suscepit uxorem duxerit, seu postea, si beneficium habeat, ipso
privetur, et ab exsecutione sui officii suspendatur, nisi in casu a
jure concesso.—Constit. Walteri Episc. Dunelmens. (Wilkins, I. 705).
[711] Sir, il ne doit mie joyer du benefit de celle priviledge, car
il ad forfait per vice de Bigamy; comme celui qui ad espousé vefve ou
plusors femmes.—Myrror of Justice, cap. III. sect. v.
[712] Concil. Londiniens. ann. 1268 c. 8 (Wilkins, II. 5).
[713] Convocat. Cantuar. ann. 1399 c. 13 (Wilkins, III. 240).
[714] The canon law maintained the extraordinary doctrine that the
confession of the guilty woman could not be received as evidence
against her accomplice, though it was good as against herself. “Unde
nec sacerdotes accusare nec in eos testificari valent.... Quia ergo
ista de se confitetur, super alienum crimen ei credi non oportet; sed
contra eam sua confessio interpretanda est” (Gratian. P. II. c. xv. q.
3). It would be hard to imagine a rule of practice better fitted to
repress investigation and to shield offenders.
[715] Wilkins, II. 40.
[716] Ad domos religiosarum veniens, fecit exprimi mammillas earundem,
ut sic physice si esset inter eas corruptela, experiretur—Matt. Paris
ann. 1251.
[717] Adæ de Marisco Epist. passim (Monumenta Franciscana). How
little the character of the clergy had improved under the ceaseless
efforts of the preceding half century may be guessed from Adam’s
description of his contemporary brethren—“Nihil aliud pervicacissima
caninæ voracitatis impudentia consectantur, quam caducam fastuum
arrogantiam, quam mobilem quæstuum affluentiam, quam sordidam luxuum
petulentiam, auctoritatem summæ salvationis in perditionis æternæ
crudelitatem depravantes; cernimus usquequaquam quasi solutum Satanam
effrænata tyrannide beatam hæreditatem benedicti Dei immanissime
depopulari.”—Ibid. Epist. CCXLVII. P. i. c. 18.
[718]
And thise ersedeknes that ben set to visite holi churche,
Everich fondeth hu he may shrewedelichest worche;
He wole take mede of that on and that other,
And late the parsoun have a wyf and the prest another,
At wille:
Coveytise shal stoppen here mouth, and maken hem al stille.
Wright, Political Songs of England,
p. 326.
So Robert Langlande states
“In the consistorie bifore the commissarie
He cometh noght but ofte;
For hir lawe dureth over longe,
But if thei lacchen silver,
And matrimoyne for moneie
Maken and unmaken.”
Vision of Piers Ploughman, v. 10102-7
(Wright’s Edition).
[719] 1 Henry VII. cap. 4.
[720] Gwentian Code, Book II. chap. xxx. “Because he was begotten
contrary to decree.”—Dimetian Code, Book II. chap. viii. § 27 (Aneurin
Owen’s Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales, Vol. I. pp. 761, 445). Of
the latter of these codes, the recension which has reached us contains
alterations made by Rys son of Grufudd, showing it to be posterior at
least to the year 1180.
[721] Anomalous Laws, Book X. chap. vii. § 19 (Owen, Vol. II. p. 331).
[722] Ibid. chap. ix. (Vol. II. p. 347).
[723] Ibid. Book VIII. chap. xi. § 19 (Vol. II. p. 205).
[724] Ibid. Book XI. chap. iii. § 15 (Vol. II. p. 409).
[725] Senchus Mor. Introduction. pp. 57-9. (Edited by Hancock, Dublin,
1865.)
[726] Lanfranci Epistt. 37, 38.—Bernardi Vit. S. Malachiæ cap. iii.
viii.—The rudeness of the age may be measured by the fact that when
Malachi determined to adorn the venerable monastery of Benchor with
an oratory of stone such as he had seen abroad, the mere laying
of the foundations aroused the wonderment of the people, to whom
buildings of that kind were unknown—“quod in terra illa necdum ejusmodi
ædificia invenirentur”—and his enemies took advantage of the feeling
to interfere with the work on the ground that such an enterprise was
unheard of, and that so stupendous an undertaking could never be
accomplished. This piece of presumption was promptly rebuked by the
death of the ringleader, and by the finding in the excavations of
a treasure which enabled St. Malachi to execute his plans (Vit. S.
