Question — Decretum of Gratian
Question IV
GRATIAN. Moreover, whose judgment he is to seek if the chosen judges have begun to disagree among themselves is found to have been determined thus in the Council of Laodicea, [c. 14]:
GRATIANUS. Porro cuius iudicium sibi expetendum sit, si iudices electi inter se discordare ceperint, in Laudicensi Concilio [c. 14.] sic inuenitur diffinitum:
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. I. By whom a sentence is to be rendered when coprovincial bishops disagree.
If any bishop has been criminally accused in the judgment of bishops, but it happens that the bishops of the province who have assembled hold diverse opinions, some indeed pronouncing him innocent and others guilty, in order to cut away a controversy of this kind it was resolved by the holy synod that the metropolitan bishop of another neighboring province be called in, and certain other bishops with him, who, sitting together, shall settle whatever the question may be, so that the judgment promulgated by the bishops of one province may thereby be firm.
C. I. A quo sit ferenda sententia, quando conprouinciales episcopi discordant.
Si quis episcopus criminaliter in iudicio episcoporum fuerit accusatus, contingat autem episcopos prouinciae, qui conuenerint, diuersas habere sententias, et alios quidem innocentem eum pronunciare, alios reum, propter huiusmodi controuersiam amputandam placuit sanctae sinodo metropolitanum episcopum alterius uicinae prouinciae aduocari, et aliquantos cum eo episcopos alios, qui pariter residentes quecumque fuerit dirimant questionem, propter hoc, ut sit firmum iudicium, quod ab unius prouinciae episcopis fuerit promulgatum.
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. II. When the chosen judges have disagreed among themselves concerning the sentence, the archbishop shall be called from a neighboring province.
Likewise from the Council of Pope Martin. If any bishop is judged in any matters and sees that those bishops who are in his province differ among themselves in judgment, so that some appear to justify the man who is judged and others to condemn him, for the determination of this dissension it was resolved by the holy synod that another metropolitan bishop be summoned from a neighboring province, so that through him what has been resolved according to the right canon may be confirmed. GRATIAN. Unless that same province has a primate, to whom affairs which cannot be terminated by the metropolitan are to be referred. Hence Pope Boniface to the Bishops of Gaul:
C. II. Quando electi iudices inter se de sententia discordes extiterint, de uicina prouincia archiepiscopus aduocetur.
Item ex Concilio Martini Papae. Si quis episcopus in aliquibus iudicatur, et uiderit ipsos episcopos, qui in prouincia sua sunt, inter se iudicio discrepare, ut alii uideantur eum, qui iudicatur, iustificare, alii condempnare, pro diffinitione huius dissensionis hoc placuit sanctae sinodo, ut de prouincia uicina alter metropolitanus conuocetur episcopus, ut per eum confirmetur quod secundum rectum placuerit canonem. Gratian. Nisi eadem prouincia primatem habuerit, ad quem negotia, que per metropolitanum terminari non ualent, referenda sunt. Unde Bonifatius Papa Episcopis Galliae:
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. III. Affairs which the metropolitan cannot resolve shall be referred to the primate.
If among the bishops of the same council a doubt has arisen concerning ecclesiastical law or other affairs, first let their metropolitan, considering the matter with certain others in the council, adjudicate it; and if both parties do not acquiesce in the things adjudged, then let the primate of the region hear the matter between them and determine what is consonant with the ecclesiastical canons and our laws, and let neither party be able to contradict his vote.
[PALEA.
C. III. Primati deferantur negotia, que metropolitanus explicare non ualet.
Si inter episcopos eiusdem concilii dubitatio emerserit de ecclesiastico iure uel de aliis negotiis, primum metropolitanus eorum cum aliis quibusdam in concilio considerans rem diiudicet, et si non adquiescat utraque pars iudicatis, tunc primas regionis inter ipsos audiat, et quod ecclesiasticis canonibus et legibus nostris consentaneum sit, hoc diffiniat, et nulla pars calculo eius ualeat contradicere.
[PALEA.
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. IV. Concerning the same.
