On Simony, and That Nothing Be Demanded or Promised for Spiritual Things

Table of Questions

1 What simony is. 2 Whence it gets its name. 3 In what manner it is committed. 4 And in what manner it is induced. 8. 5 Whether a priest may hire out his labors. 6 Whether it is simony if a cleric, paid a fee, keeps vigil with the deceased and recites the psalter. 7 Whether it is simony if a judge refuses to absolve an excommunicate unless he first pays a certain sum of money. 9 Whether every pact induces simony. 10 Who is admitted to accuse a simoniac. 11 With what penalty simoniacs are struck, and what dispensation is applied with regard to them. 15. 12 One who confers simoniacally cannot thereafter give effect to the order. 13 Whether an excommunicated and deposed heretic can consecrate. 14 Why a layman convicted by inquisitorial procedure is degraded and not a religious. 16 Whether a bishop can dispense in a case of simony committed concerning the offices of the dead, etc.

It Has Been Said Above

It has been said above concerning accusations in general. And because the decretals propose to deal with crimes, he begins to treat of them, first placing the rubric on simony as on that crime in comparison with which others are counted as nothing, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Pertuas, C. 2 q. ult. cap. ult., and at [Extra], eodem [titulo], cap. Per tuas §Ceterasque; whence it is even called heresy, as at C. 1 q. 4 §Sed licet. Yet sometimes other crimes are said to be greater in respect of the greater penalty imposed; and thus resolve [the apparent contradiction] at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Per tuas at the end, and at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Licet §Praeterea — for instance, the crime of lèse-majesté; but in truth it is the lesser, because it is more grievous to offend the divine majesty than the temporal, as at [Extra] de haereticis, Ad abolendam §Credentes. This is to be considered here.

What Simony Is

What simony is. And whence it gets its name. In what manner it is committed. Who are admitted to the accusation of a simoniac. With what penalty they are struck. What dispensation, and by whom, is applied with regard to them. What of the money given on the occasion of simoniacal depravity.

What Simony Is

What simony is. It is indeed a deliberate will or desire to buy or sell spiritual things, or things annexed to spiritual things, according to Damasus and the other ancient doctors. But this description does not seem good, because it implies that simony is committed by intention alone. This, however, is false as regards the Church, though true as regards God, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Tua nos at the end. For if someone, drawn by such an intention, enters a monastery and is received on condition that he would give something, yet enters with no pact interposed, even though he afterwards gives something, he is not compelled to renounce the benefice or share thus acquired, nor is the recipient compelled to return what he received. Rather, such simony is wiped away by penance, because here he does not offend the Church but God alone, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. ult.: “Because intention judges the man,” at C. 22 q. 5 Quamplura and following. But the Church does not judge of hidden things, but God alone, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Sicut at the end, and C. 32 q. 5 Christiana. For if all that is committed in this world were punished by the Church, divine judgments would have no place, as at C. 1 q. 4 Si omnia.

But contrast [Extra] de usuris, Consuluit, and C. 14 q. 3 cap. 1, where usury is committed by intention alone without a pact. And if it is said that this is false in the judicial forum, as at [Extra] de usuris, In civitate, yet in the forum of conscience the man is held a usurer such that he must restore what he has thus received, as the decretal Consuluit says. Why then is it not the same here, so that in the forum of conscience the abbot is bound to restore the price, and the monk to renounce the benefice or fellowship thus acquired? It can be said that usury is condemned by both laws indifferently, and therefore is prohibited in the New Testament because it was condemned in the Old.

The same therefore holds in things prohibited, since the simoniacal is like the things forbidden as sacred. Whence the Lord also cast the sellers of doves out of the temple, as at C. 1 q. 1 Cum multis; and so can be understood C. 1 q. 1 Qui studet and cap. Reperiuntur and q. 3 Non solum, and C. 1 q. 1 Consequens. But the decretal Hic, cited at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. ult., speaks of simoniacs, because the buying [of a benefice], although in the Old Testament it was not prohibited, is today simoniacal — because it is prohibited; and so notes Vincentius at [Extra] de officio delegati, Ex parte I. Whence today too it is simoniacal to buy a vicarage, a stewardship, an advocacy, and such like, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Ad nostram, C. 1 q. 1 Si quis episcopus, and q. 3 Salvator. And in these things the will alone does not constitute the offense, but an act is required, according to Goffredus. This is true as regards the Church, as I have said.

Or it can be said that the reason it is otherwise at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. fin. — namely, that he is not bound to restore to him what he gave — is because a monk can have nothing of his own; whence, however much one should restore the price to him, it would always remain the monastery’s, as at [Extra] de statu monachorum, Cum ad monasterium. But he who gives money to a usurer would have it restored, because he has it as his own.

From this it appears that if a bishop, drawn by such hope, ordains a secular cleric and afterwards receives the money which he had hoped for, in the forum of conscience he is bound to return the money. And to the cleric it must be said that he had the same intention, so that he must not exercise his office until it has been dispensed with him. But what of celebrating in the church? This may sufficiently be granted, because if

[…] as was said, the Church does not judge concerning hidden things — as may be discussed below at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Quod de pecunia. ¶ For a second reason, the above description does not seem good, because it implies that simony is committed without a deliberate desire to sell or buy spiritual things, which is false, as appears in what follows below. ¶ It seems to me that it can be described thus. ¶ † Simony is the receiving or giving of spiritual things, or of what is annexed to spiritual things, with a preceding pact of promise, of a gift, of any manner of service, of a price, or of any temporal thing whatsoever, as will appear below. ¶ I call “spiritual” the orders [conferred] by the Church, and any spiritual benefice that ought to be conferred freely and of necessity, as at [Extra] de praebendis, Relatum, and [Extra] de officio archiepiscopi, cap. ult. Annexed to spiritual things are the fruits arising from these spiritual benefices; and so if one of these is bought without which the other could not be acquired, neither is left unbought. For spiritual things without temporal goods avail nothing, just as the soul does not live a bodily life without the body, as at C. 1 q. 1, Si quis obiecerit. According to Damasus, I understand this when the fruits are sold in perpetuity, that is, the very right of receiving them, as at [Extra] de rebus ecclesiae non alienandis, Ad audientiam, C. 1 q. 1 Si quis praebendas, C. 1 q. ult. Non satis. It is otherwise if the fruits are sold for a time and not the very right of receiving them, as will be said below at [Extra] Ne praelati vices suas, vers. Item praelatus, Sed quare. But here too one must distinguish: whether someone buys the fruits in perpetuity from a prelate who has the power of conferring [the benefice] — and then it is unlawful — or from the one who has received the benefice and from whom he can buy the fruits in perpetuity, that is, for as long as the beneficed person lives, according to Laurentius, by argument from [Extra] Ut beneficia ecclesiastica sine diminutione conferantur, cap. unic. at the end. And what the reason for the distinction is, see below at [Extra] Ne praelati vices suas, vers. Sed quare. ¶ Likewise, even a church may be given with a certain rent reserved upon it in perpetuity by common consent of the bishop and chapter, as at [Extra] de religiosis domibus, Constitutus, and [Extra] eodem [titulo], Querelam. But if a pact preceded the donation or the receipt that followed, then neither before nor after may anything be exacted or received; nor again, with no preceding pact, may anything be extorted violently under pretext of some custom — as if it should be customary to give something for pasture, or for pasturage, or for the ros [dew] or calamus [reed] without writing, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. 1, and C. 1 q. 3 Si quis obiecerit, Si quis praebenda. But what is freely offered may be freely accepted, as is proved in the case of the court at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Dilectus filius and cap. Et si quaestiones, at the end. ¶ Or say that the rights of patronage are annexed to spiritual things, which are forbidden to be sold just as spiritual things are, as at [Extra] de iure patronatus, cap. De iure, cap. Quia clerici, and [Extra] de rerum permutatione, Quaesitum, and [Extra] de iudiciis, Sto. A thing is called annexed to the spiritual on account of a certain conformity, namely, that it falls to a layman and is possessed by a layman, since no other spiritual right falls to a layman except the right of burial (ff. de mortuo inferendo, l. 1) and the right of electing if his custom is confirmed by privilege, as at [Extra] de iure patronatus, Nobis, according to Bonifacius. The same holds also in many other spiritual rights granted by the pope, as at D. 22 §Vetus, C. 16 q. 1 De decimis, A nobis, and cap. Tua, and below. ¶ But annexed to the spiritual is also the right of receiving income by reason of a canonry or prelacy. For although such a right is spiritual, nevertheless it is said to be annexed because of the temporal