Malach. c. xxviii.). St. Bernard, who derived his impressions from
Malachi and his companions, thus describes the Irish of Connaught,
“sic protervos ad mores, sic ferales ad ritus, sic ad fidem impios, ad
leges barbaros, cervicosos ad disciplinam, spurcos ad vitam. Christiani
nomine, re pagani. Non decimas, non primitias dare, non legitima inire
conjugia, non facere confessiones; pœnitentias nec qui peteret, nec qui
daret penitus invenire. Ministri altaris pauci admodum erant.”—Ibid.
cap. viii.
[727] Ibid. c. x. xi. xii. xiii.
[728] Ibid. c. x.
[729] Ibid. c. xv.
[730] Ibid. c. xviii.—Fiunt de medio barbaricæ leges, Romanæ
introducuntur.—Ibid. c. viii.
[731] Ibid. c. xvi.—Illæ gentes quæ a diebus antiquis monachi quidem
nomen audierunt, monachum non viderunt.
[732] In the hymn in which St. Bernard celebrated the virtues of his
friend he compares him to the Apostles—
Sobrius victus, castitas perennis,
Fides, doctrina, animarum lucra,
Meritis parem cœtui permiscet Apostolorum.
[733] Sermo Giraldi in Concil. Dublinens. (De Rebus a se Gestis Lib.
II. c. 14).
In the “Topographia Hibernica,” Dist. III. cap. 27, Giraldus confirms
his assertion as to the chastity and drunkenness of the Irish clergy,
but admits that they observed the canonical fasts with praiseworthy
strictness.
[734] Hist. Archiep. Bremens ann. 1179 (Lindenbrog. Script. Septent. p.
107).
It must be borne in mind, however, that in the Irish church bishops
were almost as numerous as in the primitive church of Africa—“singulæ
pene ecclesiæ singulos haberent episcopos.”—Bernard. Vit. S. Malachiæ
cap. X.
[735] Cap. 13 Extra Lib. I. Tit. xvii.
[736] Benedicti Abbatis Gesta Henrici II. ann. 1171.
[737] Girald. Cambrens. op. cit. Lib. II. c. 13.
[738] Girald. Cambrens. loc. cit.
[739] Innocent PP. III. Regest. v. 158.
[740] Concil. Dublinens. ann. 1217 (Wilkins, I. 548).
[741] Quia putridum libidinosæ spurcitiæ contagium adeo apud clericos
et presbyteros invaluit his diebus, quod nec auctoritas evangelica,
nec canonica severitas illud hactenus extirpare potuit, quia in suæ
perpetuæ damnationis periculum, et ordinis ecclesiasticæ ignominiam,
populique perniciosum exemplum manifestum, adhuc suas publice detinent
concubinas, etc.—Constit. Synod. Ossoriens. (Wilkins, II. 502).
[742] Bradshaw’s Enniskillen (London Athenæum, Sept. 7th, 1878, p. 305).
[743] Haddan and Stubbs, II. 175-80.
[744] Haddan and Stubbs, II, 216, 224-7, 235.—See also Cosmo Innes’
“Scotland in the Middle Ages,” pp. 107 sqq. We may assume that John of
Crema or the pope must have conferred extraordinary powers on David
before he could have the presumption to thus arbitrarily regulate and
revolutionize the church. This, indeed, may readily be conceived as
probable when we reflect how little authority Rome could have exercised
over the Culdees, and how readily Scotland must have been subjected to
the central power by placing her ecclesiastical establishment in the
hands of the Sassenach monks.
