Question — Decretum of Gratian
Question III
GRATIAN. It is not lawful, however, for anyone to seek the judgment of the archbishop of another province.
Hence Gregory says, [response IX to Augustine, Bishop of the English]:
GRATIANUS. Iudicium uero archiepiscopi alterius prouinciae alicui expetere non licet.
Unde Gregorius ait: [respons. IX. ad Augustinum Anglorum Episcopum]
Friedberg, col. 561/562
C. I. It is not lawful for anyone to judge another's parishioner.
It is written in the law: “When passing through another's harvest, you ought not to put in a sickle, but to rub the ears with your hand and eat.” For you ought not to put the sickle of judgment into that crop which is seen to have been entrusted to another; but through the affection of a good work strip the Lord's grains of the chaff of their vices, and by admonishing and persuading, as though by chewing, convert them into the body of the Church.
C. I. Alterius parrochianum alicui iudicare non licet.
Scriptum est in lege: "Per alienam messem transiens falcem mittere non debes, sed manu spicas conterere et manducare." Falcem enim iudicii mittere non debes in ea segete, que alteri uidetur esse conmissa, sed per affectum boni operis frumenta dominica uiciorum suorum paleis expolia, et in ecclesiae corpus admonendo et persuadendo, quasi mandendo, conuertere.
Friedberg, col. 561/562
C. II. How many cities each province is to have.
Likewise Pope Pelagius [II, letter VIII] to all Bishops. Know that a province is established which has ten or eleven cities, and one king, and as many lesser authorities under him, and one metropolitan, and ten or eleven other suffragan bishops as judges, to whose judgment all cases of bishops, of the other priests, and of cities are to be referred, so that they may be justly decided by them all with a concordant voice, unless an appeal has been made to a greater authority by those who are to be judged. Hence it is not fitting that each province be degraded or dishonored, but let it have among its own people judges, priests, and bishops, each, of course, according to their own orders; and whoever has a case shall be judged by his own judges and not by outsiders, that is, by the just judges of his own province and not by strangers, unless—as has already been touched upon—an appeal has been made by those who are to be judged.
C. II. Quot ciuitates unaqueque prouincia habeat.
Item Pelagius Papa [II. ep. VIII.] omnibus Episcopis. Scitote certam esse prouinciam, que habet X. aut XI. ciuitates, et unum regem, et totidem minores potestates sub se, et unum metropolitanum, aliosque suffraganeos X. uel XI. episcopos iudices, ad quorum iudicium omnes causae episcoporum, et reliquorum sacerdotum, ac ciuitatum referantur, ut ab his omnibus iuste consona uoce discernatur, nisi ad maiorem auctoritatem fuerit ab his, qui iudicandi sunt, appellatum. Unde non oportet, ut degradetur uel dehonoretur unaqueque prouincia; sed apud semetipsam habeat iudices, sacerdotes et episcopos, singulos uidelicet secundum ordines suos, et quicumque causam habuerit a suis iudicibus iudicetur, et non ab alienis, id est a suae iustis iudicibus prouinciae, et non ab extraneis, nisi (ut iam est prelibatum) a iudicandis fuerit appellatum.
Friedberg, col. 561/562
C. III. Let every bishop subject himself to the judgment not of others, but of his own primate.
Likewise Pope Nicholas. Finally, if Suffredus knew that there was in him such a crime by which he could rightly be deprived of the episcopate, or perhaps felt himself weighed down by an infirmity by which, being impeded, he could benefit none of his neighbors through his prelacy, he ought to have awaited the judgment of his own primate and not that of the bishops of other dioceses. But if any ambiguity or perhaps any contention concerning his examination or renunciation of the episcopate had arisen, it would have been fitting for it to be referred according to custom to the apostolic see, and all ought in these matters to have awaited our decrees entirely. Because this was omitted, as we have grieved until now, I vehemently implore your glory, most beloved by me, that the aforesaid Bishop Suffredus be restored to his own episcopate; and if he did anything deserving of rebuke, it shall afterward be determined by either correction or a worthy punishment.
GRATIAN. There is nevertheless a case in which a bishop can excommunicate the parishioner of another. Hence in the Council at Compiègne, [c. 5]:
C. III. Non aliorum, sed primatis sui iudicio quisque se subiciat episcopus.
Item Nicolaus Papa. Denique si Suffredus, tale in se crimen nouerat, quo recte posset episcopatu priuari, uel infirmitate se sentiebat forsitan pregrauari, qua inpeditus nullis posset proximis sua prelatione prodesse, primatis sui debuerat et non aliorum dioceseon antistitum prestolari iudicium. Quod si quelibet ambiguitas, uel aliqua fortasse super eius examinatione, uel episcopatus abrenunciatione oborta fuisset contentio, ex more ad apostolicam sedem referri conuenerat, et nostra in his omnibus debuerant cuncti decreta penitus expectare. Quod quia omissum hactenus dolemus, dilectissimam mihi gloriam uestram uehementer efflagito, ut iam dictus Suffredus episcopus proprio restituatur episcopio, et si quid reprehensione dignum gessit, postea uel correctione, uel digna animaduersione diffinietur.
Gratian. Est tamen casus, in quo episcopus alterius parrochianum excommunicare ualet. Unde in Concilio apud Conpendium: [c. 5.]
Friedberg, col. 561/562
C. IV. When a bishop can excommunicate another's parishioner.
It was resolved for the common benefit that no bishop take it grievously if another bishop has excommunicated his parishioner for a cause of depredation.
[PALEA.
C. IV. Quando episcopus parrochianum alterius excommunicare ualet.
Placuit pro communi utilitate, ut nullus episcoporum grauiter ferat, si eius parrochianum pro depredationis causa alter episcopus excommunicauerit.
[PALEA.
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. V. Concerning the same.
Likewise from the Council of Meaux, c. 2. Concerning those who have a benefice or inheritance within a parish, but are parishioners of another bishop, and who journey from place to place and commit rapine and depredations, it was resolved that they be excommunicated and not depart from the diocese before they worthily amend what they have perpetrated. Their excommunication is to be signified to their lord and to their own bishop, lest he receive them before they return to the place where they committed the rapine and there amend all things fully.]
C. V. De eodem.
Item ex Concilio Meldensi, c. 2. De illis autem, qui intra parrochiam beneficium aut hereditatem habent, et alterius episcopi parrochiani sunt, et de loco ad locum iter faciunt, et rapinam et depredationes peragunt, placuit, ut excommunicentur, nec ante ex parecia exeant, quam que perpetrarunt digne emendent. Quorum excommunicatio seniori eorum et proprio episcopo significanda est, ne eos recipiat ante, quam illuc redeant, ubi rapinam fecerunt, et ibi omnia pleniter emendent. ]
Friedberg, col. 563/564