Question III

GRATIAN. That an archbishop can condemn the clerics of his suffragan without consulting him or absolve them seems able to be proved as follows. Just as the churches of an entire episcopate are in the power of the bishop, so the churches of an entire archiepiscopate pertain to the diocese of the archbishop. For bishops are called by the metropolitan into a share of solicitude, not into the fullness of power. For he thus imparts his functions to them without taking his own power away from himself. Hence they are permitted to do nothing without his counsel, as is read in the Council of Pope Martin, [c. 4]:

Throughout the individual provinces the bishops ought to acknowledge their metropolitan and he to undertake the care of the primacy, while the remaining bishops are to do nothing apart from him, according to what is contained in the canon established by our Fathers in antiquity. For this reason the metropolitan too shall presumptuously undertake nothing without the counsel of the others.

Likewise from the Council of Antioch, [c. 9]. Throughout the individual provinces each bishop ought to know that the metropolitan bishop who presides has undertaken the care and solicitude of the whole province. For this reason let those who have cases assemble at the metropolitan city. Therefore it was resolved both that he excel in honor and that the remaining bishops do nothing beyond their bounds without him, according to the ancient canon of our Fathers, except only what pertains to each individual church throughout its own diocese. For each bishop ought to possess power over his own diocese, so that he may rule and govern according to the reverence fitting to each and exercise providence for the whole region which is under his city, so that he is also permitted to ordain priests and deacons by approved judgment and to adjudicate the individual cases of his region with moderation and weight. But he is permitted to do nothing beyond this without the knowledge of the metropolitan bishop, nor shall the metropolitan conduct anything without the counsel of the remaining priests.

GRATIAN. Unless perhaps the bishops have neglected to ordain stewards in their church. Hence it is read in the Seventh Synod, [c. 11]:

Since we are debtors to observe all the sacred rules, we ought by every means to preserve inviolate the one which says that there ought to be stewards in each church. And if indeed each metropolitan has appointed a steward in his own church, it is surely well. But if not, by their own authority the bishops of Constantinople have permission to place stewards over his church. Likewise metropolitans too have this permission if the bishops who are under them have not taken care to establish stewards in their churches. The very same is also to be observed in monasteries. GRATIAN. The same is proved by the example of the Apostle, who handed the impenitent Corinthian fornicator over to Satan and afterward reconciled him, once penitent, to the church, writing only this to the Corinthians in the first and second letter: that they not communicate with the excommunicated man and, when he had been reconciled, be joined to him in associated charity. But the contrary is proved by the authority of many. For Pope Hyginus says, [letter I, c. 2]:

With the privilege of the Roman Church preserved in all things, let no metropolitan hear the cases of any of the bishops without the attendance of all the remaining bishops of the province, because proceedings otherwise conducted than those examined in the sight of all of them will be void; and if he has done it, let him be restrained by his brothers.

Likewise Pope Anicius, [to the Bishops of Gaul, c. 1]. In accordance with the statutes of the apostles, an archbishop shall do nothing concerning the cases of the bishops or other common cases without the counsel of all of them, nor shall they undertake anything, except to the extent that it pertains to their own parishes, without his consent, because the Most High rejoices in such concord and is glorified in His members.

The same, [in the same letter, c. 3]. But if any of the metropolitans has become swollen with pride and wishes, without the presence or counsel of all the bishops of the province, to conduct either their cases or other cases—except only those which pertain to his own parish—or to burden them, let him be strictly corrected by all, lest he dare to presume such things henceforth. But if he appears incorrigible and disobedient to them, let his contumacy be reported to this apostolic see, to which it has been commanded that all judgments of bishops be referred, so that vengeance may be exacted from him and the others may have fear.