Towards the end of the 12th century, Giraldus Cambrensis calls the
Culdees of Bardsey in Wales, “Cœlibes vel Colidei” and characterizes
them as “religiosissimi” (Itin. Cambr. II. 6—_ap._ Haddan and Stubbs,
II. xxiii.).
[745] Gesta Henrici II. T. I. p. 282 (M. R. Series).
[746] Concil. Scotican. ann. 1225 c. 18, 62 (Wilkins, I. 610).
[747] Chron. Paslatens. ann. 1268 (Wilkins, II. 19).
[748] Hist. Compostellan. Lib. II. c. 1.
[749] Hist. Compostellan. Lib. I. c. 20.
[750] Didaci Decret. No. 15 (Hist. Compostellan. Lib. I. cap. 90).
[751] Synod. Helenens. ann. 1027 c. 3 (Aguirre, IV. 393).
[752] Hist, de España, Lib. IX. cap. xi.
[753] Concil. Compostellan. ann. 1056 can. 3. An allusion, however,
to those who left the church and married being allowed to return on
abandoning their wives, would seem to show that some supervision was
exercised. The council of Coyanza, in 1050, had forbidden the residence
of strange women, except mother, aunt, or step-mother, but says nothing
as to marriage.—Con. Coyacens. ann. 1050 c. iii. (Aguirre IV. 405, 407).
[754] Concil. Gerundens. ann. 1068 can. 7, 8 (Labbei et Coleti T.
XII.). The council of Toulouse, in 1056 (see ante, p. 255), which
ordered the separation of priests from their wives, undertook to
include Spain in its legislation, presumably meaning the eastern
portion of the Peninsula which was subject to the Archbishops of
Narbonne.
[755] Gregor. VII. Regist. Lib. IV. Epist. 28.
[756] Concil. Gerundens. ann. 1078 can. 1, 3, 4, 5 (Labbei et Coleti T.
XII.).
[757] Mariana, loc. cit.
[758] Paschal. PP. II. Epist. 57.
[759] Hist. Compostellan. Lib. I. cap. 20, 58, 81; Lib. II. cap. 3;
Lib. III. cap. 46.—Even the moderate reforms introduced met with
violent opposition—“nobis omnibus, veluti bruta animalia, nulla adhuc
jugali asperitate depressa, reluctantibus”—and only a portion seem
to have submitted “quosdam sibi acquiescentes doctrina et operatione
conspicuos divina clementia reddidit.”
[760] Didaci Decreta, No. 21 (Hist. Compostell. Lib. I. cap. 96).
[761] Ibid. Lib. I. cap. 100.—“Si qui ex eorum progenie clerici esse et
sæculariter continere vellent.”
[762] Hist. Compostellan. Lib. II. cap. 87.
[763] The Spanish church was not alone in this looseness of discipline
as regards canons. When Arthur of Britanny took up arms against his
uncle King John, and advanced with an army to Tours at Easter, A. D.
1200, he there “more debito in ecclesia B. Martini in canonicum est
receptus, et in stallum decani in vestibus chori, sicut canonicus
installatus.”—Chron. Turonens. ann. 1200 (Martene Ampl. Collect. V.
1038).
[764] Hist. Compostell. Lib. III. cap. 11.
[765] Ibid. Lib. I. cap. 101 (Concil. Legionens. ann. 1114 can. 8).
[766] Concil. Palentin. ann. 1129 can. 5.—“Concubinæ clericorum
manifestæ ejiciantur.”
[767] Hist. Compostellan. Lib. III. cap. 20.—“Pro modulo suæ
possibilitatis.”
[768] Concil. Hispan. Sæc. XIII. (Martene Thesaur. IV. 167).
[769] “De los clérigos que casan á bendiciones habiendo órdenes
sagradas, que pena deben haber ellos et aquellas con quien
casan.—Casándose algunt clérigo que hobiese órden sagrada non debe
fincar sin pena, ca débenle vedar de oficio, et tollerle el beneficio
que hobiere de la eglesia por sentencia de descomulgamiento fasta que
la dexe et faga penitencia de aquel yerro, etc.”—Siete Partidas, P. I.
