were held to attend the synods of the bishops, archdeacons, and archpresbyters of Burgos, to observe the sentences of excommunication or interdict promulgated by them, to render annual procurations, and to pay single gold pieces to the Bishop of Burgos newly appointed; to strengthen his own claim, on the first three articles alleging the common law, according to which he said that the said clerics, as also others of his diocese, were held to the aforesaid, and the free use of that same right from of old; and on the fourth, an ancient and approved custom. Concerning all of which he said proof had been made through the depositions of witnesses.]

Verum pars altera proposuit ex adverso, supradicti monasterii membra, sicut et ipsum coenobium, ab antiquo fuisse saecularium principum et Romanorum Pontificum Urbani II., Paschalis II., Eugenii III. et Alexandri III. privilegiis libertate donata, et longis retroactis temporibus huiusmodi fuisse libertate gavisa; sicut per ipsa privilegia exhibita coram nobis, ac instrumentum Victoris quondam Burgensis episcopi, et suorum depositiones testium manifeste constare dicebat.] Nos igitur auditis et intellectis quae utraque pars proposuit coram nobis, super quatuor articulis praenotatis monasterium Oviense de consilio fratrum nostrorum iustitia condemnavimus exigente.

But the other party proposed on the contrary that the members of the aforesaid monastery, as also the coenobium itself, had from of old been endowed with liberty by the privileges of secular princes and of the Roman Pontiffs Urban 2., Paschal 2., Eugenius 3. and Alexander 3., and that for long times past they had enjoyed liberty of this kind; as it said to be plainly established by the very privileges exhibited before us, and by the instrument of Victor, formerly bishop of Burgos, and by the depositions of its witnesses.] We therefore, having heard and understood what each party set forth before us, upon the four pre-noted articles, condemned the Oviedo monastery, by the counsel of our brothers, justice requiring it.

Sententia vero lata procurator monasterii ad probandam praescriptionem factam tam super quatuor articulis praenotatis, quam etiam super quibusdam decimis per transactionem acquisitis a monasterio, ecclesiis et colonis ipsius ex parte petitis, quarum controversiam volebamus sententiae calculo terminare, et in qua fuerat coram iudicibus supra dictis conclusum, restitutionem in integrum nomine monasterii postulavit, et quum super hoc coram nobis fuisset aliquamdiu litigatum, nos, deliberatione praehabita, restitutionem in integrum ad praescriptionem probandam tam super quatuor articulis praenotatis, quam etiam super controversia decimarum eidem procuratori nomine monasterii duximus indulgendam, [tibi, frater Zamorensis, et dilectis filiis magistris Mauricio archidiacono Toletano et Michaeli canonico Segobiensi dantes nostris literis in mandatis, ut recipiatis testes, quos pars monasterii ad probandam praescriptionem legitimam super quatuor articulis saepedictis, et super capitulo decimarum, vel etiam episcopus ad interruptionem probandam duxerit producendos; et si de partium voluntate processerit, causam ipsam appellatione remota fine debito terminetis; alioquin remittatis eandem ad nos sufficienter instructam, praefigentes partibus terminum competentem, quo nostro se conspectui repraesentarent, sententiam dante Domino recepturae.] Ne vero per excogitatam malitiam, sicut ex [quibusdam] praesumptionibus pluribus videbatur, effectum sententiae in damnum episcopi contingeret impediri, neve monasterium per exsecutionem sententiae propter diversas suspiciones incurreret detrimentum, nos, aequitate pensata, iure duximus providendum, ut ante omnia supradicta sententia a nobis prolata [per vos] exsecutioni mandetur. (Et infra:) Volumus nihilominus et mandamus, ut ab ipso episcopo recipiatis idoneam cautionem, quod, si monasterium in causa ipsa [per sententiam] praevaluerit, universa, quae medio tempore sententiae ipsius occasione perceperit, monasterio restituat memorato. [Dat.

But once sentence had been delivered, the procurator of the monastery, to prove the prescription established both concerning the four articles above-noted and also concerning certain tithes acquired by transaction, which were being sought on the other side from the monastery, its churches, and its colonists—whose controversy we wished to terminate by the casting of sentence, and in which it had been concluded before the judges above mentioned—petitioned restitution in integrum in the name of the monastery; and when there had been litigation before us for some time on this, we, deliberation first had, judged that restitution in integrum for proving prescription, both on the four articles aforesaid and also on the controversy of the tithes, should be granted to the same procurator in the name of the monastery, [giving by our letters to you, brother of Zamora, and to our beloved sons Masters Maurice, Archdeacon of Toledo, and Michael, Canon of Segovia, mandates that you receive the witnesses whom the party of the monastery shall have brought forward to prove legitimate prescription on the four articles so often mentioned and on the chapter of the tithes, or even the bishop to prove interruption; and if it shall proceed by the will of the parties, you are to terminate the cause, appeal removed, with due end; otherwise you are to remit the same, sufficiently instructed, to us, setting a competent term for the parties, at which they would present themselves to our sight, to receive sentence, the Lord granting.] Yet lest, by contrived malice, as seemed from [certain] several presumptions, the effect of the sentence should happen to be impeded to the bishop’s harm, and lest the monastery, by the execution of the sentence, should incur detriment on account of diverse suspicions, we, equity weighed, judged that it ought to be provided in law that before all things the above-said sentence promulgated by us be committed to execution [by you]. (And below:) We nonetheless will and command that you receive from the bishop himself suitable security, that, if the monastery shall prevail in the cause itself [by sentence], he restore to the aforesaid monastery all that, in the meantime, on the occasion of that sentence, he shall have received. [Given.

Lat. VIII. Kal.

Issued on the 8th day before the Kalends.

Maii Pont. nostr. Ao. XIII.

May, in the 13th year of our pontificate.

1210].

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Post peremptorium non auditur ecclesia de iure communi; auditur tamen per beneficium restitutionis in integrum.

After the peremptory term, the Church is not heard by the common law; nevertheless, it is heard through the benefit of restitution in integrum.

Honorius III. Archiepiscopo et Capitulo Bracharensi.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishop and Chapter of Braga.

Coram felicis memoriae I. Papa praedecessore nostro lite inter venerabilem fratrem nostrum archiepiscopum Toletanum et te, frater archiepiscope, super primatia solenniter contestata, fuit peremptorius terminus assignatus (Et infra:) Verum, elapso termino constituto, post exspectationem non modicam comparuerunt procuratores vestri; sed, quia, ut dicebant, non attulerant depositiones testium et alia munimenta, dilationem cum instantia postularunt. Postquam vero contra eos interlocuti fuimus super dilatione petita, tandem indulgeri ecclesiae Bracharensi dilationem propter instructionem causae per auxilium restitutionis in integrum postularunt, exhibentes super hoc ex parte vestra speciale mandatum. Nos autem de fratrum nostrorum consilio usque ad octavas Pentecostes proxime futuras per restitutionis beneficium id vobis duximus indulgendum.

Before our predecessor of happy memory, Pope Innocent, with the lawsuit between our venerable brother the archbishop of Toledo and you, brother archbishop, concerning the primacy solemnly contested, a peremptory term was assigned (And below:) However, the set term having elapsed, after no small waiting your procurators appeared; but because, as they said, they had not brought the depositions of witnesses and other muniments, they urgently requested a postponement. After we had delivered an interlocutory ruling against them on the requested postponement, at length they requested that a postponement be granted to the Church of Braga for the instruction of the cause by the aid of restitution in integrum, exhibiting on this point a special mandate on your part. But we, by the counsel of our brothers, judged that by the benefit of restitution this ought to be granted to you until the octave of Pentecost next to come.

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

Restituitur minor in eo, quod contraxit vel omisit, si probat exinde se laesum et sit infra tempora restitutionis petendae.

The minor is restored in that which he contracted or omitted, if he proves that he was thereby harmed and is within the time-limits for seeking restitution.

Gregorius IX.

Gregory 9.

Constitutus in nostra praesentia magister Guill. pro se ac fratre suo I. canonico Parrosinensi exhibita nobis petitione monstravit, quod eis in minori constitutis aetate, ac eorum matre, cuius successores exsistunt, rebus humanis exempta, quondam Guil. pater ipsorum quasdam possessiones utrique communes quibusdam vendidit pro quadam pecuniae quantitate, ac, ut huiusmodi venditio robur firmitatis haberet, emancipavit eosdem, et fecit eos contractui consentire.

Having appeared in our presence, Master Guill., on his own behalf and on behalf of his brother I., a canon of Parros, having presented a petition to us, showed that, they being in a minor age, and their mother—whom they succeed—removed from human affairs, the late Guill., their father, sold certain possessions, common to both of them, to certain persons for a certain sum of money; and, so that a sale of this sort might have the strength of firmness, he emancipated the same, and made them consent to the contract.

Quare supplicavit, ut vel venditionem eandem mandaremus nunciari nullam, vel, quum adhuc exsistant infra tempus ad obtinendum beneficium in integrum restitutionis indultum, et infra annum et diem a tempore contractus ipsis tanquam proximioribus competeret super alia portione ius offerendi emptoribus pretium iuxta municipii Parrosinensis consuetudinem approbatam, quod hactenus omiserunt, dignaremur eis super utroque, quum in hoc non modicum laesi noscantur, et emptoribus portionis eiusdem vel eorum successoribus pretium sint offerre parati, per idem beneficium subvenire. Quocirca mandamus, quatenus, si praemissa inveneritis veritate subnixa, vel venditionem praedictam quoad partem ex successione materna ipsos contingentem nullam nunciare curetis, si in ea debita iuris solennitas est omissa, vel si forsitan intervenerit, et eos laesos esse constiterit, tam super ea, quam super residua portione, dum tamen quod offerunt duxerint faciendum, auctoritate nostra in integrum restituere studeatis.