Likewise Pope Callistus, [to the Bishops of Gaul, letter II, c. 3]. Let no primate or metropolitan presume to excommunicate or judge a diocesan's church or parish, or anyone from his parish, or to do anything without his counsel or judgment; rather, let him observe what was established by the apostles, the Fathers, and our predecessors and confirmed by us, namely: if any metropolitan bishop attempts to do anything beyond his own proper parish—except what pertains solely to it—without the counsel and will of all the bishops of the province, he will lie under danger to his rank, and what he has done will be void and empty. But whatever it shall be necessary to do or arrange concerning the cases of the bishops of the province and their churches and clerics, and the necessities of secular persons, let this be done with the consent of all the bishops of the province, not with any haughtiness of domination but with the most humble and concordant administration, as the Lord says: “I came not to be ministered to but to minister,” and elsewhere: “He who is greater among you shall be your minister.” Likewise, let the bishops of the province themselves do all things with his counsel—except to the extent that they pertain to their own parishes—in accordance with the statutes of the holy Fathers, so that with one mind and one mouth the holy Trinity may concordantly be glorified forever.

Likewise Nicholas to Rudolf, Archbishop of Bourges. Our brother Sigebod, Archbishop of Narbonne, has complained to our apostolate that, against his will, you compel his clerics to come to your judgment and, without consulting him, arrange matters concerning property pertaining to his church as though by the right of your patriarchate, although neither does antiquity—to which the Fathers decreed reverence—possess this practice, and the authority of the sacred canons utterly prohibits it, unless perhaps they have appealed to you as to their patriarch concerning cases which cannot be terminated before him, or, if their bishop has died, they have wished the property of their church to be administered by your judgment. For we determine that primates or patriarchs possess no privilege beyond the remaining bishops except to the extent that the sacred canons grant and ancient custom conferred upon them in antiquity, so that in accordance with the Nicene rules their privileges may be preserved for the churches, except if the apostolic see shall have decreed to honor some church or its ruler with any special privilege.

Likewise Bede on the Apocalypse: “And write to the angel of the church of Ephesus.” He writes to the bishop, from whose hand the sins of his subjects are required, and the subjects ought not to be judged without his counsel. GRATIAN. For the Roman Church alone is able by its authority to judge concerning all; but no one is permitted to judge concerning it. Hence Pope Nicholas, [to Emperor Michael, in the letter whose beginning is “We Had Proposed”]:

It is certainly evident that the judgment of the apostolic see—than whose authority there is none greater—is to be reconsidered by no one, nor is anyone permitted to judge concerning its judgment, according to what Pope Innocent says when writing to Rufus and the other bishops established throughout Thessaly: “No one ever boldly brought opposing hands against the apostolic summit—concerning whose judgment it is not permitted to reconsider—no one remained rebellious in this except one who wished judgment to be given concerning himself”; and blessed Pope Gelasius: “Nor did the canons ever command that judgment be given concerning its judgment”—that is, the judgment of the Roman Church—“and they established that its sentence ought not to be dissolved, whose decrees they commanded rather to be followed.”

Likewise Patriarch Anastasius to Pope Felix [II]. Your apostolic see has always possessed the permission authoritatively to restore by its own authority those unjustly condemned or excommunicated, to return all their things to them, and to punish by apostolic privilege those who condemned or excommunicated them, just as we know was also done in our own and earlier times.

Likewise, [in the same place a little below]. It was decreed by the ancient rules that whatever was done concerning their complaints or accusations, although in provinces situated remotely or far away, was not first to be examined or accepted before it was brought to the knowledge of your nurturing see, so that by its authority, according to what the pronouncement had been, it might be invalidated or confirmed.

Likewise Pope Innocent. No one will judge the first see, which desires to temper justice. For the judge will be judged neither by the emperor, nor by all the clergy, nor by kings, nor by the people.

