Title XVIII: On Confessions

Latin source headnote: From the statement alone of one confessing his own crime, no penalty is to be inflicted upon another; nevertheless, purgation is to be enjoined upon one defamed.

Clement III.

When the monastery—(And below: [Cf. c. 13, On Election, I. 6.]) But concerning what you took care to attach to your letters—what you should do concerning a certain priest of the same monastery who, at the instigation of the devil, killed one of the brothers, as you publicly proposed that he confessed—we write back to your fraternity and command through apostolic writings that you shall not defer solemnly to degrade him from every divine office and to confine him in some monastery of the Cistercian order, in which, performing the penance imposed upon him for so great a crime, he may worthily lament there for as long as he lives what he committed. But those at whose suggestion the priest declares that he perpetrated the crime of homicide, unless it is established to you by other means and just reasons to be true, we judge are to be subjected to no penalty, since according to the statutes of both laws persons who have confessed concerning themselves ought not to be questioned concerning the consciences of others; and, except for the crime of injured majesty, the perilous confession of one confessing concerning his own guilt is not to be admitted against anyone. If, however, you learn that they labor under infamy of this kind, you shall enjoin purgation upon each of them with three associates of his order joined to him.

Latin source headnote: If a crime touching the principal cause is established against someone through his confession, he is punished with the ordinary penalty even if proceedings are not directed against him directly. This is what it says according to the gloss. And it is a noteworthy case and true in itself. Or summarize it thus according to another no less noteworthy understanding, which the gloss also holds although it does not explain it perfectly: If anyone incidentally confesses a crime in judgment, the ordinary judge, by beginning a new proceeding, can punish him with the ordinary penalty. This is what it says exceptionally. Abbas.

Innocent III, to the Canons of Bethlehem.

When a question was being conducted concerning the election of the Church of Bethlehem between R., your subdeacon, and P., canon of the Lord’s Sepulchre, recently in our presence—(And below: [Cf. c. 4, On the Cause of Possession, II. 12.]) Moreover, because V., canon of Bethlehem, confessed in law that, in return for furnishing his consent to the election of another, he had received an obligation and promise of five hundred Saracens and had acted as an intermediary of simoniacal depravity, we, understanding that a contract of this kind contained simoniacal depravity, because we wish to prosecute a vice of this kind as we ought, considered that he should, by definitive sentence, be deposed from every clerical order and from every ecclesiastical benefice and office.

Latin source headnote: A confession made in law by a church’s steward harms the church itself; it can nevertheless be revoked if, before the business is ended, it is shown to have issued from an error of fact. This is what it says.

Gregory IX, to B., Judge of Viterbo.

It was proposed [before us] on behalf of [the beloved sons], the abbot and convent of the monastery of Saint M. [on the mountain of Viterbo, of the Cistercian order], that, when a question was being conducted before you between them on the one side and V., [a citizen of Viterbo], in the name of his wife, on the other, [the parties finally submitted it to you as arbitrator under an agreed penalty. And when the suit proceeded before you by its own impetus], the steward of the aforesaid monastery, [who was prosecuting the same cause], confessed certain things in law through an error of fact, from which he fears that prejudice may be generated against it. [Wherefore they petitioned us that fitting provision be made for it concerning this.] Therefore, since an error of fact harms no one while the business is not yet ended, we command that, if [the aforesaid abbot and convent] can demonstrate an error of this kind, you shall provide [concerning this by our authority] that no prejudice is generated against it concerning this. [Given at Rieti on the twelfth day before the Kalends of February, in the fifth year [of our pontificate]. 1232.]