quality which inheres in receiving, according to Goffredus. ¶ Therefore in these matters every condition, every promise, every pact for temporal advantage induces simony, as at [Extra] de rerum permutatione, Quaesitum, [Extra] de pactis, cap. ult., and C. 1 q. 1 Cum pio. It is otherwise if afterwards [a gift] is freely offered, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], cap. Tua nos in the middle, paragraph 1, and at [Extra] eodem [titulo] vers. Item et ecclesias. For there are certain things which, even if dishonourably petitioned, [are nonetheless lawful], as at [Extra] de magistris, cap. 1 §Utrum a scholaribus, vers. Si vero magistro. But let everyone beware of evil intent, as is noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] §Si non sit, paragraph 1. Likewise, a lawful condition, and one that may be added by law, may be appended, as at [Extra] Et causa, cap. In causa, and [Extra] de electione, Significasti.

And Whence It Is Named

†a And indeed it is called simony from Simon Magus, who first in the New Testament wished to buy grace from blessed Peter. It is also called the cupiditas Gieziti, that is, the cupidity of Gehazi, from Gehazi the servant of Elisha, who first in the Old Testament sold the grace of healing to Naaman, the prince of the army of the king of the Assyrians, whence he was struck with the leprosy from which Naaman had suffered and from which Naaman was healed, as at C. 1 q. 1 Quod studet, and cap. Cito turpem. And therefore it is said that such men receive their portion with Gehazi and Simon, at [Extra] eodem [titulo] Non satis, cap. seq., and cap. Sicut pro certo. So too one who takes honour upon himself is bidden to share with Dathan and Abiron, whom the earth swallowed alive, as at [Extra] de electione, Sed evitanda §Si quis autem. ¶ From what has been said it is clear that, properly speaking, the seller of spiritual things is a “Gehazite” and the buyer truly a “simoniac.” But usage has prevailed that both are called simoniacs, according to Goffredus.

How It Is Committed

† Take it in by these verses: ¶ “Gift, tongue, flesh, fear, and the favour of the people ¶ hinder a spiritual thing from being given freely.” ¶ The “gift” is of three kinds; therefore it is said, “Blessed is he who shaketh his hands from every gift” [Isaiah 33:15]. For there is a gift “from the hand,” namely when money is given; likewise “from the tongue,” that is, favour, as follows; likewise “from service,” namely service unduly rendered, as at C. 1 q. 1 Sunt nonnulli. Understand

a preceding pact in either case. Hence if I promise you a church so that you may further my business in the Roman curia, it is simoniacal, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo] Cum essent. But it is otherwise if I serve you, led by this hope as a secondary motive, namely that you do me a favour, but principally I serve you freely. That is to say, if I principally serve you freely, expecting a benefice from you as a secondary thing, I do not transgress, by argument from l. fi. de pact. Quod proderit and ff. de petitione hereditatis, Sed si hac l. §Consuluit. But if I serve you principally so that you may give me a benefice and secondarily without charge, then I transgress; yet even in this case it suffices for me to make satisfaction to the Creator by penance, as noted at paragraph 3 §Quid sit. And according to this distinction, understand [Extra] eodem [titulo], Tua nos, according to Goffredus, and certain other laws which are alleged for and against the proposition that I am able to serve: l. fi. de pact. Miramur, D. 59 Si officia, D. 74 Consuluit, D. 76 In singulis, C. 8 q. 1 Qui episcopatum, and on the contrary C. 8 q. 1 Sunt in ecclesia, C. 12 q. 2 Habebat. ¶ Or one may distinguish otherwise, according to Goffredus: for either the service is corporeal or spiritual. If it is corporeal and honourable, it does not induce vice, provided no pact intervenes — as if someone should serve his bishop in honourable matters, for instance by going to Rome, by acting as his advocate, by managing his affairs. And this is hinted at in C. 1 q. 1 Sunt nonnulli, where “the gift from service” is said to be service unduly rendered; and you may understand this where one who is worthy and honourable renders the service, as has been said. But if an unworthy person renders it to a worthy one, or a worthy person to an unworthy one, it does not lack the vice of simony. And if the service is spiritual and is rendered by pact, it induces the vice, unless it is annexed to your benefice or to your person, as at [Extra] de praebendis, Significatum, according to Goffredus, and unless [the case of] [Extra] eodem [titulo], vers. Et sunt haec, [applies]. ¶ But “the gift from the hand” always induces simony, unless it be so small that it ought not to move the mind of the giver, taking into account the quality of the persons, the cause, and the time. Hence sometimes a horse given does not induce simony, much less an electuary or wine or other things of small price, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo] Ex tue, Sic et pro modico; and if there are ques-

tions, understand it if no pact preceded; otherwise even for six shillings he commits simony, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo] Ex tue, Sic et pro modico — and for a small amount he commits theft, at C. 14 q. ult., c. ult. ¶ Say that whatever men do, intention judges all in respect of God, as is noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] §Quod sit; and join [to this] what is noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] vers. Quaerit de enceniis and what follows. Therefore Laurentius said: ¶ “In the giving of gifts attend to these four things: ¶ who gives, who asks, what the thing is, what the cause of the asking.” It is an ancient common proverb: “Not all things, not from all, nor to all.” For it is very inhuman to be willing to receive from no one; but to receive all things and from all is most base, as at ff. de officio proconsulis, Solet §ult. Therefore it is lawful to accept food and drink which can be consumed within three days, as at ff. de officio praesidis, Plebiscito. ¶ And briefly one must consider what he offers, D. 19 Servi. ¶ Likewise of what sort he offers, D. 49 cap. pen. and ult. ¶ Likewise from whom he offers, by argument from C. 3 q. 7 In gradibus. ¶ Likewise for what he offers, C. 1 q. 1 Dictum est 2. ¶ Likewise before he offers, de consecratione D. 1 Quod dixerit. ¶ Likewise with what intention he offers, C. 8 q. 1 In scripturis and [Extra] de electione, Officii. ¶ Likewise how much he offers, C. 17 q. 1 Ananias. Whence Seneca [tells of] a certain Cynic, that is, a “ribald reprover” — for “Cynic” comes from cynos, which means “dog,” whence “Cynic,” meaning as it were a “biting” or “doglike” reprover. So a certain such fellow asked of King Antigonus a talent. The king replied that it was more than ought to be given to a Cynic. Then the Cynic asked for a denarius. The king replied that it was less than was fitting for a king to give, and thus he sent him away — though he could have given him a talent as a king, or a denarius as to a Cynic. ¶ In such cases excepted by the law, however, a gift may be received, namely if it is freely offered, at C. 1 q. 1 Quicquid invisibilis and q. 2 Quam pio at the end, and cap. Placuit, at [Extra] eodem [titulo] Dilectus filius, and is noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] §Quid sit, vers. In his ergo. Likewise where those things concur which are noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] vers. Sed minus and what follows. Likewise for spiritual works, as where one is not bound by office to do this, C. 12 q. 2 Caritate — which, say, as noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] vers. Et sunt haec. ¶ Likewise when alms are given for eternal life and for the remission of sins, which are to be redeemed by alms, C. 12 q. 2 Animae, [Extra] de testamentis, cap. fi., C. 1 q. 1 Ipsi sacerdotes. ¶ Likewise to redeem oneself from vexation, [Extra] eodem [titulo] Dilectus; which, say, as noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo] sub §Lingua, vers. Sed nunquid licet. ¶ The sixth case is in visitations, [Extra] de censibus, Cum apostolus and Consecrationibus, [Extra] eodem [titulo] Cum sit Romana — for these expenses the visitor or consecrator may receive payment, because he is not bound to serve at his own expense, [Extra] de praescriptionibus, Cum ex officii. And so he does not sin, because he who sins does not do this by authority of the law, C. 23 q. 4 Qui peccat, [Extra] de privilegiis, Ut privilegia, where with the pope’s licence [Mass] is celebrated without sin in a church under interdict. It is therefore lawful for the consecrator to receive procuration, and thus to con-

to consecrate [a church]; and nonetheless he seems to do this gratis, as in de vita et honestate clericorum, cum ab omni; C. 4 q. 3, verbum item venturis.