Wherefore he supplicated that either we should command that the same sale be announced null, or, since they still are within the time for obtaining the beneficium of restitution in integrum by indult, and within a year and a day from the time of the contract there belonged to them, as the nearer kinsmen, with respect to the other portion, the right of offering to the buyers the price according to the approved custom of the municipality of Parros, which they have hitherto omitted, we would deign to succor them by the same beneficium in respect to both, since in this they are known to have been not a little injured, and they are ready to offer the price to the buyers of that same portion or to their successors. Wherefore we command that, inasmuch as, if you shall have found the premises supported by truth, you either take care to announce null the aforesaid sale as to the part touching them from the maternal succession, if in it the due solemnity of law has been omitted, or, if perchance it did intervene, and it shall have been established that they were injured, both with respect to that and with respect to the remaining portion, provided, however, that they shall have proceeded to do what they offer, you strive by our authority to restore them in integrum.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Restitutio in integrum postulanda est ab ordinario administrationem habente, vel a delegato ab eo, sive haec causa sit specialiter delegata, sive incidat in causa generaliter sibi commissa. Ab ordinario vero administrationem non habente vel a delegato peti non debet, nisi veniat incidenter in causa. Arbiter autem de causa restitutionis non cognoscit, nec potest assumi in maioribus causis.

Restoration in full is to be requested from the ordinary having administration, or from a delegate by him, whether this cause be specially delegated, or it occur in a cause generally committed to him. But it ought not to be sought from an ordinary not having administration, nor from a delegate, unless it comes up incidentally in a case. Moreover, an arbiter does not take cognizance concerning the cause of restitution, nor can he be appointed in major causes.

Idem.

The same.

Causa restitutionis in integrum coram iudicibus ordinariis administrationem habentibus vel delegatis ab eis tractari poterit et finiri, sive hoc ipsis delegatis specialiter demandatum fuerit, sive in commisso eis negotio contingat incidere huiusmodi quaestionem. Delegati vero ab ordinariis, qui administrationem non habent, sed tantummodo facultatem iudicandi, seu arbitri de hac causa cognoscere nequeunt, nisi coram eis mota fuerit incidenter. In matrimoniali quoque, liberali vel criminali causa, quum maiores iudices exigant, arbiter nequit assumi.

The cause of restitution in integrum may be handled and concluded before ordinary judges possessing administration or delegates appointed by them, whether this has been specially mandated to those delegates, or whether in the business committed to them it happens that a question of this sort should arise. But delegates from ordinaries who do not have administration, but only the faculty of judging, as well as arbiters, cannot take cognizance of this cause, unless it has been raised incidentally before them. Likewise, in a matrimonial, a cause of liberty, or a criminal cause, when higher judges are required, an arbiter cannot be appointed.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Restitutio denegata ecclesiae ulterius sibi non conceditur, nisi ex nova causa; restituitur tamen ad appellandum a sententia denegationis.

Restitution, once denied to a church, is not further granted to it, unless on a new cause; nevertheless, it is restored for appealing from the sentence of denial.

Idem.

The same.

Beneficio restitutionis in integrum ecclesiae tuae in alio iudicio denegato, restitutio, praeterquam ad appellationem omissam, videtur eidem ecclesiae posse negari, nisi novis defensionibus ad huiusmodi sit beneficium admittenda.

With the benefit of restitutio in integrum for your church having been denied in another judgment, restitution, except for the omitted appeal, seems able to be denied to the same church, unless by new defenses such a benefit is to be admitted.

TITULUS XLII. DE ALIENATIONE IUDICII MUTANDI CAUSA FACTA.

TITLE 42. ON ALIENATION DONE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGING THE COURT.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Is, in quem facta est alienatio rei causa mutandi iudicii, convenitur per rescriptum impetratum contra alienantem.

He, to whom the alienation of the thing was made for the purpose of changing the court, is sued by means of a rescript impetrated against the alienating party.

Alexander III.

Alexander 3.

Ex quorundam certa relatione audivimus, quod, quum aliqui viri ecclesiastici de provincia vestra pro prosequenda sua iustitia literas commissionis a nobis impetrant, adversarii eorum, ut mandatum nostrum eludant, antequam literae nostrae ad iudices perveniant, vel etiam postea, priusquam illi citentur ab eis, in vocem appellationis prorumpunt, aut commutationem facientes aliquos in possessionem eorum, de quibus controversiae vertuntur, malitiose inducunt. Nos igitur contra praedictam calliditatem et versutiam pastorali sollicitudine providere volentes, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus, si adversarii eorum, inter quos et ipsum super ecclesia controversia est [diutius] agitata pro evacuando nostro mandato taliter appellaverint, aut de possessione, de qua controversia vertitur, commutationem fecerint, vel se malitiose duxerint absentandos, eos qui in possessione praedictae [ecclesiae] se ingesserint, appellatione cessante cogatis sub vestro examine iuris aequitati parere.

From the sure relation of certain persons we have heard that, when some ecclesiastical men from your province obtain from us letters of commission for prosecuting their justice, their adversaries, in order to elude our mandate, before our letters reach the judges, or even afterwards, before they are cited by them, burst out into the voice of appeal; or, making a commutation (transfer), they maliciously bring certain persons into the possession of those things about which controversies are turned. We therefore, wishing with pastoral solicitude to provide against the aforesaid craft and cunning, by apostolic writings command your discretion by way of precept, to the effect that, if their adversaries—between whom and himself a controversy over the church has been [diutius] agitated—have thus appealed for the purpose of evacuating our mandate, or have made a commutation concerning the possession about which the controversy turns, or have maliciously taken themselves to be absent, you compel, the appeal ceasing, those who have thrust themselves into possession of the aforesaid [church], under your examination, to obey the equity of the law.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Clericus causa mutandi iudicium, non debet recipere cessionem a laico.

A cleric, for the sake of changing the forum, ought not to receive a cession from a layman.

Gregorius IX. Abbati S. Nicolai et decano Furnensi Morinensis dioecesis.

Gregory 9. To the Abbot of St. Nicholas and the Dean of Furnes, of the Diocese of the Morini.

Ex parte scabinorum Hipretis fuit propositum, quod inter laicos eiusdem loci quaestionibus emergentibus, dirimendis per iudicium saeculare, quidam clerici sibi dono vel pretio ab aliquibus laicorum ipsorum cedi faciunt actiones, ut adversarios ad ecclesiasticum forum trahant, et praedam ex huiusmodi commercio assequantur. (Et infra:) Quum igitur cessiones et emptiones litium legitimae prohibeant sanctiones ita, quod iactura causae afficiant illos, qui sibi potentiorum patrocinium taliter advocare praesumunt, et ex eo sint etiam odiosae, quod ex fonte cupiditatis videntur procedere, mandamus, quatenus clericos memoratos a praesumptione huiusmodi per censuram ecclesiasticam compescatis.

On the part of the scabini of Ypres it was set forth that, when among the laity of the same place questions arise to be resolved by secular judgment, certain clerics have actions made over (ceded) to themselves by gift or by price from some of those same laymen, so that they may drag their adversaries to the ecclesiastical forum, and acquire booty from commerce of this sort. (And below:) Since therefore cessions and purchases (emptions) of lawsuits are forbidden by legitimate sanctions in such wise that they visit with loss of the case those who presume thus to invoke for themselves the patronage of the more powerful, and they are also odious from the fact that they seem to proceed from the fount of cupidity, we command that you restrain the aforesaid clerics from such presumption by ecclesiastical censure.

TITULUS XLIII. DE ARBITRIS.

TITLE 43. ON ARBITERS.

CAP. I.

CHAPTER 1.

Arbitri sunt in dispari numero assumendi, et, eis discordantibus, statur sententiae maioris partis.

Arbiters are to be appointed in an odd number, and, if they disagree, the sentence of the greater part is abided by.

Ex concilio Africano.

From the African council.

Sane (Et infra: [cf. c. 3. de for. comp. II. 2.]) Si autem ex communi placito episcoporum, inter quos causa versatur, arbitros elegerint, aut unus eligatur aut tres, ut, si tres elegerint, aut omnium sequantur sententiam, aut duorum.

Indeed (And below: [cf. ch. 3. on the competent forum 2. 2.]) But if, by the common agreement of the bishops between whom the case is in dispute, they shall have chosen arbiters, either one should be chosen or three, so that, if they choose three, they follow either the sentence of all or of two.

CAP. II.

CHAPTER 2.

Nullum est arbitrium seu arbitramentum continens peccatum per partes non remissibile.

There is no arbitration or arbitrament containing sin that is not remissible in parts.

Alexander III. Eboracensi Archiepiscopo.

Alexander 3. To the Archbishop of York.