Likewise Pope Alexander. If a metropolitan, after an appeal has been made to him by any coprovincial bishop in the bishop's own case, has delayed hearing him, let him have license to prosecute his business in the next synod; and whatever has been enacted with justice by his coprovincials ought to be observed.] GRATIAN. But if he has been condemned by the concordant sentence of all the coprovincials, the censure shall remain immovable against him. Hence it is read in the Council of Laodicea, [c. 15]:
C. IV. De eodem.
Item Alexander Papa. Si metropolitanus a quocumque conprouinciali episcopo in causa propria appellatus eum audire distulerit, in proxima sinodo negotii sui habeat licentiam exercendi, et quicquid per iustitiam a conprouincialibus suis fuerit statutum debet custodiri. ] Gratian. Sed si omnium conprouincialium concordi sententia fuerit dampnatus, manebit erga eum inmobilis censura. Unde in Laudicensi Concilio [cap. 15.] legitur:
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. V. A bishop who has received a concordant sentence from the bishops of his province will not be able to be judged by others.
If any bishop criminally accused has received one concordant sentence from all the bishops who are within the province, he will not be able to be judged further by others, but the sentence put forth by all ought to remain firm and ratified concerning him as a fitting sentence. GRATIAN. It must be understood, however, unless an appeal has been made to a judge of greater authority. For then the sentence, dissolved through the appeal, does not obtain firmness. Hence Pope Nicholas says, [in the letter to King Charles which begins, “It Never Produces Grief”]:
C. V. Episcopus, qui ab episcopis suae prouinciae consonam sententiam reportauerit, ab aliis iudicari non poterit.
Si quis episcopus criminaliter accusatus ab omnibus, qui sunt intra prouinciam, episcopis exceperit unam consonamque sententiam, ab aliis ulterius iudicari non poterit, sed manere circa eum oportet tamquam conuenientem, que ab omnibus prolata est, firmam ratamque sententiam. Gratian. Subintelligendum uero est, nisi ad iudicem maioris auctoritatis fuerit prouocatum. Tunc enim per appellationem soluta sententia firmitatem non obtinet. Unde Nicolaus Papa ait: [in epist. ad Carolum Regem, cuius initium: "Numquam dolorem generat."]
Friedberg, col. 563/564
C. VI. What has once been determined may not be reconsidered, except where there is a greater authority.
What has once been well determined and decided with oaths interposed ought not to be reconsidered by any repetition, unless perhaps where there is a greater authority.
C. VI. Semel difinitum retractari non licet, nisi ubi maior auctoritas fuerit.
Quod bene semel diffinitum est et interpositis iuramentis deliberatum, nulla debet iteratione, nisi fortassis ubi fuerit maior auctoritas, retractari.
Friedberg, col. 565/566
C. VII. In the renewal of a judgment the memory of blessed Peter is to be honored.
Likewise from the Council of Sardica, [c. 4]. Bishop Hosius said: “But if any bishop has been adjudged in some case and thinks that he has a good case, let another judgment be renewed. If it pleases you, let us honor the memory of Saint Peter the Apostle, so that those who examined the case, or also other bishops who dwell in the neighboring province, may write to the Roman bishop. And if he has judged that the judgment is to be renewed, let it be renewed and let him give judges. But if he has approved the case as being of such a kind that the things which were done should not be stirred anew, the things which the Roman bishop decrees shall be confirmed. Therefore, if this pleases all, let it be enacted.” The synod responded: It pleases us. In book IV of the Code, title On Proofs: A plaintiff who declares that he is unable to prove what he asserts does not bind the defendant by a necessity of demonstrating the contrary, since by the nature of things there is no proof of a fact for one who denies it.
C. VII. In renouatione iudicii memoria B. Petri est habenda.
Item ex Concilio Sardicensi. [c. 4.] Osius episcopus dixit: "Quod si aliquis episcopus adiudicatus fuerit in aliqua causa, et putat se bonam causam habere, alterum iudicium renouetur, si uobis placet, S. Petri apostoli memoriam honoremus, ut scribatur uel ab his, qui examinauerunt, uel etiam ab aliis episcopis, qui in prouincia proxima morantur, Romano episcopo. Et si iudicauerit renouandum esse iudicium, renouetur et det iudices. Si autem probauerit talem causam ut ea non refricentur, que acta sunt, que decreuerit Romanus episcopus confirmata erunt. Si hoc ergo omnibus placet, statuatur." Sinodus respondit: Placet. Codicis libro IV. titulo de probationibus: Actor, quod asseuerat profitendo se probare non posse, reum necessitate monstrandi contrarium non astringit, cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probatio nulla sit.
Friedberg, col. 565/566