Yet do not understand

Yet do not understand that he may demand anything for the act of consecration itself; otherwise it would be contrary to C. 1 q. 1, statuimus.

But for the labour

But for the labour of the journey [something may be received]: C. 12 q. [2], charitatem. And for the labour itself something can be received even if the church lies within the city: de censibus, venerabili. For although the bishop labours more in going to the said [outlying] church, he also labours in going to a church within the city — so Goffredus. But since such labour is a spiritual one which the prelate is bound of necessity to undertake and which is enjoined upon him by his office, it is better to say that custom gives this right: [Extra] eodem, ad apostolicam; and because it is equitable that he who sows spiritual things should reap temporal things, as is shown by many examples in C. 13 q. 1 §. quia ergo. Indeed this occurs by reason of harmony [converitatis], as in de censibus, cum venerabilis. Whence, just as the visitation itself [cannot be prescribed against], so neither can the procuration due by reason of the visitation be prescribed against: de prescriptionibus, cum ex officio §. nos igitur, ad hoc; [Extra] de concessione prebende non vacantis, postulastis §. de consti, translato.

And these things are an argument

And these things are an argument that a priest may hire out his labours if he has no other means of living: D. 91 cc. 1, 2, and 3; C. 1 q. 1, iudices; C. 1 q. 2, cc. penult. and ult.; C. 10 q. 2, relatum; C. 12 q. 2, charitatem, c. quicunque, and c. ecclesiasticis; and the argument optimum at C. 12 q. 1, illi qui; [Extra] tit. 1 c. fin. But let him take care that his principal intention is directed not to the money but to obtaining remission or pardon. If, however, the priest is dispensed and instituted to a church, such a one ought to receive nothing by pact even on the pretext of expenses: de consecratione D. 1, c. sufficit. Yet the parishioners are to be compelled to pay what laudable custom has introduced: [Extra] eodem, ad apostolicam at the end. And so oblations are to be given: C. 16 q. 1, statuimus; C. 32 q. 2, propter hoc at the end.

What if the oblations do not suffice

What if the oblations do not suffice? Say as noted at [Extra] de parochiis §. in quibus sub §. hic tamen sciendum, verse vel nisi sacerdotes and following.

What if a clerk hired for a price

What if a clerk, hired for a price, keeps vigil with the deceased and recites the psalter? I answer: if he made the pact thus — “for six pence I will read the psalter” — it is simony. But if he said this — “for six pence I will keep vigil with the deceased tonight” — it is not simony, since it is tacitly implied that he ought to read. The argument is in de clericis, significasti at the end; de prebendis, significatum; and ff. de heredibus instituendis, si quis sempronium. And thus he can sell labour which he is not bound to undertake of necessity or by his office — provided it is not spiritual.

Nevertheless, although ecclesiastical sacred things

Nevertheless, although ecclesiastical sacred things must be conferred gratis — nor ought anything to be received for burials or the funeral rites of the dead, or for the blessings of those marrying, or for other ecclesiastical sacraments or blessings to be conferred, nor for chrism nor for oil, even though the name be changed — as in [Extra] eodem, cum ecclesie, c. ea que, c. ad nostram, and c. suam,

and c. in tantum — nevertheless it is commanded that laudable customs be observed: [Extra] eodem, quod iij. quesitum; D. 18, de eulogiis; in the Authentic de sanctissimis episcopis §. pro consuetudinibus.

But on the contrary, that no custom avails

But on the contrary, that no custom avails: [Extra] eodem, satis and c. seq. Nor is anything to be given for a church to be carried in procession, or to be consecrated, or for an abbot or abbess to be installed in his see; nor for the investiture of a church is the archdeacon to demand a mark of silver, nor the archpriest a white cow, nor any quantity of money. Nor for the consecrations of bishops, the blessings of abbots, or the ordinations of clerks, although by corrupt usage it has been fixed how much is to be given to this one or that — as some do who wish to have kettles or bowls and napkins: [Extra] eodem, in tantum and c. sicut. And for refreshment too nothing ought to be demanded, as I said in [the section] de eodem §. quid sit, verse item et ecclesia; and it is proved in [Extra] eodem, veniens. Whence neither is the prebend to be withheld from a canon newly received on the grounds that he refuses to give the dinner which the newly received canons have customarily given: [Extra] eodem, Iacobus.

Resolution: nothing is to be received by pact

By pact nothing is to be received on the pretext of any custom; but if it be freely offered, it may be received: as noted above §. quid sit, verse in his ergo, and C. 1 q. 2, sicut episcopum.

Or better

Or better: either clerks demand from laity on the pretext of custom — and then the clerks ought not to retain a spiritual pledge; rather, they ought to bury or give blessings gratis, and afterwards, the truth being known, the laity will be compelled by the bishop of the place to observe the laudable custom introduced by the pious devotion of the faithful toward the church, mother of God: as in c. ad apostolicam. Or clerks demand from clerks — and then if the clerks demanding seek something in which their own private utility is concerned (for instance, food or a banquet, because their belly is their god, or any sum of money which you wish to turn to their own uses), it is not to

be tolerated, as in the agreements which I noted in [the section] de eodem, verse sed contra.

What then if by custom

What then if by custom a canon newly received ought to make a cope or give a fixed sum of money for the fabric of the church, or for the lights, or for other things which pertain only to divine worship? I say the custom is to be observed as laudable: argument from [Extra] de prebendis, significatum; de his que fiunt a maiore parte capituli, c. fin.; de testamentis, c. officii, c. ult.; and [Extra] eodem, ad apostolicam. Yet the prebend is not to be retained as a pledge: argument of the same decretal. Or say that it can well be retained, if the custom is that the prebend is not assigned until he has made the cope. For in this case God can demand something spiritual from the clerk made canon, so that in this way a kind of exchange of spiritual for spiritual takes place: as in [Extra] de rerum permutatione, ad questiones.

And so in this exaction

And so in this exaction only the private utility of the canons is condemned, not the public: argument from [Extra] de constitutionibus, cum omnes, c. cum M., and c. ex parte. For avarice is feared — whence even clerks do not demand tithes from clerks: [Extra] de decimis cc. 1 and 2; de censibus, ea que; and de prebendis, avaritie. To laymen, however, grace is to be conferred gratis: as in [Extra] eodem, in tantum §. 1, and [Extra] de magistris, prohibemus.

What about those who have separate cemeteries

What about those who have separate cemeteries — one into which no one enters unless he be a canon or brother, and another common one — and it is fixed for how much a stranger can be reckoned a brother, that is, for how much he can be buried in the brothers’ cemetery? I say this is simoniacal: [Extra] eodem, audivimus and c. sicut. For nothing ought to be received for the ground: as in [Extra] de sepulturis, obolende; nor for the office: as has been said above, verse in casibus.