Non sine multa necessitate et discrimine corporis sui A. presbyter praesentium lator ad sedem apostolicam fatigatus multiplici nobis querela proposuit, quod, quum in ecclesia sancti Alphridi de N. per manum R. archidiaconi et canonici de Suella personae illius ecclesiae capellanus institutus fuisset, eodem R. mortuo, M. nepos eius, qui sibi in ecclesia iam dicta successit, eundem presbyterum ad maiorem securitatem capellanum ibidem iterum ordinavit, quorum temporibus XXX. annis et ultra capellaniam eiusdem ecclesiae pacifice se asserit tenuisse. Tandem vero idem M. ab eadem ecclesia volens ipsum prebyterum removere, in eum coepit indebitas exactiones exercere, et quidam eius homo circa domum suam egressus violentas manus in eum iniecit, et ipse idem M. nisus est eum circumvenire, ut pro quinque marchis argenti, quas etiam idem M. ei promittebat annuatim nomine pensionis soluturum, praescriptae capellaniae cedere non differret.

Not without much necessity and peril of his body, A., a presbyter, the bearer of the present, wearied to the Apostolic See, laid before us a manifold complaint: that, when in the church of Saint Alfrid of N., by the hand of R., archdeacon and canon of Suella, the parson (persona) of that church, he had been instituted as chaplain, the same R. being dead, M., his nephew, who succeeded him in the already-named church, for greater security again appointed the same presbyter there as chaplain, in whose times he asserts that for 30 years and more he held the chaplaincy of the same church peacefully. At length indeed the same M., wishing to remove that presbyter from the same church, began to exercise undue exactions upon him; and a certain man of his, having gone out near his house, laid violent hands on him; and M. himself strove to circumvent him, that for five marks of silver, which the same M. also promised him he would pay yearly under the name of a pension, he should not delay to cede the aforesaid chaplaincy.

Praefato vero presbytero nolente eius exsequi voluntatem, praedictus M. tantum dicitur fecisse, quod post multas iniurias et gravamina sibi illata, occupatis omnibus aliis rebus, ab officio et beneficio est spoliatus. Quum autem idem presbyter per te adhuc extra provinciam tuam exsulans de suo beneficio non posset iustitiam obtinere, tandem quia, sicut asserit, multis necessitatibus arctabatur, nec suam ulterius inopiam potuit sustinere, per dolum et fraudem ipsius M. ab eo est sacramentum extortum, ut arbitrium clericorum duorum exinde susciperet et servaret, qui iam dicto M. faventes eidem presbytero praeceperunt, ut quinque marchas ab eodem tantum susciperet, et toti cederet quaestioni. Quoniam igitur non decet te aliquatenus sustinere, ut quod perperam arbitrati sunt debeat incorrectum relinqui, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus praefatos clericos moneas studiosius et inducas, ut, si se cognoverint praefati clerici in hac parte tam nequiter arbitratos fuisse iam dictum presbyterum ab observantia iuramenti auctoritate nostra prorsus absolvas, vel, si arbitrium ipsum noveris aequitate subnixum, ad observantiam ipsius utramque partem appellatione remota compellas.

But when the aforesaid priest was unwilling to carry out his will, the aforesaid M. is said to have done so much that, after many injuries and grievances had been inflicted on him, and all his other goods seized, he was despoiled of office and benefice. And when the same priest, through you, while still exiled outside your province, could not obtain justice concerning his benefice, at length—because, as he asserts, he was constrained by many necessities and could no longer endure his poverty—by the deceit and fraud of that same M. an oath was extorted from him by which he would thereupon receive and observe the arbitration of two clerics, who, favoring the already mentioned M., ordered that priest to accept only five marks from him and to yield the whole controversy. Since, therefore, it does not befit you in any wise to tolerate that what they have wrongly adjudged be left uncorrected, we command by apostolic letters to your fraternity that you admonish and diligently induce the aforesaid clerics, so that, if the aforesaid clerics recognize themselves to have adjudged so wickedly in this matter, you fully absolve the already mentioned priest by our authority from the observance of the oath; or, if you know that the arbitration itself is supported by equity, you compel both parties, appeal removed, to the observance of the same.

CAP. III.

CHAPTER 3.

Arbiter assumptus in patrimoniali causa clerici non potest adiudicare rem ecclesiae possidendam, etiam ad vitam clerici. Hoc dicit, et est casus notabilis.

An arbiter appointed in a patrimonial cause of a cleric cannot adjudicate that property of the Church be possessed, even for the life of the cleric. This says so, and it is a notable case.

Idem Exoniensi Episcopo.

The same to the Bishop of Exeter.

Pervenit ad nos, quod quum W. clericus de Calestin in minori esset aetate constitutus, G. de Cal. sororem eiusdem G. clerici duxisset in uxorem, et idem G. fidei interpositione firmavit, quod V. solidos sterlingorum annuatim daret eidem. Unde, quum postea super eisdem V. solidis inter ipsos controversia mota fuisset, in quatuor compromisere personas, quae utique inter se taliter arbitratae fuerunt, quod idem G. decimas proprias, et rusticorum suorum, quas in parochia de Cal.

It has come to our attention that, when W., a cleric of Calestin, was constituted in minority (under age), G. of Cal. had taken to wife the sister of that same G., the cleric, and the same G., by the interposition of a pledge of faith, confirmed that he would give 5 shillings sterling annually to him. Whence, when afterwards a controversy had been stirred up between them over the same 5 shillings, they compromised to four persons, who indeed thus arbitrated among themselves, that the same G. should [pay] the tithes of his own and of his rustics, which in the parish of Cal.

praefatus G. habere dignoscitur, pro V. praetaxatis solidis perciperet annuatim. Unde quoniam huiusmodi arbitrium ecclesiae iam dicti loci posset in posterum perniciosum exsistere, nec memoratus W. aut personae illae, in quibus compromissum fuerat, id ullatenus in ecclesiae damnum facere debuissent, fraternitati tuae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus rei veritatem diligenter inquiras, et si ita esse inveneris, praenominatum G. diligenter commoneas, et ecclesiastica districtione compellas, ut ecclesiae, cuius est parochianus, praelibatas decimas omni occasione et appellatione remota liberas omnino dimittat, nec sibi occasione huiusmodi aliquid ulterius vendicare praesumat. Clericum vero supra dictum moneas, ut cum eodem G. amicabiliter pacificeque studeat convenire.

The aforesaid G. is recognized to have them, that he should receive annually, for the pre-stated 5 shillings, the tithes of his own and of his rustics; wherefore, since an arbitration of this kind could in future prove pernicious to the church of the already-mentioned place, and neither the aforesaid W. nor those persons in whom the compromise had been made ought in any wise to have done this to the church’s harm, we command by apostolic letters to your fraternity that you diligently inquire into the truth of the matter; and if you find it to be so, carefully admonish the above-named G., and compel him by ecclesiastical distriction, that he entirely release, with every pretext and appeal removed, the aforesaid tithes to the church of which he is a parishioner, nor presume on this occasion to vindicate anything further to himself. But admonish the above-said clerk to strive to come to terms amicably and peaceably with the same G.

CAP. IV.

CHAPTER 4.

In mulierem singularem tanquam in arbitratricem compromitti non potest; secus si mulier habet alias iurisdictionem de iure communi vel consuetudine. Nam tunc etiam super rebus temporalibus ecclesiae potest in eam valide compromitti. H. d. clare.

Into a woman taken singly, as an arbitratrix, one cannot compromise; otherwise, if the woman has some other jurisdiction by the ius commune or by custom. For then even over the temporal affairs of the church one can validly compromise into her. This is clear.

Innocentius III. Cancellario et Magistro Loth. Canonico Parisiensi.

Innocent 3. To the Chancellor and to Master Loth., Canon of Paris.

Dilecti filii abbas et conventus de Scarduna Cisterciensis ordinis sua nobis querela monstrarunt, quod, quum inter eos ex una parte, ac dilectos filios Hospitalarios de Ceresiers Senonensis dioecesis ex altera super usuario cuiusdam nemoris in Oscha, quod dicitur Fagetum, et territorio vallis Morini quaestio verteretur, in carissimam in Christo filiam A. reginam Francorum illustrem fuit compromissum utrinque, quae, auditis hinc inde propositis, et causae meritis plenius intellectis, de plurimorum episcoporum et aliorum virorum prudentum consilio arbitrium duxit per diffinitivam sententiam promulgandum, et redactum in scripto proprio et episcoporum, qui interfuerunt, fecit firmari sigillis; contra cuius sententiam Hospitalarii temere venire non timent. Quamvis autem secundum regulam iuris civilis feminae a huiusmodi publicis officiis sint remotae, et alibi dicatur, quod, licet summae opinionis et optime constitutae exsistant, si arbitrium in se susceperint, vel si patronae inter libertos suos interposuerint audientiam, ab omni sint iudiciali examine separandae, ut ex earum prolatione nulla poena adversus iustos earum comtemptores, nullaque pacti exceptio habeatur; quia tamen iuxta consuetudinem approbatam, quae pro lege servatur, in partibus Gallicanis huiusmodi feminae praecellentes in subditos suos ordinariam iurisdictionem habere noscuntur, discretioni vestrae per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus praefatos Hospitalarios, ut arbitrium ipsum, praesertim quum episcoporum fuerit praesentia et consilio roboratum, sicut sine pravitate provide latum est, et ab utraque parte sponte receptum, observent, monere ac inducere procuretis, eos ad hoc, si necesse fuerit, per poenam in compromisso statutam appellatione postposita compellatis. [Testes autem etc.

