Question II

GRATIAN. PART I. That no one can be excommunicated or absolved after death is shown from the words of the Gospel in which it is said: “Whatever you shall have bound upon earth, etc.” “Upon earth,” he says, not beneath the earth, showing that we can loose or bind the living according to the diversity of their merits, but cannot render sentence concerning the dead. Hence Pope Leo writes to Rusticus, Bishop of Narbonne, [epistle 90, c. 7; otherwise epistle 92, c. 6]:

Concerning those deprived of communion and thus deceased. Their case is to be reserved for the judgment of God, in whose hand it was that the death of such persons should not be delayed until the remedy of communion. But we cannot communicate when dead with those with whom we did not communicate while they were living.

Likewise Gelasius, to Faustus the magister performing the office of legate at Constantinople. Let it be read, from the time the Christian religion began, or certainly let an example be given in the church of God, that pardon was granted by any pontiffs, or by the Apostles themselves, or finally by the Savior himself, except to those correcting themselves. But it is altogether neither read nor said that what their voice brings forth has been heard beneath this heaven: “Grant us pardon, yet so that we persist in error.” Likewise, let those who strive to oppose the canons to us show by which canons, which rules, which reading, or which document—whether from our forebears, or from the Apostles themselves, who without doubt were deservedly more powerful, or from the Lord the Savior himself, who is believed to be about to judge the living and the dead—this either was ever done or is commanded to be done. We read that Christ raised the dead; we do not read that he absolved those dead in error. And he who alone possessed so great a power of doing this principally commanded blessed Peter the Apostle: “Whatever you shall have bound upon earth, etc.” “Upon earth,” he says. For he nowhere said that one deceased in a bond was to be absolved.

Likewise Urban II to Bishop Vilimundus. Assuredly, we praise what your Fraternity made known that it did concerning Richard, son of Borrell, from zeal for God and love of souls. But it is not to be feared to such an extent; you are not to abstain from his alms to such an extent. For among the other fathers of our faith, blessed Leo, an outstanding doctor, says: “Those with whom we do not communicate while living, we ought not to communicate with when dead.” It is established, therefore, that with those with whom we communicate while they live—to speak from the opposite—we can also communicate when they are dead. We, plainly placed between two opposing groups, can in no way communicate with the impious and schismatics; but with these persons, although they are sinners and plunderers, we communicate dispensationally for a time, because they have supported the church until now and promise that they will be more faithful in the future. Otherwise, it would be necessary for us to depart from these regions of the world. Under this pledge we also recently granted them absolution on the feast of blessed Peter. Therefore, because the aforesaid man departed neither excommunicated by name nor communicating with persons excommunicated by name, but in the faith and service of his Lord, it is lawful for us dispensationally—that is, for as long as we tolerate them—to share in their alms and to assist the soul of the deceased by every means of the Christian religion.

And let no one at all persuade you that the crime of his prevarication was relaxed for Acacius, because he who, after falling back into the fellowship of depravity, deserved by right to be excluded from apostolic communion, and died while persisting in this same condemnation, now dead cannot obtain the absolution that while alive he neither sought at all nor merited. For it was delegated to the Apostles themselves by the voice of Christ: “The things that you shall have bound upon earth, and the rest.” But concerning him who has been placed under divine judgment, it is not lawful for us to decree anything other than that in which his final day found him. And therefore, unless his name and the other associates of this error have been rejected, you ought to share with none of them at all the purity of the Lord’s table, which our forebears always preserved carefully as separate from heretical pollution.

Likewise Pope Leo, [epistle 13 to the Empress Pulcheria]. Whoever merits to receive a sentence of condemnation, if he wishes to remain in his own opinion, no one will be able to relax it. PART II. GRATIAN. By these authorities it is proved that we can loose or bind the living, not the dead. But this is not to be understood of every crime. For there are certain crimes concerning which any persons can be accused or condemned even after death, such as heresy. Hence in the first session of the Fifth Synod it is read:

Assuredly, it is put forward by certain persons who say that heretics ought to be anathematized after death and that in this the teaching of the holy Fathers is to be followed, who not only condemned living heretics but also the dead, just as they recalled after death those who had been unjustly condemned and wrote them in the sacred diptychs. This was done in the case of John and Flavian, bishops of Constantinople of religious memory. Likewise in the fifth session: § 1. Augustine says: “If perhaps these books designate their betrayer just as the Lord designated Judas, let them read in them by name and expressly that either Caecilian or his ordainers were betrayers of those same books; and unless I anathematize them, let me myself be judged to have betrayed them.” § 2. Augustine of holy memory advised and established that the things that have just been recited were held in the church from the beginning. For an impious dogma has already been accused and condemned, and the tradition of the church wills those who are liable to such a dogma to be anathematized, even though they were also dead. Therefore Augustine of holy memory says: “If Caecilian were now convicted of the things alleged against him, even after his death I anathematize him.” Likewise: § 3. Many bishops, having assembled and arranged certain matters from different cases pertaining to ecclesiastical status, established concerning deceased bishops who leave their property to heretics that they should be subjected to anathema even after death. There are also epistles of Augustine of holy memory saying that if any persons during their life were not of right understanding, although they had not yet been condemned while alive, nevertheless, when the sin has been demonstrated, they too should be subjected to anathema after death. Likewise: § 4. “If the things objected against Caecilian are true and could at some time be shown to us, we would anathematize him though dead.” Likewise: § 5. “You say that it is lawful for me to judge even concerning the dead, because judgment is customarily made not only concerning the living but also concerning the dead.” Likewise: § 6. Rabbula of holy memory, having been made bishop of the city of Edessa, who shone among the priests, anathematized Theodore of Mopsuestia after death in the church. Likewise: § 7. The church of the Romans also, a few years ago, anathematized Dioscorus, who was pope of that same church, even after death, although he had not sinned in the faith. And all who live here in Rome know this, especially those who are established in dignities, who also remained communicants with the same Dioscorus until his death. Likewise: § 8. If anyone goes back to the times of Theophilus of holy memory or further, he will also find Origen anathematized after death. This both your Holiness and Vigilius, most religious Pope of Old Rome, also did in this case. Likewise: § 9. The holy synod said: The things that have been said and put forward suffice to demonstrate the ecclesiastical tradition that heretics ought to be anathematized even after death. Likewise in the fourth session: § 10. The holy synod said: Various epistles of Augustine of holy memory, who shone among the African bishops, have been recited, signifying that heretics ought to be anathematized even after death. The other most reverend African bishops also preserved such an ecclesiastical tradition; but the holy Roman church too anathematized certain bishops even after death, although during their life they had not been accused concerning the faith, and the records held among us attest both things.