What if the greater cross is not carried

What if the greater cross is not carried unless a fixed price is had? This is without doubt simoniacal, and is the appearance of evil and a sign of avarice, therefore to be condemned: [Extra] eodem, audivimus, and note above, verse quid ergo at the end.

What about those who make a pact for the redemption of the bier

What about those who make a pact for the redemption of the bier, that for a fixed price, before

the body is carried to the church, certainly both the bier and the pall are of equal value? Therefore they can be sold, redeemed, donated, and exchanged, both at the outset and after the fact.

What if the clerks refuse to bury the body

What if the clerks refuse to bury the body unless a pact for the return of the bier is first interposed? This is the appearance of evil, since a pact is made of the temporal for the spiritual: [Extra] de rerum permutatione, c. ult.

What if, after the body is carried

What if, after the body has been carried to the church, the clerks wish to recover the bier, even by violently carrying it off to their own house? I answer: nonetheless the body must be buried gratis and with honour. But since the general or quasi-general custom of the church is that the bier be retained by the clerks, the friends [of the deceased] can be compelled by ecclesiastical censure to restore the bier, because such a custom is laudable. In this case or one like it can be understood [Extra] eodem, ad apostolicam.

What if the custom is

What if the custom is that the priest ought to have the garments which the dead man was wearing at the time of death — as in the castle of Clariacum in the diocese of Vienne? I say that he is to be buried gratis and the layman to be coerced, namely the heir or him who possesses [the garments], to render the clothing: as in the next decretal, by whose authority I judged these things when I was with the lord Iohannes, archpriest of Vienne, then legate of the Apostolic See, who also approves these same things. But the priest ought not to retain as a pledge the funeral rites, which must be conferred gratis even to one to whom he was otherwise obliged: as in [Extra] de sepulturis, parochiano; and de natis ex libero, c. unico.

What if the custom is that one marrying

What if the custom is that one marrying who receives the blessing should give six pence or five shillings? I judge this the same way: that the blessing be conferred gratis, and afterwards he be compelled to pay through ecclesiastical censure — not on the occasion of a written document, which the layman does not request, as is done at Brasle, who, just as he ought not to sell his hand, so neither his pen: as in c. [sicut] and C. 1 q. 1, sicut episcopum. It is perhaps otherwise if those marrying wish to have a document and request it from a lay notary, or even a clerk who is not bound to render the service from his own resources: et q. et precarie.

What if a priest refused to baptize

What if a priest refused to baptize an infant unless a candle or one penny were first paid, alleging custom on this matter — as is done at Vapincum [Gap]? I corrected the priests on this point, because he must baptize gratis and afterwards compel the godfather to pay what pious laudable custom has introduced: [Extra] eodem, ad apostolicam. Thus this decretal is as it were the centre of this title, and in this manner it resolves countless questions.

Concerning gifts [encenia]

It is asked concerning gifts [encenia] whether they induce simony, and it seems that they do not, provided the number is not large in quantity: ff. de officio proconsulis, solet §. non ante and §. fin. For he may lawfully receive food and drink which can be presumed to be consumed within three days: ff. de officio presidis, plebiscito. Yet these too — even the prophets — used to offer alms; rather were the gifts of the tabernacle esteemed greater [than those] of the prophet: C. 4 q. 4, iudices. According to Goffredus, say as noted in [Extra] eodem, verse sed mun., and in [Extra] de censibus §. fin., verse hodie vero.

And is simony committed for a small amount

And is simony committed for a small amount? Yes: for thirty shillings will induce it: [Extra] eodem, c. venies. And see

thus, ex tuc. and dnq oboli. s.q.s. iudices. another reading begins duces and tremissis. s.q.s. placuit vt nullus. Of the coin: 6 and either a tremissis, the third part of a solidus — so called because the tremissis makes up the solidus, according to Isidorus. Concerning this tremissis, see C. de veste mili. l. fortissimus li. x.

Likewise the simoniac is compared to a thief

s.q.s. ordinationes, and in theft no distinction is made as to quantity. xiiii.q.vi.c.fi. Likewise simony is compared to the crime of usury, since both are committed by intention alone, as noted s.co.6.qd sit, and in usury no distinction is made — indeed it is committed even through a small cup of wine or by postponement, for whatever exceeds the principal is usury. xiiii.q.iiii pleriqz. Say [that] whenever something is given by pact, it is simony, and renunciation is necessary. But whenever, without a pact, the intention has been corrupted, it suffices to satisfy one’s Creator through penance, j.c.si. — where, since the corruption of the mind is not established, the circumstances are considered, concerning which you have j.co. and the questions according to Goffredus. Say as noted s.e.s. quid sit. s.quat’r.ver.sed munus and following.

Likewise it is asked

whether one commits simony if something is given for a chalice or for vestments or for altar-linens to be blessed. And certain men say no, unless he finds this expressly stated — as is seen in the case of chrism, baptism, communion, the eucharist, balsam, burial, and the dedication of basilicas. s.q.s. dictum and c. placuit. nullus, and c. placuit. vt vnusquisqz, j.e. cu i ecclesie. And Bernardus wrote the same to brother Raymundus. But Goffredus notes [that] in any ecclesiastical mystery whatever simony can be committed, j.c.ad nostram, which I think more true.

But whether

he who has acquired a benefice simoniacally is bound for all the fruits he has received and which could have been received. So it is, just as with the thief and robber. s.q.s. ordinationes. And therefore, just as the thief is always in delay and is held liable for damages — C.qd me.causa.l.s. C.de condi. fur.l.s. C.de fur.subtracto — so also for all the fruits, and as a violent possessor, s.de resti.spo.grauis. For generally one possessing without title is held liable for all losses and for fruits received and to be received. ff.de rei ven.si nauis.S.generaliter. The same holds if he has a title, but such a one as is to be reckoned as no title. C. de agri. et censi. queadmodum. ff. quod met.causa. sed et partus.

“Lingua caro” etc.

That is, carnal entreaties which are feared or which one favors — these induce simony. Yet by these, if one promotes someone to a prelacy by his own prayers, especially when conferred by election, simony is committed. And in this case I understand [that] no man should take honor upon himself, but he who is called by God as Aaron, as s.de ele.quat’r. viii.q.j. in scripturis. j.q.vj. sicut is and q.j. ordinationes.c.c. nullus itaqz. For increases of honor should come to each man not by ambition but by labor, as C. de re mili. publica lib. xii. however worthy he may be, as s. de insti.c. vlti. and de iure pa, per nostras, and de elec. per inquisitionem. For a simple benefice, however, one may offer prayers on his own behalf, provided he is worthy,

as j.co.tua nos. §.j. In princ. and de cle. excom. mini. proposuit.

But if by another’s prayers

one is promoted, and [those prayers are] spiritual, it does not induce simony. ar. xliij. dist. principali. j.q.j. latore. Unless consanguinity draws them in. s.q.s. de ordinationibus. argu. s. de preben. graue, and vt bene.ecc.vt nostra. For unjust love of the heart induces simony. j.q.j. si quis neque sanctis, and c. sunt nonnulli, where it is said [that] they take the place of a price. T. et H. naturali — for since nothing is given etc., he does not lose the simony charge, j.q.j. impio. Which I understand when the kinsman is unworthy; otherwise the prelate is the more strongly bound to provide for him than for a stranger. argu. s. de coha. cleri. et mu. c.j. “Therefore do not despise your blood, that is, one worthy and lawful.” j.q.j. filium and c. quibusdam, ad fi. But the prelates of our time, embracing this too much, today reckon almost nothing worthy except their own blood. Hence Bernardus: “A marvelous thing — bishops have someone to whom they entrust souls; but to whom they may entrust temporal things they do not find. For a bishop will readily entrust many thousands of souls to some little nephew of his, to whom he would not entrust two pears.”