The beloved sons, the abbot and convent of Scardona of the Cistercian order, have shown us their complaint, that, when between them on the one side, and the beloved sons the Hospitallers of Ceresiers of the diocese of Sens on the other, a controversy was underway concerning the usuary right of a certain grove in Oscha, which is called the Beech-wood, and the territory of the valley of Morin, there was a compromise on both sides to our dearest daughter in Christ, A., the illustrious queen of the Franks, who, the proposals on this side and that having been heard, and the merits of the cause more fully understood, by the counsel of many bishops and other prudent men judged that an arbitration was to be promulgated by a definitive sentence, and, reduced into writing, she caused it to be made firm by her own seal and by the seals of the bishops who were present; against whose sentence the Hospitallers do not fear rashly to proceed. Although, however, according to the rule of civil law, women are removed from public offices of this kind, and elsewhere it is said that, although they may be of the highest repute and most excellently constituted, if they have undertaken an arbitration for themselves, or if as patronesses they have interposed an audience among their freedmen, they are to be separated from every judicial examination, so that from their pronouncement no penalty may be had against their just contemners, and no exception of a pact may be had; yet because, according to the approved custom, which is kept as law, in the Gallican regions women of this sort, excelling, are known to have ordinary jurisdiction over their subjects, we mandate to your discretion by apostolic writings, that you take care to admonish and induce the aforesaid Hospitallers to observe that arbitration itself, especially since it was strengthened by the presence and counsel of the bishops, as it was providently delivered without depravity and was willingly received by either party; and that you compel them to this, if it shall be necessary, by the penalty set in the compromise, appeal set aside. [But the witnesses, etc.

Dat. Lat. II. Non.

Given at the Lateran, on the 2 Nones.

Nov. Pont. nostr.

November, of our pontificate.

Ao. V. 1202.]

Year 5, 1202.]

CAP. V.

CHAPTER 5.

Ecclesia exempta non potest in praeiudicium exemptionis compromittere. H. d. et clare.

An exempt church cannot compromise to the prejudice of its exemption. Here it is said, and clearly.

Idem Abbati et Conventui de Pigravia.

The same to the Abbot and the Convent of Pigravia.

Quum tempore bonae memoriae C. Papae praedecessoris nostri tu, fili abbas, ad Romanam curiam accessisses, privilegium et alia scripta meruisti a sede apostolica obtinere, [et, sicut a te accepimus, quum reversus fuisses ad propria, privilegium dictum et alia scripta in praesentia fratrum tuorum et quorundam canonicorum Mersburgensium, qui in defensionem quorundam monachorum illuc venerant, fecisti fideliter recitari. Quod intelligens venerabilis frater noster Mersburgensis episcopus, nunciavit et scripsit imperatori, te contra honorem imperii ad Romanam ecclesiam accessisse, et privilegium in eius praeiudicium impetrasse. Unde motus imperator curiam tibi indixit, et privilegium sibi praesentari praecepit, quod receptum noluit tibi postmodum resignare.

When, in the time of our predecessor Pope C. of good memory,
you, son Abbot, had come to the Roman curia, you deserved to obtain from the apostolic see a privilege and other writings, [and, as we received from you, when you had returned to your own, you caused the said privilege and the other writings to be faithfully read out in the presence of your brethren and of certain canons of Merseburg, who had come thither in defense of certain monks. Which our venerable brother, the bishop of Merseburg, understanding, informed and wrote to the emperor that you had approached the Roman church against the honor of the empire, and had obtained a privilege to its prejudice. Whereupon the emperor, being moved, appointed a curia for you, and ordered the privilege to be presented to himself, which, once received, he afterwards was unwilling to return to you.

Et dum in his et aliis te per episcopum gravari sentires, appellatione interposita sedem apostolicam visitasti, a qua per nuncios commissionis literis impetratis, partes iudices citaverunt, in causa ipsa iuxta formam mandati apostolici processuri. Verum dum haec agerentur, venerabilis frater noster Magdeburgensis archiepiscopus ad petitionem episcopi memorati de mandato imperiali te, ab officio beneficioque suspensum, a monasterii administratione removit, et curam eis duobus militibus assignavit.] Unde timens abbatiae periculum provenire, quum et tibi periculum immineret, Super controversiis, quae inter te et Mersburgensem episcopum, et quosdam tuos monachos vertebantur te promisisti arbitrium Magdeburgensis archiepiscopi fide in manibus eius hinc inde praestita servaturum, sicque factum est, ut ipse archiepiscopus, adiunctis sibi tam clericis quam laicis, [inter quos erat et dapifer imperialis,] sub certa forma arbitrium promulgaverit. [Posthaec iterum Romam veniens quae facta fuerant eidem praedecessori nostro diligenter exponere procurasti, cui et adversario tuo custodi Mersburgensi procuratori dicti episcopi nos ipsi, quum essemus in minori officio constituti, et dilecti filii I. tit.

And while in these and other matters you felt yourself aggrieved by the bishop, an appeal having been interposed you visited the apostolic see, from which, through envoys, having obtained letters of commission, the judges cited the parties, being about to proceed in that case according to the form of the apostolic mandate. Verily, while these things were being transacted, our venerable brother the archbishop of Magdeburg, at the petition of the aforesaid bishop, by imperial mandate, removed you, suspended from office and benefice, from the administration of the monastery, and assigned the care to those two knights.] Whence, fearing danger to befall the abbacy, since danger was also impending for you, Super the controversies which were turning between you and the bishop of Merseburg, and certain of your monks, you promised that you would observe the arbitration of the archbishop of Magdeburg, faith having been given in his hands on both sides, and thus it was done, that the archbishop himself, clerics as well as laymen having been joined to him, [among whom was also the imperial seneschal,] under a certain form promulgated an arbitration. [After these things, coming again to Rome, you took care diligently to set forth to that same predecessor of ours the things that had been done, to whom both your adversary, the custos of Merseburg, the procurator of the said bishop, and we ourselves, when we were established in a lesser office, and the beloved son I., tit.

S. Stephani in Coelio Monte, et I. tit. S. Priscae presbyteri cardinales deputati fuimus auditores, et tandem, auditis quae partes duxerant proponenda, sub certa forma de consensu partium causa commissa fuit iudicibus delegatis, videlicet, ut de omnibus diligenter inquirerent, excepto, quod indagationem libertatis eiusdem monasterii cum duabus capellis apostolicae sedis examini per omnia reservarent. Quum itaque iudices delegati partes ad suam praesentiam auctoritate apostolica evocassent, memoratus episcopus delegatos ipsos suspectos sibi proposuit et causas suspicionis multiplices assignavit.

We were deputed as auditors, the presbyter-cardinals of St. Stephen on the Caelian Mount, and I., of the title of St. Prisca; and at length, the things which the parties had decided to propose having been heard, under a certain form, by the consent of the parties, the case was committed to delegated judges, namely, that they should diligently inquire into all things, except that they should in all respects reserve the investigation of the liberty of the same monastery together with the two chapels to the examination of the Apostolic See. Therefore, when the delegated judges had, by apostolic authority, summoned the parties to their presence, the aforesaid bishop declared those same delegates suspect to him and assigned multiple causes of suspicion.

Consequenter etiam eorum volens iudicium declinare, sedem apostolicam appellavit, sed reversus postmodum coram eisdem sacramentum calumniae praestitit, testes produxit, petitis dilationibus et obtentis. Ipsi ergo iudices procedentes in causa, auditis utriusque partis rationibus et plenius intellectis, gesta omnia sigillorum suorum munimine roborata ad sedem apostolicam destinarunt, terminum partibus imponentes, quo recepturae sententiam apostolico se conspectui personaliter praesentarent. Ad quem tu personaliter accedens, episcopus pro se misit dilectos filios H. Mersburgensem canonicum et B. S. Nicolai Mersburgensis scholasticum responsales; qui gesta, quae delegati transmiserant, nec publicari debere dicebant, nec fidem eis penitus adhibendam, quum et a suspectis iudicibus, et post appellationem legitime interpositam recepta fuerint et descripta; parte tua contrarium postulante, praesertim quia, ut firmiter asserebat, nuncii memorati personam standi iudicio non habebant, quum excommunicati essent, et episcopo fuisset sub poena suspensionis iniunctum, ut ad causam agendam in propria persona veniret; quod quum non fecerit, poenam suspensionis incurrit, quem praedicti nuncii propter aegritudinem et senectutem personaliter ad Romanam ecclesiam non posse accedere proponebant, alia, quae ipsis obiecta fuerant, denegantes.

Consequently, likewise wishing to decline their judgment, he appealed to the apostolic see; but, having returned afterward, he rendered before those same men the oath of calumny, produced witnesses, delays having been requested and obtained. Therefore the judges themselves, proceeding in the case, after the arguments of each party had been heard and more fully understood, dispatched all the acts, strengthened by the safeguard of their seals, to the apostolic see, imposing a term upon the parties, on which, about to receive the sentence, they should present themselves personally to the apostolic presence. To which you personally coming, the bishop on his own behalf sent as representatives his beloved sons H., a Merseburg canon, and B., the scholastic of St. Nicholas of Merseburg; who said that the acts which the delegates had transmitted ought neither to be published nor to have any faith at all given to them, since they had been received and written up both by suspected judges and after an appeal had been legitimately interposed; your side requesting the contrary, especially because, as it firmly asserted, the aforesaid envoys did not have a persona to stand in judgment, since they were excommunicated, and it had been enjoined upon the bishop under the penalty of suspension that he should come in his own person to conduct the case; which, since he did not do, he incurred the penalty of suspension, whom the aforesaid envoys alleged could not personally come to the Roman church on account of sickness and old age, denying the other things which had been objected against them.

