Title — Decretals of Gregory IX
Title XIV: On Clerics Fighting in a Duel
Chapter I
Latin source headnote: A cleric who enters a duel, whether he offered it or accepted it, is to be deposed; nevertheless, the bishop will be able to dispense with him if death or mutilation of a member did not follow from it.
Alexander III.
Furthermore, if a cleric voluntarily offered a duel to someone, or, if it was offered, accepted and undertook it, whether he was victor or vanquished, by the rigor of law he is deservedly to be deposed. But however grave and enormous his offense in this may be, he can escape the sentence of deposition if his bishop shall decide that a merciful dispensation should be granted to him, provided that homicide or the diminution of members did not follow from that duel.
DE CLERICIS PUGNANTIBUS IN DUELLO.
Clericus, iniens duellum, sive obtulerit sive susceperit, deponendus est; poterit tamen episcopus cum eo dispensare, si mors vel mutilatio membri non sit inde secuta.
Alexander III. Porro, si clericus alicui sponte duellum obtulerit, vel, si oblatum susceperit et subierit, sive victor sive victus fuerit, de rigore iuris est merito deponendus. Sed, quantumque eius in hoc gravis sit et enormis excessus, evadere potest depositionis sententiam, si cum ipso suus episcopus duxerit misericorditer dispensandum; dummodo ex ipso duello homicidium vel membrorum diminutio non fuerit subsecuta.
Chapter II
Latin source headnote: A cleric is irregular not only if he himself kills directly, but also if a champion furnished by him kills the adversary; nor does custom excuse him. Nevertheless, a dispensation can be granted to him concerning the holding of a benefice.
Celestine III.
Henry, the priest bearing the present letters, humbly informed us that, when he had proceeded against a certain layman concerning theft in a secular court, he, because his witnesses failed, introduced a champion according to the evil custom of the land, who wounded the accused with blows of the sword to such an extent that he was compelled to die the following night. Therefore, because you wished to consult us concerning this, we remove your uncertainty by this response: such champions are true killers, and the aforesaid priest, although not he himself but another fought for him in the duel, ought not to minister in sacred orders, as the institutions of the sacred canons also teach. There is no doubt, moreover, that homicide is perpetrated by deed as well as by command, or by counsel or defense; nevertheless, a merciful dispensation can be granted to him concerning the holding of a benefice.
Irregularis est clericus, non solum si ipse interficit per se, sed etiam si pugil, ab eo datus, adversarium occidat; nec excusat consuetudo. Poterit tamen cum eo circa beneficium habendum dispensari. Coelestinus III. Henricus presbyter lator praesentium nobis humiliter intimavit, quod, quum laicum quendam super furto in saeculari placito convenisset, ipse, quia testes sui defecerunt, pugilem secundum pravam terrae consuetudinem introduxit, qui reum usque adeo ictibus gladii vulneravit, quod coactus est nocte proxima exspirare. Quia igitur super hoc nos consulere voluisti, ambiguitatem tuam responsione huiusmodi removemus, quod tales pugiles homicidae veri exsistunt, nec praedictus sacerdos, licet non ipse, sed alius pro eo in duello pugnaverit, debet in sacris ordinibus ministrare, sicut etiam tradunt sacrorum canonum instituta. Homicidium autem tam facto quam praecepto, sive consilio aut defensione non est dubium perpetrari; poterit tamen cum eo circa habendum beneficium misericorditer dispensari.