But if someone for me

offers or promises prayers or money — when I have expressly forbidden it — it does not harm me. as j.e. sicut nobis. §. pe., and de homicidio. pe. trua. Otherwise if it is done with my knowledge and acquiescence: for then I am said to interpose my disturbed will, and therefore however secretly it may be done I ought to renounce, if I wish to save my soul — mindful of that word, “It profits a man nothing if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul.” vt.j.c. mattheus.

But if this happens entirely without my knowledge

and by an enemy wishing to impede my promotion, which he hopes [to prevent], I do not lose [the benefice] by simony, as regards myself, lest he should reap from his own deceit what he intends. as j.co. sicut nobis. §. pe. and c. nobis fuit. rh.j.

But if my friend has given money

I am simoniacally promoted but I am not a simoniac; yet I am bound to renounce. as j.c. de simoniace. and c. o regularib[us]

I shall speak more fully. j. e. §. qua pena.

But if prayers are offered, and on account of the prelacy the prayers are unjust

But if prayers are offered, and on account of the prelacy the prayers are unjust — especially when it is a layman whose countenance can be feared — as s. de ele. ostis. and c. quisqs, and de iure pat. ppterea. xvj. q. vij. si qs deinceps. Unless perhaps the prelate, with no regard to the prayers, installs him on his own office alone, the necessity or utility of the church demanding it, as s. de eta. et qua. tua.

But where they are offered for a simple benefice, and he for whom they are offered is unworthy

But where they are offered for a simple benefice, and he for whom they are offered is unworthy, he commits simony. f. q. i. de ordinationibus and c. sunt nonulli.

But if he is worthy and the prayers do not follow as the principal cause

But if he is worthy and the prayers do not follow as the principal cause, it is not simony. j. q. i. quibusda. ar. ad hoc, s. de eta. et qua. tuaz.

Just as a spiritual right cannot be sold, so neither can it be redeemed

Just as a spiritual right cannot be sold, so neither can it be redeemed, as j. c. querela. Nor resigned for money, j. q. i. nullus eps. ij. For in all these every transaction and every pact is reproved, as s. dixi et probat. ff. de pac. cum pride. and de transactionib super eo. xvj. q. vij.

But may I redeem a wrong done to me without fear of this crime

But may I redeem a wrong done to me without fear of this crime — suppose a bishop unjustly excommunicates me or threatens to take away a benefice which I unjustly possess; I give him money so that he may revoke the unjust sentence or desist from this wrong, and indeed I lawfully redeem my right although he unlawfully receives [the money]. ar. j. q. iij. quesitum. j. de magistris phibeas, and de vsur. c. f. “Let us redeem the time, according to the Apostle, for the days are evil.” ar. j. c. ad aures and c. dilectus, and j. and C. mandati p diuersas, and ff. de bonis coruz q ante Iniam mor. sibi cosci. l. f. Nor is j. co. querela an obstacle, where both seem to be prohibited — namely to buy and to redeem — because there [the word] “to redeem” is explained as “to be assigned for money.” Likewise j. eod. nemo is no obstacle, because there harassment is not redeemed, but absolution is bought, according to Goffredus. Or otherwise, as follows: but if someone is justly excommunicated, or has justly acquired a benefice, here on this account simony is committed. argu. j. eodem. f. qd f. nullus epo. ij. and §. preced. Therefore the redemption of a spiritual thing is permitted to him [who] tru-

ly and unjustly [suffers] and redeems. But it is forbidden to the one receiving, and to the one receiving for the cessation of harassment.

What if a judge will not absolve the excommunicate

What if a judge will not absolve the excommunicate unless he first pays a certain sum of money? Say as noted j. de excel. plā. j. ver. quid si petit rone pluetudinis and the preceding.

It is therefore lawful for a bishop to redeem tithes from the hand of laymen

It is therefore lawful for a bishop to redeem tithes from the hand of laymen. j. de vsuris. c. f. Which understand if he redeems from a knight; otherwise if he had bought them from neighbors, and those who are bound thereto are willing to pay them — thus notes Ioannes f. q. iij. puenit. But against the express xvj. q. vij. decias. f. q. iij. altare. Whence there were those who said that this is understood when he redeems without the authority of a superior. But with the authority of a superior it is lawful. ar. s. de prbn. nisi essent and c. in lateranesi, and de his que fiunt a pla. cū aplica., and de re. pmu. c. f., and de trasac. statuim. and c. decetero, and c. veniens. ff. de his q no. infe. furti § qui iussu.

Others say that bishops are forbidden to redeem tithes from laymen for this reason

Others say that bishops are forbidden to redeem tithes from laymen for this reason — lest the layman take it as an example and believe himself to have a right [to them], when in fact he does not, as s. de prscri. cū cām.

That seems truer, that by the authority of a superior this can be done

That seems truer, that by the authority of a superior this can be done, so that the cause of bad example may also be avoided. For he is said [to act] on the ground that one detains them from God, who [detains] his own soul — since they are spiritual, and since they cannot even be redeemed unless the superior, by interposing his authority, purges the simony which would otherwise be committed on this occasion. Moreover, because the layman is to be induced through the superior to make restitution to the proper parish and to receive a benefice; for if he is willing to receive money therefor, he commits simony — indeed to such a degree that the superior’s authority could not purge it on his side. And add what is noted s. de deci. § si. sub § ij.

What if I make a pact with the presenter

What if I make a pact with the presenter, that I will not disturb him concerning the title to be obtained — without doubt it is simoniacal. as s. c. p tuas. ij. de hoc. ie. f. § qua pana. sub § p iudicem. ver. sz et eps.

Likewise, money given or a promise made for the acquiring of a benefice

Likewise, money given or a promise made for the acquiring of a benefice — whether the benefice be secular, or of a secular church, or religious — induces simony, even if given by the parents without the knowledge of the one promoted. as j. c. ex insinuatione, and de regularib. c. sicut nobis. § pe., and c. nobis, and c. tua nos. Which say as noted s. §. j. versi. mihi autē.

And it is also to be noted

And it is also to be noted that, just as a simoniac is one who acquires a spiritual thing by means of money or pact, so too [he is one who] resigns [it thus]. j. co. querelam. s. de testi. veniens. For “to give” is understood as [remitting] whatever is owed to oneself. viij. q. iij. talia. ff. de cal. quin etiam, and ff. de cdi. cā da. silr. Although there is an argument to the contrary: ff. qui. mo. pt. vel. hipo. fol. l. f. § cū debitor. C. ad velleia. etiā. ff. de his que in frau. credi. si pignus.

And in the same way it is simoniacal to reconcile a sinner — or not to reconcile him — for money

And in the same way it is simoniacal to reconcile a sinner — or not to reconcile him — for money. j. eodem. nemo, and c. ad aures. Nor be surprised if two contraries come to the same result; for this happens elsewhere also: as if a price is received

[…] should be received for accusing or for giving testimony, or not elected, or not denounced. For all these things are punished by the same law: C. 2 q. 1, Prohibent, and the same follows at C. 1 q. 1 §Qui autem pecunia. But there is an objection from cap. 1, C. 1 q. 1: “There are certain men who by violence or favor do not permit churches to be ordered [rightly]; we decree that these are to be judged as sacrilegious.” But say “as sacrilegious,” understanding also “and nonetheless as simoniacs,” according to Goffredus and all the doctors in common — which I understand when violence is brought in by reason of a pact; otherwise I do not think this is to be understood.