Qui pro ipso episcopo factum taliter proponebant, quod quum ab eo, tanquam a tuo praelato, abbatiam et sacerdotium percepisses, sicut fueras in iure confessus, propter pravam conversationem tuam super multis enormitatibus coepisti a monachis conveniri, inter quos episcopus pacem et concordiam saepius reformavit, monens te, ut ad frugem melioris vitae transires. Quum autem fratres per ea, quae iugiter faciebas, de tua emendatione nullatenus iam sperarent, contra te proposuerunt in synodo de dilapidatione, quod res monasterii pauperum usibus deputatas voluptuose consumeres, et pro defectu necessariorum religio ibi penitus deperiret, te etiam de sacrilegio, simonia, aliisque multis criminibus impetebant, interdum coram episcopo, quandoque in praesentia cardinalis, quem episcopus tamdiu sustinuit, quod monachis denegare iustitiam dicebatur. Citatus exinde ab episcopo, nuncium misisti super omni gravamine, quod tibi possit inferri per sententiam archiepiscopi, provocantem.

Those who acted for the bishop on his behalf set forth the case thus: that whereas from him, as from your prelate, you had received the abbacy and the priesthood, as you had confessed in law, because of your depraved conversation regarding many enormities you began to be convened by the monks; among whom the bishop often reformed peace and concord, admonishing you to pass over to the fruit of a better life. But when the brothers, through the things which you were continually doing, could now in no way hope for your emendation, they brought a charge against you in synod for dilapidation, namely that you were luxuriously consuming the goods of the monastery deputed to the uses of the poor, and that for lack of necessaries the religion there was utterly perishing; they were also impugning you for sacrilege, simony, and many other crimes, sometimes before the bishop, sometimes in the presence of the cardinal, whom the bishop bore with so long that he was said to deny justice to the monks. Thereafter, when cited by the bishop, you sent a messenger appealing against every grievance that could be inflicted on you by the sentence of the archbishop.

Quum autem neque per te neque per nuncium ad archiepiscopum accessisses, ipse archiepiscopus appellationi tam generaliter factae in praeiudicium ecclesiae iudicavit nullatenus deferendum. Episcopus itaque, habito prudentum consilio, citatum denuo te ab officio beneficioque suspendit. Interim superveniens dilectus filius noster I. tit.

But when you had approached the archbishop neither in person nor by a messenger, the archbishop himself judged that no deference at all should be paid to an appeal made so generally, to the prejudice of the Church. Therefore the bishop, having taken counsel of prudent men, suspended you, cited anew, from office and benefice. Meanwhile, arriving on the scene, our beloved son I., of the title,

sancti Stephani in Coelio monte presbyter cardinalis, tunc apostolicae sedis legatus, ad dictam abbatiam accessit, ut componeret inter te et monachos memoratos. Sed te in villis proximis latitante, et magistro Ulrico allegante, dictus cardinalis latam in te suspensionis sententiam confirmavit. Sic ergo latenter Romam veniens, commissionis literas veritate tacita, et sub specie renovationis privilegium, quod nunquam ante habueras, impetrasti.

the presbyter cardinal of St. Stephen on the Caelian Mount, then legate of the Apostolic See, approached the said abbey to compose matters between you and the aforesaid monks. But with you lurking in the neighboring villas, and Master Ulric alleging, the said cardinal confirmed the sentence of suspension laid against you. Thus, therefore, coming secretly to Rome, with the truth kept silent, you obtained letters of commission, and under the guise of renovation a privilege which you had never before possessed.

Quumque iudices delegati episcopo suspecti essent et monachis, a quibus nec unius diei poterant inducias obtinere, appellatione interposita ab episcopi nunciis, statim, quum privilegium subreptitium legeretur, partes nuncios suos ad sedem apostolicam transmiserunt, de quorum assensu causa tandem fuit aliis iudicibus sub certa forma commissa, sicut in commissionis literis continetur. Sed quum non omnes possent examinationi causae propter nimiam distantiam interesse, dilectus filius abbas de Goizoche, una cum venerabilibus fratribus nostris dicto archiepiscopo, Babenbergensi et Misnensi episcopis, et quam plurimis ecclesiarum praelatis, inter episcopum, te et monachos pacem et concordiam reformavit. Iterum autem ad Romanam ecclesiam latenter accedens, et proponens multa contra monachos et episcopum, ad duos iudicum illorum, quos superius episcopo diximus esse suspectos, et a quibus nuper ipse episcopus per nuncios appellaverat, commissorias literas impetrasti.

And when the delegated judges were suspect to the bishop and to the monks, from whom they could not obtain a truce of even a single day, an appeal having been interposed by the bishop’s nuncios, immediately, when the surreptitious privilege was being read, the parties sent their nuncios to the Apostolic See, by whose assent the case was at length committed to other judges under a certain form, as is contained in the letters of commission. But since not all could be present at the examination of the cause on account of excessive distance, our beloved son, the abbot of Goizoche, together with our venerable brothers, the said archbishop, the bishops of Bamberg and of Meissen, and very many prelates of churches, restored peace and concord between the bishop, you, and the monks. Again, however, approaching the Roman Church covertly, and proposing many things against the monks and the bishop, you obtained commissory letters to two of those judges whom above we said to be suspect to the bishop, and from whom lately the bishop himself had, through nuncios, appealed.

Qui quum iustas exceptiones episcopi non admitterent, quas in continenti probare volebat, sedem apostolicam appellavit. Sed ipsis in causa nihilominus procedentibus, invitus accessit ad eos, timens, ne sua iustitia deperiret. Quum autem post alia, quae iudices ipsi proprio motu fecerant, terminum publicandis attestationibus praefixissent, venientibus partibus unus tantum comparuit de iudicibus cum alterius nuncio, qui nec habebat ad alios literas, nec cavere volebat, quod dominus suus vices suas praesenti iudici commisisset.

When they would not admit the bishop’s just exceptions, which he wished to prove on the spot, he appealed to the Apostolic See. But as they nonetheless proceeded in the case, he approached them unwillingly, fearing lest his justice should perish. When, moreover, after other things which the judges themselves had done of their own motion, they had fixed a term for the attestations to be published, the parties having come, only one of the judges appeared, with the messenger of another, who neither had letters to the others, nor was willing to warrant that his lord had committed his functions to the present judge.

Sicque factum est, quod solus Numburgensis praepositus, licet tribus sigillis appositis, gesta descripserit, quae fuerant ad sedem apostolicam destinata; unde dicebant fidem eis nullatenus adhibendam, et quia ipsum instrumentum relationis ipsorum iudicum fuit in superficie vitiosum, et datum ab eo, quem plurimis dicunt excommunicationis vinculis innodatum. Verum praemissa fere omnia pro episcopi parte proposita, tu veritate destitui firmiter asserebas. Quia vero memoratus episcopus eo, quod iuramentum praestitit de calumnia, et a delegatis inducias postulavit, et testes coram eis produxit, appellationi renunciasse videtur, et eorum examini consensisse, nos habito fratrum consilio in praemissa incidenti quaestione interlocuti fuimus, quod deberent quae coram praedictis iudicibus gesta fuerant publicari, ut secundum tenorem ipsorum nostra tandem sententia formaretur.] Tibi igitur et procuratoribus episcopi supradicti venerabilem fratrem nostrum O. Hostiensem episcopum et dilectum filium P. tit.

And so it came about that the provost of Naumburg alone, although with three seals affixed, had written up the acts which were destined for the apostolic see; whence they said that no credence at all was to be given to them, and that the very instrument of the report of those judges was on the face defective, and issued by one whom they say is knotted in very many bonds of excommunication. But you were firmly asserting that almost all the aforesaid things set forth for the bishop’s side were destitute of truth. Now, because the aforesaid bishop, in that he took the oath concerning calumny, and asked adjournments from the delegates, and produced witnesses before them, seems to have renounced the appeal and to have consented to their examination, we, having taken counsel with the brothers, in the aforesaid incidental question delivered an interlocutory ruling, that the things which had been done before the aforesaid judges ought to be published, so that according to their tenor our sentence at length might be formed.] To you therefore and to the procurators of the above-said bishop, our venerable brother O., bishop of Ostia, and our beloved son P., tit.

S. Caeciliae presbyterum cardinalem dedimus auditores; qui quum ea, quae fuerant hinc inde proposita et ostensa, nobis et fratribus nostris fideliter retulissent, Quia tam per confessiones, quam per attestationes legitime constitit, quod fide hinc inde data compromissum est in archiepiscopum memoratum et quorundam etiam aliorum, nos de consilio fratrum nostrorum arbitrium ab ipso prolatum decernimus observandum, illis duntaxat capitulis exceptis, quae contra libertatem ipsius monasterii et duarum capellarum eiusdem in arbitrio sunt expressa, quum, etsi sponte volueris de iure tamen nequiveris sine licentia Romani Pontificis renunciare privilegiis vel indulgentiis libertatis, quae monasterium illud indicant ad ius et proprietatem Romanae ecclesiae pertinere, praesertim quum in ultimae commissionis literis contineatur expressum quod [saepedictus] praedecessor noster super renuntiatione a te super privilegio et aliis scriptis facta nullum tibi vel successoribus tuis, aut etiam monasterio et duabus capellis de Pigavia praeiudicium voluit generari. [Dat. Romae ap. S. Petr.