Tit. vi. l. 41.
[770] Concil. Valentin. ann. 1255 (Aguirre V. 197, 201).
[771] Constit. Synodal. Arnaldi de Peralta Episc. Valentin. (Aguirre V.
207-8).
[772] Synod. Gerund. ann. 1257 can. 4; ann. 1274 can. 25 (Martene Ampl.
Coll. VIII. 1461, 1469).
[773] Concil. Penna-fidelens. ann. 1302 can. ii. (Aguirre V. 226).
[774] Concil. Vallis-oletan. ann. 1322 can. vi. vii. (Aguirre V. 243-5).
[775] Concil. Salmanticens. ann. 1335 can. iii. (Aguirre V. 266).
[776] Concil. Palentin. ann. 1388 can. ii. (Aguirre V. 298-99).
[777] Et utinam nunquam continentiam promisissent, maxime Hispani et
regnicolæ, in quibus provinciis in pauco maiori numero sunt filii
laicorum quam clericorum.... Sæpe cum parochianis mulieribus quas ad
confessionem admittunt, scelestissime fornicantur.... De bonis ecclesiæ
pascunt concubinam continue et filios, et de pecunia ecclesiae emunt
eis possessiones.... Multi presbyteri et alii constituti in sacris,
maxime in Hispania, in Asturia et Gallicia et alibi, et publice et
aliquoties per publicum instrumentum promittunt et jurant quibusdam,
maxime nobilibus mulieribus, numquam eas dimittere; et dant eis arras
de bonis ecclesiæ et possessiones ecclesiæ, publice eas ducunt, cum
consanguineis et amicis et solenni convivio, acsi essent uxores
legitimæ.—Alv. Pelag. de Planctu Ecclesiæ Lib. II. Art. xxviii. (Ed.
1517 fol. 131-3).
This forms part of a list of fifty-four charges brought by Pelayo
against the clergy of his time—“peccant in his communiter.” If the good
bishop does not exaggerate, these ministers of Christ must have been a
fearful curse to the communities over which they presided in the name
of the Saviour.
[778] Concil. Dertusan. ann. 1429 can. ii. (Aguirre V. 335-6).
[779] Presbyteris, diaconibus, subdiaconibus et monachis concubinas
habere, seu matrimonia contrahere, penitus interdicimus: contracta
quoque matrimonia ab hujusmodi personis disjungi, et personas
ad pœnitentiam redigi, juxta sacrorum canonum diffinitiones
judicamus.—Concil. Lateran. I. c. 21.
[780] Thus Gregory the Great, in 602: “Si enim dicunt religionis
causa conjugia debere dissolvi sciendum est quia etsi hoc lex humana
concessit, divina lex tamen prohibuit.”—Gregor. I. Lib. XI. Epist. 45.
And St. Augustin: “Proinde qui dicunt talium nuptias non esse nuptias
sed potius adulteria non mihi videntur satis acute ac diligenter
considerare quid dicant ... et cum volunt eas separatas reddere
continentiæ faciunt maritos earum adulteros veros etc.”—De Bono Viduit.
c. 10.
[781] Decrevimus ut ii qui a subdiaconatu et supra uxores duxerint,
aut concubinas habuerint, officio atque beneficio ecclesiastico
careant.—Concil. Claromont. ann. 1130 can. 4. This is repeated verbatim
in the council of Rheims in 1131, canon 4.
Concerning the latter a contemporary observes: “Placuit etiam domino
apostolico et toti concilio, ne quis audiat missam presbyteri habentis
concubinam vel uxorem. Assensu etiam omnium firmatum est ut clerici
omnes a subdiacono et supra continentes sint, et qui non fuerint
continentes, deponantur.”—Udalr. Babenb. Cod. Lib. II. c. 1.