¶ † But not every pact induces simony, and therefore not every pact deserves the penalty. For something may even be given afterwards so that an oratory may be built upon it, as at [Extra] de restitutione spoliatorum, Olim, 1; and license to build the oratory itself may be given under a certain pact, as at C. 18 q. 1, Eleutherius, [Extra] de religiosis domibus, Constitutus, [Extra] de censibus, Quanto, by argument from [Extra] eodem [titulo], Ex insinuatione. For such pacts are reckoned spiritual, as also is the case at [Extra] de praebendis, Significatum, Sicut, [Extra] de servis non ordinandis, Nullus, [Extra] de electione, Significasti, C. 10 q. 1, cap. 1. And in the handing over of one’s own property anyone may attach whatever pact he pleases, as at ff. de pactis, In traditionibus, [Extra] de conditionibus appositis, Veruntamen.

¶ But can security ever be exacted before promotion under the vice of simony? Not before, but it may be afterwards, as at C. 8 q. 3, Talia, and C. 1 q. 2, Cum pio — provided that no pact preceded; otherwise, as at C. 8 q. 3, Artaldus. Afterwards, also, the security is given that is approved by ancient custom, as at D. 63, Quare sancta. Except a superior, who may exact both before confirmation and afterwards the due security, as at [Extra] de electione, Significasti, D. 23, Quacumque, D. 28, De circumcisione, [Extra] de iureiurando, c. D., Adoptatum. For the authority of a superior frequently removes [the taint], as at [Extra] de pactis, Cum pridem, [Extra] de transactionibus, Statuimus, [Extra] de praebendis, Nisi essent, ff. de his qui notantur infamia, Furti, §Qui iussu. Yet not before the election or promotion, as by the argument at [Extra] de electione, Officii.

Who is to be admitted to the accusation of a simoniac

Who is to be admitted to the accusation of a simoniac? Indeed, according to Damasus, all persons, even irregular ones — [Extra] eodem, Tanta, §Si clericus sit male fame. For since the accusation of simony proceeds in the manner of an accusation of treason [lese-majesty], as at C. 15 q. 3, Sane, C. de episcopali audientia, l. fin., and in the crime of treason criminal clerics are not admitted unless they are of good reputation, as at C. 1 q. 1, In primis — therefore neither in the crime of simony. Yet it is certain that, since the accuser does not prove but the witness does, many are admitted to accuse who are repelled from testimony. And so one must subtly distinguish between accusers and witnesses, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Testimonium beli., [Extra] de purgatione at the end. Therefore anyone is to be admitted, by argument from [Extra] de filiis presbyterorum, Sicut simoniaca. But on this it has been said fully, as noted at [Extra] de accusationibus, §Quis accusare, and the following verse, and especially according to Bernardus.

But to testimony criminal clerics do not seem to be admitted. Regulars, however, are admitted, but provided that those regulars who are defamed are also witnesses amended of their

crime; let proceedings be civil for removal from administration, where there may be objected against the witnesses capital enmity or conspiracies, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas, according to Damasus. I say that the witnesses, even if criminal, must especially have been amended of the crime, and they must be supported by other corroborations — which I believe necessary when they are criminal and not amended; otherwise, especially when they are not partakers in the crime and testify without bribe out of zeal for justice, and only lesser crimes are objected against them, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas, rh. 1, fin. Praeterea, in the following at the word Ceteras, a regular of inferior grade who is gravely defamed and can easily be removed without scandal is admitted, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas, rh. fin., at Item verum and following, and at Ille quidem, when proceedings are civil and under the temperance of equity not to depose from the order but to remove from administration, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas and at Utrum is. Therefore such persons are rightly admitted in such a manner, since they are removed for lighter causes, just as the approved custom of certain religious orders requires, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas, §fin., and [Extra] de appellationibus, Quare nos, and [Extra] de accusationibus, Qualiter, at the end. Therefore plainly an inquisition concerning regulars must proceed without uproar, since it is not fitting for the servants of God to be entangled in these subtleties. Yet it is true, if they raise such crimes, that those exceptions are to be reserved to them, and that thus no criminal witness — even if supported by corroborations — is admitted, as at [Extra] de accusationibus, Olim, 1, 2, and following, [Extra] de statu monachorum, cap. Monachi, §Priores. And so I say that the foregoing distinction is to be diligently observed: if even one element fails, I reject the witness. Thus I do not admit criminal persons without corroborations, even in the crime of simony, nor regulars of inferior grade.

¶ Those who testify from zeal for justice but with the goad of malignity I reject as capital enemies and conspirators, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas, §Nos vero.

¶ Likewise, I reject the aforesaid if proceedings are for deposition from grade, or even if the crime is denounced by someone in order that he be removed from administration, since then proceedings must follow the rigor of law, as noted at [Extra] de denuntiatione, under the title De accusationibus.

¶ Likewise, I do not admit them if a secular accuses, or a regular of superior grade — for instance a bishop — or one of inferior grade of good reputation, or one who cannot be removed without scandal. Others say that this decretal is corrected by Binganus at [Extra] de testibus, Testimonium. But I say that those passages are to be understood according to the foregoing distinction. For indeed I reckon it absurd to suppose that lord Innocent would have wished to overturn with one word this decretal — so most equitable and so rational, devised by the many vigils of the lord doctor Innocent, father of the law — as noted at [Extra] de clericis excommunicatis, Ecclesia, 2, §Denique.

¶ Likewise, partakers are not admitted, as at [Extra] de testibus, Veniens, and cap. Personas, C. de testibus, Quoniam, C. 3 q. 4, capp. 1, 2, and 3, C. 2 q. 7, Testes. But on the contrary, [Extra] de testibus, Extra mediatores. But there the talk is of a mediator who is admitted; in Veniens, however, the talk is of one who is a partner and who is rejected. Others say that Veniens

speaks of a partaker of the crime and of the bribe, as I touched on at [Extra] eodem [titulo], at Ego; but [Extra] De participe sceleris, only. But certainly there is still the question of how far even a partaker of the crime is to be admitted, as at D. 79, Si quis papa, C. 15 q. 3, Nemini. Whence some say that he is admitted to accusation, as there, but to testimony, as at Veniens. Others, such as T., say that criminals are not admitted, even in excepted [crimes], unless the accused had previously been of bad reputation, as at C. 2 q. 1, In primis, and [Extra] eodem [titulo], Per tuas. And see on this what is noted at [Extra] de testibus, 6, Quia possit esse testis, at Item in causa communis criminis. Mediators, however, of simony are simoniacs, as at C. 1 q. 1, Si quis episcopus, and they are struck with the mark of infamy, as at C. 1 q. 3, cap. fin.

But how a partaker of the crime may be repelled

For if he should say, “You cannot testify against me, because you were my partner in the same crime,” he will thus be condemned as a confessed party, since like a fool he confesses against himself, as at [Extra] de donationibus, Inter dilectos, and de confessis, capp. 1 and 2, and C. 2 q. 1, cap. 1.

If he should say, “I did not do what he charges me with,

and if I had done it, you cannot be a witness as one laboring under the same vice” — so he lies, and the law does not teach one to lie, as at C. 23 q. 3, Qui peccat. Yet it teaches that a partner in crime is to be repelled, as at C. de liberis, l. Si filium. But there it is manifest that he was a partaker, since it was said that the father had sold his son to his neighbor; whence to either party an accuser is lacking, because no person so closely joined could allege ignorance, and so the judge can repel him ex officio, since it is notorious, as by argument at [Extra] de exceptionibus, Exceptiones.

According to T.

he may propose thus: “I except against you, because I say that you committed that crime concerning which you wish to accuse me or in which you wish to testify; whence I say that you ought not to be heard, and to show the exception is true I offer myself ready to prove it.” But if the judge does not admit such an exception, that party will appeal, as at [Extra] de appellationibus, Interposita.

What penalty he is to suffer

On this subject Goffredus notes thus: that a simoniac in orders is to be deposed, however this be

established, whether by way of accusation, or of inquisition, or of denunciation, as at [Extra] de accusationibus, Super his, and cap. Inquisitionis, noted at [Extra] de accusationibus, under the rubric De inquisitionibus, Quis sit effectus, at Qua inquisitio.