We appointed as auditors the presbyter cardinal of St. Cecilia; who, when they had faithfully reported to us and to our brothers the things that had on both sides been proposed and shown, because both through confessions and through attestations it was legitimately established that, faith having been given on both sides, a compromise was made to the aforesaid archbishop and also certain others, we, by the counsel of our brothers, decree that the arbitration pronounced by him is to be observed, with only those chapters excepted which, in the arbitral decision, are expressed against the liberty of that monastery and its two chapels, since, even if you wished it of your own accord, yet by right you could not, without license of the Roman Pontiff, renounce the privileges or indulgences of liberty which indicate that that monastery pertains to the right and property of the Roman Church, especially since in the letters of the last commission it is expressly contained that the [oft-mentioned] predecessor of ours, concerning the renunciation made by you touching the privilege and other writings, wished no prejudice to be generated for you or your successors, or even for the monastery and the two chapels of Pigavia. [Given at Rome at St. Peter’s.

III. Id. Iul. 1198.]

July 13, 1198.]

CAP. VI.

CHAPTER 6.

Arbiter non habet potestatem iudicandi ultra comprehensa in compromisso; ideo coram eo non fit reconventio.

An arbiter does not have the power of judging beyond the matters comprehended in the compromise; therefore, before him no reconvention takes place.

Idem Episcopo S. Andreae et Abbati de Bechot.

The same, to the Bishop of St. Andrew and to the Abbot of Bechot.

Quum dilectus filius [abbas et canonici de Kambuskinel dilectos filios abbatem et monachos de Dunfermelin dioecesis sancti Andreae coram venerabili fratre nostro Ö Dublinensi episcopo et dilectis filiis Ö de Cupro et Ö de Soona abbatibus eiusdem dioecesis super quibusdam decimis ad ecclesiam suam de Egles spectantibus, et damnis et iniuriis irrogatis auctoritate literarum nostrarum traxissent in causam, et ipsi eosdem abbatem et canonicos ex delegatione nostra coram dilectis filiis Ö priore sanctae crucis et Ö decano de Tiningham praedictae dioecesis, ac te, fili officialis, super capella de Dunipast et decimis ad eandem spectantibus convenissent, utraque pars in vos post allegationes et altercationes multiplices compromisit, ut vos in negotiis ipsis secundum iuris ordinem procedentes, controversias ipsas tam super possessione quam proprietate appellatione postposita iudicio vel concordia finiretis; praestito corporaliter iuramento firmantes, quod quicquid super iis duo vestrum tecum, frater episcope, si non possetis omnes pariter concordare, ducerent statuendum, ratum haberent et firmiter observarent, nec processum arbitrii dolo vel malitia impedirent. Vos igitur auditis hinc inde propositis, receptis testibus, et publicatis depositionibus eorundem, quia super quatuor articulis dubitastis, causam instructam ad nostram praesentiam transmisistis, super quatuor illis dubitabilibus apostolicae sedis oraculum implorantes. Ex eo siquidem coram vobis prima quaestio est exorta, quod, quum canonici monachos super praedictis decimis convenissent, monachi super quibusdam aliis decimis convenire volebant eosdem, licet de eis in vos non fruerit compromissum.

When the beloved son [the abbot and canons of Kambuskinel had drawn the beloved sons, the abbot and monks of Dunfermline of the diocese of St. Andrews, into suit before our venerable brother Ö, bishop of Dublin, and the beloved sons Ö of Coupar and Ö of Scone, abbots of the same diocese, by authority of our letters, concerning certain tithes belonging to their church of Egles, and concerning damages and injuries inflicted; and they in turn, by our delegation, had proceeded against the same abbot and canons before the beloved sons Ö, prior of the Holy Cross, and Ö, dean of Tiningham of the aforesaid diocese, and you, son, the official, concerning the chapel of Dunipace and the tithes belonging to the same; each party compromised to you, after many allegations and altercations, that you, proceeding in the very matters according to the order of law, should end those controversies, both over possession and over property, appeal being set aside, by judgment or by concord; strengthening this by a corporal oath taken, that whatever two of you together with you, brother bishop, should deem to be established, if you could not all agree together, they would hold valid and firmly observe, nor would they impede the progress of the arbitration by deceit or malice. You therefore, the proposals on either side having been heard, the witnesses received, and their depositions published, because you doubted concerning four articles, sent the case, being prepared, to our presence, imploring the oracle of the Apostolic See concerning those four doubtful points. From this indeed before you the first question arose, that, when the canons had proceeded against the monks concerning the aforesaid tithes, the monks wished to proceed against those same canons concerning certain other tithes, although concerning them there had not been a compromise to you.]

Asserebat enim pars monachorum, quod secundum legitimas sanctiones is, qui coram aliquo convenitur, coram eodem convenire valet eundem.] Unde Utrum coram arbitris reconventioni sit locus, postulasti per sedem apostolicam explicari [Secunda vero etc. (cf. c. 9. de fide instr. II. 23.)] Nos igitur discretioni vestrae super primo articulo taliter respondemus, quod, licet in iudicio convenientem reconvenire valeat is, qui coram iudice convenitur, coram arbitris tamen reconvenire non potest, quum arbitri iudicare non valeant nisi de his tantum, super quibus in eos exstiterit compromissum.

For the party of the monks was asserting that, according to lawful sanctions, he who is convened (summoned) before someone is able before that same person to convene the same by way of reconvention.] Whence you asked through the apostolic see to have it explained whether before arbiters there is room for reconvention [Second indeed, etc. (cf. c. 9. on the instruction of the faith 2. 23.)]. We therefore thus respond to your discretion on the first article, that, although in a trial he who is convened before a judge may reconvene (counter‑sue) the other, yet before arbiters he cannot reconvene, since arbiters are not able to judge except only concerning those matters about which there has been a compromise (submission) to them.

[Ad secundam etc. (cf. c. 9. de fide instr. II. 23.) Dat.

[To the second, etc. (cf. c. 9. de fide instr. II. 23.) Given.

Lat. XIII. Kal.

Lateran, on the 13th day before the Kalends.

Apr. Ao. X. 1207.]

Apr. Year 10, 1207.]

CAP. VII.

CHAPTER 7.

Qui per arbitrium tenetur eligere cum aliquorum consilio, tenetur illorum consilium in tractatu electionis requirere, sed sequi non adstringitur.

He who is bound, by discretion, to elect with the counsel of some persons, is bound to require their counsel in the transaction of the election, but he is not constrained to follow it.

Idem Rectori et Fratribus hospitalis S. Bartholomaei Lucani.

The same, to the Rector and the Brothers of the hospital of St. Bartholomew of Lucania.

Quum olim super eligendis in hospitali vestro rectore et fratribus inter vos et dilectum filium priorem ecclesiae sancti Bartholomaei Lucani coram priore S. Fridiani et primicerio S. Martini Lucanensis a sede apostolica iudicibus delegatis quaestio verteretur, et utraque pars in eos compromittens ipsorum arbitrium se promiserit servaturum ac ipsi iudices certum duxerint arbitrium proferendum, super prolato ab ipsis arbitrio utrinque dubitatio est exorta, quam petistis per sedem apostolicam declarari. Nos igitur publico instrumento arbitrium continente diligenter inspecto cognovimus, quod secundum formam arbitrii prior sancti Bartholomaei Lucani tenetur habere consilium cum familia hospitalis eiusdem et tractare cum ea de inveniendo rectore; sed sive concordet sive discordet familia cum ipso priore, idem prior eligere debet in utroque casu rectorem. Propter quod dicimus, quod nisi prior super inveniendo rectore tractaverit cum familia hospitalis, et ipsius consilium requisierit, non habet potestatem eligendi rectorem, et, si alio modo eum elegerit, eius electio haberi debet irrita et inanis.

When formerly a question was in dispute, concerning the choosing in your hospital of a rector and brothers, between you and the beloved son, the prior of the church of Saint Bartholomew of Lucca, before the prior of St. Fridianus and the primicerius of St. Martin of Lucca, judges delegated by the Apostolic See, and each party, compromising to them, promised that it would observe their arbitration, and the judges themselves deemed that a definite award should be rendered, over the award pronounced by them a doubt arose on both sides, which you asked to be declared by the Apostolic See. We therefore, the public instrument containing the arbitration having been diligently inspected, have learned that, according to the form of the award, the prior of Saint Bartholomew of Lucca is bound to have counsel with the familia of the same hospital and to treat with it about finding a rector; but whether the familia agrees or disagrees with the prior himself, the same prior ought in either case to elect the rector. Wherefore we say that unless the prior shall have treated with the familia of the hospital concerning finding a rector and shall have sought its counsel, he does not have the power of electing a rector; and, if he shall have elected him in any other way, his election ought to be held null and void.