[782] Ut autem lex continentiæ et Deo placens munditia in
ecclesiasticis personis et sacris ordinibus dilatetur, statuimus
quatenus episcopi, presbyteri, diaconi, subdiaconi, regulares canonici
et monachi atque conversi professi, qui sanctum transgredientes
propositum uxores sibi copulare praesumpserint, separentur. Hujusmodi
namque copulationem, quam contra ecclesiasticam regulam constat esse
contractam, matrimonium non esse censemus. Qui etiam ab invicem
separati, pro tantis excessibus condignam pœnitentiam agant.—Concil.
Lateran. II. ann. 1139 c. 7.
[783] Sed nimis abundans per universum orbem nequitia terrigenarum
corda contra ecclesiastica scita obduravit.—Orderic. Vital. P. III.
Lib. xiii. c. 20.
[784] Concil. Remens. ann. 1148 can. 3, 8. “Sanctorum patrum et
prædecessoris nostri Papæ Innocentii vestigia inhærentes, statuimus
quatenus episcopi, presbyteri, diaconi, etc.”
[785] Et ad hæc nihil ad præsens certius breviusque respondendum
occurrit, nisi quod ita sancti antistites sapuerunt: rectene? ipsi
viderint.—Lib. de Præcept. et Dispensat, cap. XVII.—Abelard contrasts
the contradictory canons of the church in these matters in his _Sic
et Non_ cap. CXXII. It was possibly among other motives the skilful
unveiling of ecclesiastical inconsistencies in this curious work
that led the authorities of the church to procure the compilation of
Gratian’s “Decretum.”
[786] Bernardi Epist. LXXVI.
[787] Ejusd. de Considerat. Lib. III. cap. v.
[788] Si vero diaconus a ministerio cessare voluerit, et contracto
matrimonio licite potest uti. Nam etsi in ordinatione sua castitatis
votum obtulerit, tamen tanta est vis in sacramento conjugii, quod nec
ex violatione voti potest dissolvi ipsum conjugium.—Comment. in Can. i.
Dist. XXVII.
The introduction of the doctrine of Innocent and Eugenius into the
church has given rise to some controversy. In the Encyclical of Aug.
22, 1851, and in the Syllabus of Dec. 1864, Pius IX. has condemned
the error of attributing it to Boniface VIII. Some zealously orthodox
writers have endeavored to prove that the church consistently
maintained this doctrine from the beginning, but the contrary is
admitted by the greater number of Catholic authorities. Cf. Zaccaria,
Storia Polemica, p. 346-7 and Bernal Diaz, Practice Criminalis Canonica
cap. 74.
[789] Gerhohi Tract. adv. Simoniac. c. 2.—About the year 1140, we find
St. Bernard (Epist. 203) writing to the bishop and clergy of Trèves,
urging them to labor for the reformation of a married subdeacon of
their church, in terms which show that no severe application of the
canons was to be expected.
[790] Gerhohi Exposit. in Psalm LXIV. cap. xlix.
[791] Gerhohi Exposit. in Psalm LXIV. c. xxxv. An allusion in this
passage to Eugenius III. and the council of Rheims shows that it was
written between 1148 and 1153. It seems that the nuns rebelled against
the canon (Concil. Remens. ann. 1148 can. iv.) confining them to their
convents under threat of deprivation of Christian sepulture.
[792] Ibid. cap. xlvi.
[793] Hugon. Rothomag. contra Hæret. Lib. III. cap. v.—Hugh gives
us in a new form the old calculation as to the comparative merits
of virginity, continence, and marriage—“Non centesimo honore cum
virginibus gloriatur, non sexagesima continentiæ palma lætatur, sed
tricesimo conjugii labore fatigatur.”
[794] Fortescue de Laud. Leg. Angl. cap. xxi.—Fortescue speaks of the
case as having occurred within his own knowledge.
[795] Et constituit ut nullus in sacris ordinibus habeat uxorem vel
concubinam.—Chron. S. Ægid. in Brunswig.
[796] Concil. Turon. ann. 1163 can. 4 (MS. St. Michael. ap. Harduin.
Tom. VI. P. ii. p. 1600).