A simoniac, however, established in a benefice or dignity, by accusation

is deposed; by inquisition he is removed, as at [Extra] de electione, Per inquisitionem; and the same by denunciation when that is retained. [Otherwise] true penance could not be done, as at Illo or D. 12, Nervi.

And a simoniac in a dignity is suspended ipso iure

He deceives others, since by administering he accomplishes nothing — by argument from [Extra] de electione, Dudum. The same for one having a benefice with care of others, since concerning these the same judgment is to be held, as in the first decretal at [Extra] de poenis, by argument from [Extra] de filiis presbyterorum, cap. 1.

In a simple benefice, however, if it is hidden

thus he is suspended as to himself, as is anyone constituted in mortal sin; but if notorious, then he is suspended as to himself and as to others, by argument from [Extra] de cohabitatione clericorum et mulierum, cap. fin.

But if he commits simony with regard to a monk

received [into a monastery]: if by way of accusation both the receivers and the received are convicted, they are deposed. But if it is established by inquisition, the received are removed and placed in stricter monasteries to perform penance; on the receivers a penance is enjoined, and until they have performed it they are suspended from the execution of sacred orders, as at [Extra] eodem [titulo], Cum dilectus filius A.

But why are receiving priors or abbots not removed

even when convicted by way of inquisition, since this is the ordinary penalty of simoniacs, as noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo], at De hac materia, following? I answer: that has its place in simony committed concerning a dignity having administration; it is otherwise if it is committed in conferring benefices or in receiving monks, in which case that decretal Dilectus speaks, as there [the words] Multitudo erat in causa, [Extra] de tempore ordinationum, cap. 1; or it was not useful for monasteries to remove old prelates, as at [Extra] de renuntiatione, cap. fin. Goffredus on this: say as noted at [Extra] eodem [titulo], 6, Sub quo per iudicem, at Sed quae est ratio.

But you, if it please, note thus concerning the penalty of simoniacs

that simoniacs suffer diverse penalties: for simoniacs suffer a penalty ipso facto. Likewise they are punished by the judge — sometimes for a time, sometimes in perpetuity.

Ipso facto simoniacs suffer a penalty

For if anyone has been simoniacally ordained, an inward [force] kills him, as at C. 1 q. 1, Quibusdam, and [Extra] eodem [titulo], Accusatus, R., cap. Quoties; and because [he bears] the mark of theft and thus ipso iure is suspended, therefore from every [liturgical act] any layman may withdraw — understanding, not those cut off from the Church by sentence of the judge or of the canon; thus the objection concerning the excommunicated and the suspended is removed, since such a one is excluded from participation in sacred things, as at C. 3 q. 4, Engeltrudam, [Extra] de exceptionibus, A nobis, [Extra] de clericis excommunicatis, Si celebrat toleratus et penitens. And thus the objection is not valid that is wont to be raised about one constituted in mortal sin, that he is suspended as to himself, as follows — which has its place in enormous and hidden [sins] and not in mediocre notorious ones.

For this [suspension] continues to bar the execution of his order even after the penance has been carried out: §. de renunciatione, nisi cum pridem; D. 50, de his; [Extra] de temporibus ordinationum, c. fi. Or, [the point is that] although such a sinner — that is, one not cut off but tolerated and penitent — can celebrate, nevertheless a simoniac cannot: as below, eodem, tanta. But on the second view, below eodem, tue, Iacobus says that this is speaking of the occult case. But Petrus understands tanta of the notorious case: for he is suspended, C. 1 q. 1, reperiatur; C. 32 q. 2 §. verum.

And understand this with respect to others

For with respect to himself he is suspended, however occult he may be, just like any sinner: §. de cohabitatione clericorum et mulierum, c. vl.; C. 1 q. 1, si sacerdotes. Or say that if he is a simoniac in respect of orders and occult, he is suspended with respect to all, since he does not have the character — understand [this] [with respect to execution], C. 1 q. 1 c. 1 — and so the chapter tanta speaks accordingly.

And the church

[Extra] eodem, ex tue, says that it can prohibit him from execution: understand, in fact. That is to say, in fact it can carry out [the prohibition], even though the crime is occult, provided you yourself know him as such. But why can you not prohibit him? — see [Extra] de temporibus ordinationum, c. contra, nulla, and de officio ordinarii, si sacerdos. Nevertheless, understand this according to Sina in the case of one who has received a benefice simoniacally which required a certain order, as is read [Extra] de etate et qualitate, c. 1; and in the case of a homicide, as below, de accusationibus, inquisitionis; [Extra] de temporibus ordinationum, qualitum. But he who confers the order is not suspended except with respect to himself; nor is the simoniac in religion: as §. eodem, veniens, and c. dilectus filius.

Whence he who confers the order

Since he is not suspended, he gives execution to others by the law itself. But he who has received [orders] simoniacally cannot give it, because he does not have it: above, q. 5, Daibertum. And therefore he cannot celebrate, C. 1 q. 1, sicut eunuchi, and c. quibusdam narrantibus. But others say this with respect to the power of office, not the power of merit: as below, eodem, tanta. For with respect to the power of office a heretic can celebrate, as above, q. 1, quidam.

But Iohannes said

That whoever has once conferred an order simoniacally will not thereafter be able to give execution, however occult it be, however ignorant the recipient: as above, q. 1, si quis a simoniacis; and therefore the gloss misericorditer; and eodem q., reperiuntur, and c. quibusdam. But this seems to be refuted below, c. plus, §. p qua. Whence at home if I have received an order from one whom I did not know to be a simoniac, I have execution, even if I have heard this from some, unless my conscience reproved me: as you have, [Extra] de sententia excommunicationis, cum illorum, rh. 1, and q. si., where in the same case the secular is deposed, but the regular is only suspended. And some say also that a simoniac, however occult, is suspended with respect to all: as I noted above, and [as in the case of] the notorious fornicator, D. 32 §. verum, and c. nullus, and c. preter hoc, and c. si queras. Why do the canon laws so prosecute these two crimes alike? Answer: simony is a cancerous disease, and so the red-hot iron is needed; it is also a vice that ought to be avoided, C. 1 q. 1, reperiuntur. Likewise, fornication is a common vice, D. 50, quod tua sanctitas in fi.; and so in both the penalty ought to be sharpened, ff. de penis, aut facta, §. fin.

Suspended

Or excommunicated, or deposed — he has no execution of office, although he retains the character: as

he retains it, as above q. 1 § opponitur.

Iohannes says that a heretic

Excommunicated and deposed, he can consecrate and administer the other sacraments: above q. 1, dominus, and c. non nocet, and c. dictum est; de consecratione D. 3, non in nobis. Moreover, what reason would there be why a condemned man could so consecrate so long as he is tolerated by the church, but not when condemned by men? That is to say: I do not see [any reason], according to Iohannes.

But others say

That such men never consecrate, nor do they have execution. For as Pelagius says, if they were to bring the truth, it is not the body of Christ that a heretic consecrates, as above q. 1, schisma. For this is the sacrament of unity, de consecratione D. 1, quod passus; and therefore outside the unity of the church it cannot be consecrated, as below q. 1, ecclesia, and c. sacerdotes. Which also seems true according to Iohannes the new, since no one can perform this sacrament unless a catholic priest, since outside the church no one is saved — rightly ordained according to the keys of the church: as above de summa trinitate, c. 1, §. una.

