causa — Decretum of Gratian
Causa VI
GRATIAN. Two fornicators, marked by infamy, endeavor to accuse a certain religious bishop of simony; the defendant seeks the judgment of the archbishop of another province; at length the accuser fails in proof; the defendant is compelled to an assertion of his own innocence. (Qu. I.) First it is asked whether those ensnared by crime or marked by infamy are to be admitted to an accusation of this kind. (Qu. II.) Second, if the bishop wishes to turn the accusation against them, whether credence is to be given to his simple assertion. (Qu. III.) Third, whether it is lawful for him to seek the judgment of the archbishop of another province. (Qu. IV.) Fourth, whose judgment he is to seek if the bishops of his province happen to disagree concerning their sentence. (Qu. V.) Fifth, if the accuser fails in proof, whether the defendant is to be compelled to proof of his innocence.
GRATIANUS. Duo fornicatores et infamia notati quendam religiosum episcopum de symonia accusare nituntur; reus alterius prouinciae archiepiscopi iudicium expetit; tandem in probatione deficit accusator; reus cogitur ad innocentiae suae assertionem. (Qu. I.) Primo queritur, an crimine irretiti uel infamia notati ad huiusmodi accusationem sint admittendi? (Qu. II.) Secundo, si episcopus in eos accusationem uertere uoluerit, an simplici assertioni suae sit fides habenda? (Qu. III.) Tertio, si liceat sibi expetere iudicium archiepiscopi alterius prouinciae? (Qu. IV.) Quarto, cuius iudicium sibi sit expetendum, si circa suam sententiam episcopos suae prouinciae discordare contigerit? (Qu. V.) Quinto, si in probatione deficit accusator, an reus sit cogendus ad probationem innocentiae suae?
Friedberg, col. 553/554