Likewise Symmachus. God wished the cases of other men to be terminated through men, but He reserved the prelate of this see to His own judgment without question. He wished the successor of the blessed apostle Peter to owe his innocence to heaven alone and to possess an inviolate conscience for the investigation of the most subtle examiner. Do not suppose that those souls have no fear of an investigator which God, beyond the rest, reserved for His own examination. Before Him the guilty man has no aid from the splendor of his pleading when he uses as witness of the very deeds the one whom he has as judge. You may perhaps say, “Such will be the condition of all souls in that adjudication.” I will reply: to one it was said, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and whatever you loose upon earth will be loosed also in heaven.” And again, by the voice of the saints, the dignity of the pontiffs of his see was made venerable throughout the whole world, since whatever belongs to the faithful everywhere is subjected to it, since it is designated the head of the whole body. Concerning this it appears to me to have been said through the Prophet: “If this is humbled, to whose aid will you flee? And where will you leave your glory?”

Likewise Pope Anterus, [to the Bishops of the Provinces of Baetica and Toledo]. The deeds of our subjects are judged by us, but our deeds are judged by the Lord. § 1. Those who corrupt the life and morals of the good are worse than those who plunder the substance and estates of others.

Likewise Gelasius, [to the legate Faustus]. These are the canons which wished appeals of the whole church to be carried to the examination of this see. But they decreed that appeal ought never at all to be made from it, and through this that it should judge concerning the whole church, that it should come to no one's judgment, nor did they ever command that judgment be given concerning its judgment; and they established that its sentence ought not to be dissolved, whose decrees they commanded rather to be followed.

The same to all the Bishops. The whole church throughout the world knows that the sacrosanct Roman Church possesses the right to judge concerning all and that no one is permitted to judge concerning its judgment. Indeed, appeal is to be made to it from any part of the world, but no one is permitted to appeal from it. § 1. Nor do we pass over the fact that the apostolic see, without any preceding synod, possessed the faculty both of releasing those whom an iniquitous synod had condemned and of condemning, with no synod existing, those whom it was fitting to condemn; and this assuredly on account of its primacy, which the blessed apostle Peter both always held and will hold by the voice of the Lord.

The same to the Bishops established throughout Dardania. The whole church throughout the world knows that the see of the blessed apostle Peter has the right to release those bound by the sentences of any pontiffs whatsoever, inasmuch as it possesses the right to judge concerning every church, etc.

Likewise Pope Sixtus [II] to the Bishops of the Spaniards, [letter II, c. 4]. Know that the brothers whom you unjustly condemned through earthly fear have been justly restored by us, and by authority we command that all things which were taken from them be returned to them in their entirety, if you do not wish both you and your princes to be separated from our college and the members of the church.

Likewise Bishop Stephen to Patriarch Walbert. But now we write to you again, not wishing to infringe the privilege of any church, although by apostolic prerogative we can ordain a cleric from any church: cease now, through jealousy of someone, to delay the bishop of the church of Cumae, because, if you delay and do not hasten to consecrate him after now having been admonished so many times, without doubt he will depart consecrated.

Likewise Pope Nicholas to Emperor Michael, [in the letter whose beginning is “We Had Proposed”]. Therefore, through the principal power of the blessed Peter and Paul, concerning which we explained above, we possess the power and right, whenever it shall be necessary, not only to summon to us monks but also any clerics from any diocese whatsoever, and to invite them when ecclesiastical opportunities require it. GRATIAN. But what is undertaken from the rashness of presumption is one thing; what is conducted from the necessity of charity is another. When the suffragans of archbishops have begun to favor the evil of their subjects and have been negligent concerning their correction, then metropolitans are permitted, apart from their will, both to condemn those to be bound and to absolve those to be reconciled. But when bishops, kindled by zeal for divine charity, edify the good by word and example and reprove the vices of the evil with harsh rebuke, metropolitans are not permitted to do or arrange anything in their parish without the counsel of such bishops. Hence at the end of the chapter of Pope Martin it is not said simply, “let him do nothing,” but with the qualification, “let him presumptuously undertake nothing without their counsel,” so that the vice of presumption, not the office of charity, appears to be condemned. Thus the Apostle too, because he saw the Corinthians negligent concerning the correction of the fornicator, condemned him by his own authority. But John, because he saw the Bishop of Ephesus prepared to correct the vices of his subjects, refused to correct them without his authority, but admonished only him concerning their correction.