Verum, habito cum familia super hoc consilio et tractatu de inveniendo rectore, ipse prior libere potest rectorem eligere, duntaxat idoneum, sive concordet sive discordet familia cum ipso super inventione rectoris. [Ne vero etc. Dat.

However, once counsel has been held with the family on this and a consultation conducted about finding a rector, the prior himself can freely choose a rector, provided only that he be suitable, whether the family agrees or disagrees with him about the finding of the rector. [Lest indeed etc. Given.]

Sorae IV. Non Aug. Pontif. nostr.

At Sora, on the 4th of the Nones of Aug., of our pontificate.

Ao. XI. 1208.]

Year 11. 1208.]

CAP. VIII.

CHAPTER 8.

De rebus spiritualibus in laicum compromitti non potest.

Concerning spiritual matters, it cannot be committed to a layman for arbitration.

Idem in concilio generali.

The same in the general council.

Contingit interdum, quod, quum actori (Et infra: [cf. c. 9. de col. et cont. II. 14.]) Ad hoc generaliter prohibemus, ne super rebus spiritualibus compromittatur in laicum, quia non decet, ut laicus in talibus arbitretur.

It happens at times that, when for the plaintiff (And below: [cf. c. 9. de col. et cont. 2. 14.]) For this we generally forbid that, concerning spiritual matters, it be compromised to a layman, because it is not fitting that a layman arbitrate in such things.

CAP. IX.

CHAPTER 9.

Auctoritate iudicis etiam delegati potest de causa spirituali in clericum et laicum compromitti, et, si arbitrium est a partibus receptum, debet a partibus exsecutioni mandari, licet per generalem procuratorem factum fuerit compromissum. Si autem non fuit arbitrium approbatum, et poena fuit apposita, agitur ad poenam, alias ad interesse. H. d. generaliter inhaerendo literae.

By authority of a judge, even a delegated one, a spiritual cause can be compromised (submitted to arbitration) concerning both a cleric and a layman; and, if the arbitrium has been received by the parties, it ought by the parties to be committed to execution, even if the compromissum was made through a general procurator. But if the arbitrium was not approved, and a penalty was appended, one proceeds for the penalty; otherwise, for the interesse (damages). This holds generally, adhering to the letter.

Idem Pisano Archiepiscopo.

The same, to the Archbishop of Pisa.

Per tuas nobis literas intimasti, quod, quum super exsecutione arbitrii, quod inter Hospitalarios sancti Ioannis et plebanum de Piscia super hospitali sancti Allucii latum erat, a nobis literas accepisses, partibus in tua praesentia constitutis, Hospitalarii a te exsecutionem arbitrii postulabant, asserentes, illud debere observari pro eo, quod procurator plebani sponte in arbitros iuramento interposito compromisit, quoniam dicebat, potestatem compromittendi et transigendi super eodem negotio recepisse. Plebanus proposuit ex adverso, quod ad causam tractandam praedicto procuratori dedit generale mandatum; non tamen ei mandavit, ut sine speciali mandato suo compromittere posset vel transigere super eo; et praeterea procurator iam dictus de assensu canonicorum suorum non fuerat institutus. Et ideo dicebat id arbitrium non valere, praesertim quum procurator fines mandati excesserit et arbitrium fuerit per unum clericum et duos laicos promulgatum, licet ipsi de assensu venerabilis fratris nostri Genuensis archiepiscopi, cui causa commissa fuerat, arbitrium protulissent.

Through your letters you intimated to us that, when, concerning the execution of the award which had been delivered between the Hospitallers of Saint John and the plebanus of Pescia regarding the hospital of Saint Allucius, you had received letters from us, the parties having been set in your presence, the Hospitallers were demanding from you the execution of the award, asserting that it ought to be observed for this reason: that the procurator of the plebanus had of his own accord compromised to the arbitrators with an oath interposed, since he said he had received authority of compromising and transacting regarding the same matter. The plebanus set forth on the contrary that he had given to the aforesaid procurator a general mandate to handle the case; yet he did not mandate him that, without his special mandate, he could compromise or transact upon it; and moreover the said procurator had not been appointed with the assent of his canons. And therefore he said that that award was not valid, especially since the procurator had exceeded the bounds of the mandate and the award had been promulgated by one cleric and two laymen, although they had delivered the award with the assent of our venerable brother, the Archbishop of Genoa, to whom the cause had been committed.

Unde, quum super his dubietas fuisset exorta, per apostolicae sedis oraculum edoceri petiisti, qualiter super negotio ipso tibi sit procedendum. Super quo fraternitati tuae taliter respondemus, quod, si ex parte plebani arbitrium receptum fuerit, indistincte ratum haberi debet, ac per hoc iuxta tenorem mandati apostolici exsecutioni mandari. Si vero receptum non fuerit, refert, utrum fuerit vel non fuerit de observando ipsum poena statuta.

Whence, when a dubiety had arisen concerning these things, you sought to be taught by the oracle of the Apostolic See how you should proceed in the matter itself. On which we thus respond to your fraternity: if on the part of the pleban the arbitration has been received, it ought, without distinction, to be held ratified, and thereby to be committed to execution according to the tenor of the apostolic mandate. But if it has not been received, it makes a difference whether or not a penalty was stipulated for observing it.

Et quidem si poena fuerit apposita in compromissione, agi potest ad poenam. At si nulla poena statuta fuerit sed simpliciter, quod staretur sententiae, fuerit compromissum, procurator ad interesse poterit conveniri, quia iuramento suo se ipsum personaliter, non ecclesiam poterat obligare. Quod autem a duobus laicis et uno clerico dicitur esse prolatum, nequaquam obviare videtur, quum auctoritate dicti archiepiscopi factum sit, cui causa de qua, dicitur compromissum, fuerat delegata.

And indeed, if a penalty has been appended in the compromission, action can be brought for the penalty. But if no penalty has been stipulated, but it has been simply compromised that the sentence should be abided by, the procurator can be proceeded against for the interesse (damages), because by his oath he could bind himself personally, not the church. But as to its being said to have been pronounced by two laymen and one cleric, it seems by no means to be an obstacle, since it was done by authority of the said archbishop, to whom the cause in question, about which it is said there was a compromissum, had been delegated.

CAP. X.

CHAPTER 10.

Si per duos electos ad eandem praelaturam in discordia compromittitur in ordinarium, morte alterius compromittentium exspirat compromissum; ordinarius tamen ex potestate ordinaria procedit super iure superstitis, antequam fiat transitus ad aliam electionem. H. d.

If by two persons elected to the same prelature, being in discord, the matter is compromised to the ordinary, by the death of one of the compromitting parties the compromise expires; nevertheless the ordinary proceeds by ordinary power concerning the right of the survivor, before transit is made to another election. H. d.

Honorius III. Archiepiscopo Coloniensi.

Honorius 3. To the Archbishop of Cologne.

Ex parte tua nostris est auribus intimatum, quod, vacante praepositura sancti Cuniberti in Colonia, canonici eiusdem ecclesiae electioni die praefixa de praeficiendo sibi praeposito discordantes vota sua diviserunt, in duos, quorum unum videlicet H. de Iuliaco, et C. de Lombardia. Quumque postmodum tractaretur super electione huiusmodi, et partes essent in tua praesentia constitutae, in te demum super hoc fide praestita compromittere curaverunt, qui causae meritis diligenter inspectis et cognitis ad proferendam diffinitivam sententiam diem ipsis consentientibus praefixisti. Interim vero praefato H. ab una parte electo sublato de medio, supradictis canonicis inhibere curasti, ne tua pendente sententia procederetur ab ipsis ad electionem aliam faciendam, quorum quidam nihilominus B. de Ahrberch Coloniensem canonicum elegerunt.

On your part it has been intimated to our ears that, the provostship of Saint Cunibert at Cologne being vacant, the canons of the same church, on the day fixed for the election for appointing a provost over themselves, being at variance divided their votes into two, namely for H. of Jülich and for C. of Lombardy. And when thereafter it was being dealt with concerning an election of this sort, and the parties had been constituted in your presence, at length they took care, faith having been pledged, to compromise the matter upon you; and you, the merits of the cause having been diligently inspected and known, with their consent fixed a day for pronouncing the definitive sentence. Meanwhile, however, the aforesaid H., elected by the one party, having been taken away from the midst, you took care to inhibit the aforesaid canons, lest, while your sentence was pending, there should be a proceeding by them to make another election; nevertheless some of them elected B. of Ahrberch, a canon of Cologne.

Die igitur, quo sententia proferri debuit, in tua praesentia partibus constitutis, et praefato C., ut diffinitivam proferres sententiam, postulante, dictus B. e contrario allegavit, quod procedere ulterius non deberes. Quapropter tibi, edoceri a nobis humiliter postulanti, breviter respondemus, quod, licet arbitrium sit finitum per mortem ipsius H., prius tamen de primae electionis meritis debuisti cognoscere, quam processus fieret ad secundam. Nam si forte dictus C., qui est superstes, in electione ius habet, de qua compromissio facta fuit in te, electionem secundam constat penitus non valere [XIV.

Therefore, on the day on which the sentence ought to have been pronounced, with the parties set in your presence, and the aforesaid C. requesting that you pronounce the definitive sentence, the said B., on the contrary, alleged that you ought not to proceed further. Wherefore, to you, humbly asking to be instructed by us, we briefly respond that, although the arbitration has been finished by the death of H. himself, nonetheless you ought first to have taken cognizance of the merits of the first election before there was a process to the second. For if perhaps the said C., who is surviving, has a right in the election about which a compromise (compromissio) was made to you, the second election is established to be utterly of no validity [14.