[797] Qui autem a subdiaconatu vel supra ad matrimonia convolaverint,
mulieres etiam invitas et renitentes relinquant.—Concil. Abrincens.
ann. 1172 c. 1. I give this on the authority of the Abate Zaccaria
(Nuova Giustificazione del Celibato Sacro p. 120); there is no such
canon among those attributed to the council by Hardouin (T. VI. P. II.
p. 1634), and by Bessin (Concil. Rotomagensia, p. 86), whose accounts
of the proceedings are extracted from Roger of Hoveden and tally with
that given in the Gesta Henrici II. attributed to Benedict of Peterboro
(I. 33. M. R. Series). As a number of canons proposed by the papal
legates, Cardinals Theodwin and Albert, were rejected by the Norman
bishops, it is possible that the local reports and those current at
Rome may have differed.
[798] Post Concil. Lateran. P. XVIII. c. 12.
[799] Post Concil. Lateran. P. XVIII. e. 2, 6.
[800] Sane sacerdotes illi, qui nuptias contrahunt, quæ non nuptiæ
sed contubernia sunt potius nuncupanda, post longam pœnitentiam et
vitam laudabilem continentes, officio suo restitui poterunt, et ex
indulgentia sui episcopi ejus exsecutionem habere.—Can. 4 Extra, Tit.
iii. Lib. III.
[801] Post Concil. Lateran. P. XVIII. c. 4.
[802] Post Concil. Lateran. P. XVIII. c. 13.—In a decretal addressed
to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln, Alexander grants permission of
marriage to a certain subdeacon, and forbids interference with such
legitimate marriage, giving as a reason that the subdiaconate of the
person referred to carried with it no preferment.—Ibid. c. 14.
[803] Post Concil. Lateran. P. VI. c. 9.
[804] Votum simplex impedit sponsalia de futuro, non autem dirimit
matrimonium sequens; secus in voto solenni.—Can. 6 Extra Lib. IV. Tit.
vi.
The practical rule deduced by a shrewd lawyer in the latter half of the
thirteenth century from this varying legislation is, “Note deus relles;
que simple vou et sollempnié lie maeme quant à Deu; et simple vou
empêche à marier, mès il ne tost pas ce qui est fet; et note que vou,
de la nature de soi, ne dépièce pas mariage, mès c’est de constitucion
d’yglise”—(Livres de Jostice et de Piet, Liv. X. chap. vi. § 6). This
is likewise the conclusion reached by Thomas Aquinas, Summ. Theol.
Supp. Quæst. LIII. Art. i. ii.
[805] Alani ab Insulis Lib. Pœnitentialis.
[806] Post. Concil. Lateran. P. XIX. c. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9,
10.—Can. 10, 11, 12, 14, Extra Lib. I. Tit. xvii.
[807] Can. 17, 18, Extra Lib. I. Tit. xvii.
[808] Quia de talibus absque difficultate curia Romana dispensat,
quia et de subdiaconibus quibusdam audivimus a domino Papa
dispensatum.—Girald. Cambrens. Gemm. Eccles. Dist. II. cap. v.
[809] Consuetudinem introductam quod filii eorum qui vestras ecclesias
tenuerunt ... patribus ... consecuti, sub reprehensibili collusione
volunt ipsas ecclesias jure successionis habere, etc.—Lucii. PP. III.
Epist. 88.—Cf. Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1189 can. vi.
[810] Chartular. Eccles. Parisiens. No. XX. T. I. p. 35.
[811] D’Oudegherst, Annales de Flandre, chap. CIII.—Baluz. et Mansi
T. I.—Miræi Diplom. Lib. I. c. 88.—Grandes Chroniques, T. IV. pp.
339-42.—Innocent. PP. III. Regest. Append. ad Lib. XIV.
[812] Innocent. PP. III. Regest. XI. 204.
[813] Innocent. PP. III. Regest. XII. 13.
[814] Girald. Cambrens. Gemm. Eccles. Dist. II. cap. vi.
The “Gemma” was the favorite work of its author, who relates with pride
the approbation specially bestowed upon it by Innocent III.