Kal. Iul. Ao. II. 1218.]

Kalends of July, Year 2, 1218.]

CAP. XI.

CHAPTER 11.

Arbiter post rem iudicatam super discordiis novis assumptus, non potest per suum arbitrium sententiam immutare, etiamsi de componendo inter partes mandatum acceperit a Papa.

An arbiter, appointed after the res judicata with respect to new discords, cannot by his own arbitrament alter the sentence, even if he has received from the Pope a mandate for composing between the parties.

Idem Electo et Abbati sancti Zenonis et C. Canonico Veronensi.

The same to the Elect and to the Abbot of St. Zeno and to C., Canon of Verona.

Exposita nobis dilecti filii O. Feltrensis et Belvensis electi petitio continebat, quod, quum causa, quae quondam inter bonae memoriae antecessorem suum ex parte una, et cives Tervisinos ex altera super districtu et iurisdictione ac rebus aliis vertebatur, per sententiam venerabilis fratris nostri Hostiensis episcopi tunc apostolicae sedis legati fuerit terminata, et ipsius antecessor electi adiudicata sibi per legatum eundem diu pacifice possedisset, ipse nihilominus, habito tandem capitulorum suorum assensu in praeiudicium ecclesiarum suarum tandem super quibusdam discordiis, quae hinc inde videbantur exortae, in nobilem virum ducem Venetorum tanquam in arbitrum cum parte altera compromisit, qui veniens contra eandem sententiam auctoritate apostolica confirmatam, super rebus iudicatis ab eodem legato adversus praedictas ecclesias aequitate postposita iniquum arbitrium promulgavit. Licet autem eidem duci literas nostras miserimus, ut ad componendum inter partes laborare deberet, quum tamen intentionis nostrae non fuerit immutare sententiam ipsam, vel sopitas per eam querimonias suscitare, discretioni vestrae [per apostolica scripta] mandamus, quatenus, praefatis literis non obstantibus, quicquid per praenominati ducis arbitrium contra ipsius legati sententiam inveneritis esse factum, in irritum revocetis, ei districtius inhibentes, ne ulterius in compromisso procedat, et eundem ad restitutionem obsidum et cuiusdam castri occasione illius compromissi sibi datorum, ut ipsius arbitrium servaretur, per censuram ecclesiasticam appellatione postposita compellentes. [Dat.

Once set forth to us, the petition of our beloved son O., the Elect of Feltre and Belluno, contained that, since the case which formerly was in dispute between his predecessor of good memory on the one side and the citizens of Treviso on the other, concerning the district and jurisdiction and other matters, had been terminated by the sentence of our venerable brother, the bishop of Ostia, then legate of the Apostolic See, and his predecessor had long and peacefully possessed what was adjudicated to him by that same legate, nevertheless he himself, having at length obtained the assent of his chapters, to the prejudice of his churches, upon certain discords which seemed to have arisen on either side, made a compromise with the other party to the noble man, the duke of the Venetians, as to an arbiter, who, coming in contradiction to that same sentence confirmed by apostolic authority, on matters already adjudged (res iudicata) by that same legate, against the aforesaid churches, with equity set aside, promulgated an iniquitous arbitral award. Although indeed we sent our letters to the same duke, that he ought to labor at composing between the parties, yet since it was not our intention to alter that sentence or to awaken complaints lulled to rest by it, we command to your discretion [through apostolic writings], that, the aforesaid letters notwithstanding, whatever you shall find to have been done by the arbitral award of the aforementioned duke against the sentence of that legate, you revoke to nullity, strictly forbidding him to proceed further in the compromise, and compelling him, by ecclesiastical censure with appeal set aside, to the restitution of the hostages and of a certain castle given to him on the occasion of that compromise, in order that his award might be observed. [Given.

Reate VIII. Id. Sept. Ao. X. 1225.]

Rieti 8th before the Ides of Sept. Year 10. 1225.]

CAP. XII.

CHAPTER 12.

Non valet compromissum factum in duos sive plures, hoc adiecto, ut in casu discordiae eligatur tertius per eosdem vel alios. H. d.

A compromissory agreement made to two or more, with this added, that in a case of discord a third be chosen by the same persons or by others, is not valid. H. d.

Gregorius IX. Decano et Magistro P. Canonico S. Petri Atrebatensis dioecesis.

Gregory 9. To the Dean and to Master P., Canon of St. Peter, of the diocese of Arras.

Innotuit nobis Guilielmo laico conquerente, quod, quum O. laicus ipsum super quadam summa pecuniae coram iudicibus auctoritate apostolica convenisset, tandem fuit a partibus in duos arbitros compromissum, sic tamen, quod, si illi duo adinvicem discordarent, tertium adderent iudices nominati, retenta penes se compellendi partes ad observandum arbitrium per dictos arbitros promulgandum nihilominus potestate. Quumque tertius arbiter a iudicibus praedictis electus cum altero duorum ipsum parti alteri condemnasset, idem, ex eo sentiens se a saepedictis iudicibus gravari, quod ipsum ad observantiam huiusmodi arbitrii compellebant, nostram appellavit audientiam; sed ipsi apellatione contempta excommunicationis tulerunt sententiam in eundem. Ideoque mandamus, quatenus, si est ita, quum legali sit provisione statutum, ut compromissum de incerta persona in arbitrium assumenda non teneat, dictam excommunicationis sententiam denuncietis penitus nullam esse.

It has become known to us, William, a layman, making complaint, that, when O., a layman, had convened him concerning a certain sum of money before judges by apostolic authority, at length there was by the parties a compromise to two arbitrators, with this proviso nevertheless: that, if those two should disagree with each other, the judges appointed would add a third, retaining with themselves nevertheless the power of compelling the parties to observe the arbitral award to be promulgated by the said arbitrators. And when the third arbiter, elected by the aforesaid judges, together with one of the two, had condemned him in favor of the other party, he, feeling himself aggrieved by the oft-said judges because they were compelling him to the observance of such an award, appealed to our hearing; but they, the appeal being held in contempt, pronounced a sentence of excommunication against him. Therefore we command that, if it is so—since by legal provision it is stipulated that a compromise concerning an uncertain person to be assumed into the arbitration does not hold—you publicly declare that the said sentence of excommunication is altogether null.

CAP. XIII.

CHAPTER 13.

Valet compromissum factum in unum, vel in plures, ut ipsi per se causam definiant, vel per alios, quos ipsi elegerint. H. d. secundum intellectum, quem sensit gloss. hic, et Innocentius in capite praecedenti, qui placet mihi.

The compromise made in one, or in several, is valid, so that they themselves may define the case by themselves, or through others whom they themselves have chosen. This is according to the understanding which the Gloss perceived here, and Innocent in the preceding chapter, which pleases me.

Panorm.

Panormitanus.

Idem Abbatissae et Conventui Iotrensi.

The same to the Abbess and the Convent of Iotra.

Quum a nobis petitur (Et infra:) Ex parte vestra fuit propositum, quod, olim inter vos et Senonensem archiepiscopum quaestione suborta, super eo, quod idem archiepiscopus, asserens monasterium vestrum metropolitico iure sibi subesse, procurationes et res alias exigebat a vobis, tandem in R. sancti Angeli diaconum cardinalem, tunc apostolicae sedis legatum, a partibus concorditer compromisso, et promisso sub certa poena, quod arbitrio seu ordinationi eiusdem, vel duorum mediatorum, quos idem super hoc deputaret, praecise parerent, magister P. capellanus noster, et I. archidiaconus Senonensis mediatores ab eodem super hoc deputati legato, ordinando et diffiniendo causam huiusmodi terminaverunt. Nos igitur quod per praedictos mediatores super hoc actum est auctoritate apostolica confirmamus.

When it is requested of us (And below:), it was put forward on your part that, once upon a time, a question having arisen between you and the Archbishop of Sens, on the point that the same archbishop, asserting that your monastery was subject to him by metropolitan right, was exacting procurations and other things from you, at length, by a concordant compromise of the parties to R., Cardinal Deacon of Saint Angel, then Legate of the Apostolic See, and with a promise under a certain penalty that they would precisely obey the judgment or ordination of the same, or of two mediators whom he would appoint over this, Master P., our chaplain, and I., Archdeacon of Sens, mediators appointed over this by the same legate, by ordaining and defining, brought this sort of cause to an end. We therefore confirm by apostolic authority what was done in this matter by the aforesaid mediators.

CAP. XIV.

CHAPTER 14.

Compromissum ante sententiam latam finitur morte alterius compromittentium; unde non transit in heredes compromittentium, nisi de eis sit cautum in compromisso. Hoc dicit comprehendendo mentem capituli.

The compromise, before the sentence has been delivered, is terminated by the death of one of the compromisers; whence it does not pass to the heirs of the compromisers, unless provision about them has been made in the compromise. He says this by comprehending the mind of the chapter.

Idem.

The same.

Compromissum non extenditur in compromittentis heredes, si de ipsis non caveatur ibidem.

The compromise does not extend to the compromitting party’s heirs, if provision concerning them is not made therein.

FINIS LIBRI PRIMI.

END OF BOOK ONE.