[815] Yet so hopeless was this well-intentioned attempt, that Giraldus
is willing to let off his recalcitrant clergy with the simple
restriction demanded of the laity—abstinence for three days previous
to partaking of the communion. “Qui igitur in immunditiæ veluti suo
volutabro volvitur adhuc et versatur, hanc saltem altari sacro et
sacrificiis reverentiam sacerdos exhibeat, ut vel tribus diebus et
noctibus priusquam corpus Christi consecrare præsumat mundum ... vas
custodiat.”—Ibid. cap. vi.
[816] Hoc autem magistrum Petrum Manducatorem in audientia totius
scholæ suæ quæ tot et tantis viris literatissimis referta fuit dicentem
audivi, quia nunquam hostis ille antiquus in aliquo articulo, adeo
ecclesiam Dei circumvenit, sicut in voti illius emissione.—Ibid. cap.
vi.
[817] Epist. Henr. Card. Albanens. (Ludewig, Rei. Msctor. II. 441).
[818] Baluz. et Mansi III. 380.
[819] De filiis quoque sacerdotum, diaconorum, rusticorum, statuimus,
ne cingulum militare aliquatenus assumant; et qui jam assumpserunt, per
judicem provincias a militia pellantur.—Feudor. Lib. V. Tit. x.—Conf.
Conr. Urspergens. ann. 1187.
[820] Statut. Synod. Odon. Tullens. cap. vi. (Hartzheim III. 456).
[821] Can. 7 Extra Lib. V. Tit. xxxviii.
[822] Ne vero facilitas veniæ incentivum tribuat delinquendi:
statuimus, ut qui deprehensi fuerint incontinentiæ vitio laborare,
prout magis aut minus peccaverint, puniantur secundum canonicas
sanctiones, quas efficacius et districtius præcipimus observari, ut
quos divinus timor a malo non revocat, temporalis saltem pœna a peccato
cohibeat.
Si quis igitur hac de causa suspensus, divina celebrare præsumpserit,
non solum ecclesiasticis beneficiis spolietur, verum etiam pro hac
duplici culpa, perpetuo deponatur.
Prælati vero qui tales præsumpserint in suis iniquitatibus sustinere,
maxime obtentu pecuniæ vel alterius commodi temporalis, pari subjaceant
ultioni.
Qui autem secundum regionis suæ morem non abdicarunt copulam
conjugalem, si lapsi fuerint, gravius puniantur, cum legitimo
matrimonio possint uti.—Concil. Lateranens. IV. can. 14.
Ad abolendam pessimam, quæ in plerisque inolevit ecclesiis,
corruptelam, firmiter prohibemus, ne canonicorum filii, maxime spurii,
canonici fiant in sæcularibus ecclesiis, in quibus instituti sunt
patres etc.—Ibid. can. 31.
[823] See his instructions to his legates, cap. xi. (Martene Ampl.
Collect. VII. 267-74).
[824] Concil. Melfitan. ann. 1284 c. iii. (Ibid. p. 284).
[825] Tolle de ecclesia honorabile connubium et torum immaculatum;
nonne reples eam concubinariis, incestuosis, seminifluis, mollibus,
masculorum concubitoribus et omni denique genere immundorum?—Bernardi
Serm. lxvi. in Cantic. § 3.—This series is understood to have been
written in 1135.
[826] Bernardi Serm. de Conversione cap. xx.
[827] Constit. Gallonis cap. (Harduin. I. T. VI. P. II. p.
1975).—Giraldus Cambrensis, a few years earlier, makes the same
assertion (Gemma. Eccles. Dist. II. cap. xv.).
[828] Statut. Eccles. Trecorens. c. 32 (Martene Thesaur. IV. 1102). Cf.
Synod. Andegavens. ann. 1312 cap. 1. (D’Achery I. 742).
[829] Statut. Eccles. Nemausens. Tit. VII. c. 5 (Martene Thesaur. IV.
1044).
[830] Innocent. PP. III. Regest. Lib. XV. Epist. 113.
[831] Concil. Parisiens, ann. 1212 can. 4 (Harduin. T. VI. P. II. p.
2001).