It is true

That although such bishops, in ordaining, do not transfer any execution which they themselves do not have, nevertheless they do transfer the character which they have, dead and naked as it is; and therefore if the ordained man has been ignorant, he can be mercifully dispensed with by the bishop through him, provided the ignorance of fact has been probable, not crass or supine — otherwise the pope alone could dispense, as above de ordinatione ab eo qui resignavit episcopatum, c. 1, §. quare. Whence it is plain that he consecrates, since ordinations are not celebrated without mass: as above de electione, q sicut, §. super eo. And that an excommunicate may celebrate and consecrate is confirmed above de sacramentis non iterandis, a nobis, according to Bernardus; and see what is noted below de schismate §. quid iuris. And according to this understand the laws that bear upon this point: C. 9 q. 1, ab excommunicatis, and c. ordinationes; and those that go against it: C. 9 q. 1 c. 1, and de consecratione D. 4, quo, and C. 1 q. 1, qui perfectionem, and c. verum est, and C. 23 q. 1, audiuimus; with the argument leading to this distinction at [Extra] eodem, per tuas, 2; and above de appellationibus, si duobus. On this matter, say as I have fully determined above de temporibus ordinationum §. z q̄, verse hec igitur sit fides tua. Except, however, the deposed, according to Goffredus, as noted there; and below de clericis excommunicatis ministrantibus §. 1, verse sed nunquid depositus.

But through the judge a penalty is imposed

But through the judge a penalty is imposed; yet it matters whether the crime is investigated by way of accusation or by way of inquisition.

If by way of accusation

If by way of accusation, and the one accused is infamous, the judge ought to suspend him from the execution of his order for a time — that is, until he has learned whether what he is accused of is true: as below eodem, accusatum, and c. quoties. The same holds if he is occult, once there are certain indications; and so the chapter below eodem, sicut simoniaca, can be understood, or otherwise as I shall say at once.

But if the accuser has proved his charge

But if the accuser has proved his charge, whether by confession or by witnesses — for it does not matter as to the manner, provided the crime is sufficiently proved — he must straightway be expelled from the church of God, that is, set outside its limits: as below eodem, sicut. That is, with the grave infamy that follows, he must be deposed: as below qo. 2 c. vl.; C. 1 q. fi., presbyter; C. 15 q. 3, sane; C. de episcopis et clericis, si questio. But if the crime is investigated by way of inquisition: if a secular who has obtained a benefice simoniacally in ignorance is infamous, he is compelled to renounce but is not deposed, below eodem, ex insinuatione. But if knowingly, he is also deposed: as above de accusationibus, inquisitionis. But if he is a regular and is a simoniac in respect of orders, the same will hold, by the argument of what is noted above eodem § ipso facto and the following, and below eodem per tuas. But if [the simony is] in respect of a benefice and they were promoted in ignorance, they are bound to renounce: as below eodem de regularibus in fi. Those giving and receiving, however, are to be struck with the canonical penalty: as below eodem, sicut nobis § pe. and ult.

But where they have been knowingly promoted into a regular community

But where they have been knowingly promoted into a regular community, the penalty of deposition is remitted; yet those received around the time of the general council [Lateran IV] are removed from the monasteries which they thus obtained and are confined in other monasteries of a stricter rule. But with those who were received before the council mercy is shown by dispensation: such that they are placed in other houses of the same order, or, if for very great numbers this cannot be done, it is permitted that, after a free resignation, they remain in the same monastery with their former seats changed and lower ones assigned. According to this

understand below eodem de regularibus, rf. f. c. c. dilectis filiis, ad., and the general council [chapter] quoniam simoniaca labes.

But with those who have been received this side of the council

But with those who have been received this side of the council, some are dispensed by the pope; and this extends from monks even to abbots — but monks are not compelled to renounce spiritual things, nor abbots to renounce temporalities, which were thereby acquired with nothing antecedent but the intention alone. Say this as noted above eodem § quid sit. You have it below eodem c. ult., where it says that the palium alone abolishes such a pact. And so gather that an injury done to God is more easily and safely remitted than one done to man: by which is plain the reason which Iohannes seeks above eodem § rh., verse suspensus; or see [further].

But what is the reason

But what is the reason why a secular convicted by way of inquisition is degraded, but not a regular? I answer: because in the inquisition of a secular the subtlety of law is required, and therefore in these excepted crimes judgment is pronounced by strict law; but in the inquisition of a regular one proceeds summarily, and therefore he would be punished summarily — as is plain from what is noted above eodem § quid de accusatione, and under the title de accusationibus, in the rubric de inquisitionibus. Likewise, because the rule is approved that while one is burdened in one respect, he is relieved in another: as below in the next, verse sed et episcopus, and the following.

What if someone offers his goods to the church

What if someone offers his goods to the church simply, without a pact, but with this intention: that for the temporal goods which he offers he may obtain spiritual ones — not otherwise being about to give them, nor would the clerks otherwise have received him? To this the decree says that nevertheless both that man and these clerks are judged guilty before the strict judge who is the searcher of hearts: below eodem, tua § sed aut. Whence, since it does not say “they are judged simoniacs,” they are to be punished on account of the depraved intention. There have been those who said that they are not simoniacs, but nevertheless are to be punished as simoniacs on account of the depraved intention together with the work that followed: argument above de bigamis non ordinandis in fi., c. c. a nobis.

You say that they are simoniacs

You say that they are simoniacs: because simony is committed by the will alone — which say as noted above c. verse si vero scienter, and above eodem § 1.

What if the monastery does not abound

What if the monastery does not abound — indeed is meagre and pressed by great poverty? Can money be given and received without the vice of simony? Not very well; nevertheless, it can be conceded that these words may be spoken by those of the convent to one wishing to enter: “We will freely and gratis receive you into our spiritual fellowship; but since our goods do not suffice for us and for you, bring with you the means whereby you may live”; or thus: “provide for yourself so that you may live.” For then if the one entering brings any temporal goods, simony is not committed. Nor is it an objection that below eodem quoniam it says that some wish to palliate this vice under the pretext of poverty; for that [passage] is to be understood when one does not proceed thus cautiously — rather, those receiving make a pact and a fixed forum, and when they have so acted, they cannot excuse themselves under pretext of poverty.

But this pretext does not absolve the delinquent

But this pretext does not absolve the delinquent. ff. de ritu nuptiarum, palam § non est ignoscendum; above de divortiis, ex literis. For it would be more holy to die in reputation, C. 32 q. 4, sicut san[ctius]

[it is] more right to suffer all evils from the world: C. 32 q. 5, itaque. Nor is it an objection that the necessity of hunger excuses from theft: de consecratione, D. 5, discipulos — because in such a time all things are common: ff. ad legem Rhodiam de iactu, l. 1, §. cum in eadem nauis.

But if the necessity was not so great

But if the necessity was not so great, it does not wholly excuse: [Extra] de furtis, si quis per necessitatem.

What of monasteries

What of monasteries in which no pact is imposed, but it is nonetheless fixed how much a girl entering ought to give? Indeed, such an assessment is condemned: [Extra] eodem, sicut pro certo, and c. in tantum at the end. Therefore, if a pact is introduced concerning the observance of such a custom, it is simoniacal: as [Extra] eodem, veniens, and c. in tantum §. cum vero. [The case is] expressly the same if she is received gratis, and afterwards the one received is compelled to observe such a custom: [Extra] eodem, audiuimus, and c. Iacobus. Finally, when every covenant and every coercion ceases, and what is customary is freely given, the simony of the church militant is not incurred — although this be simoniacal with regard to God: argument from [Extra] de usuris, consuluit; C. 14 q. 3, plerique. And it is expressed in [Extra] eodem, c. fin., concerning which see what is noted above eodem §. 1.

But whether any remedy can be had in this matter

But whether any remedy can be had in this matter — namely, that the nuns receive the girl gratis and spiritually, and if they are so poor that they cannot provide her with necessaries, that they sue the father for the alimony to which he is bound, as noted above de prescriptionibus at the end, and [Extra] de infantibus et languidis expositis; and if he is dead, that she sue for her share of his inheritance: as in the Authentic de sanctissimis episcopis §. nulla penitus, col. 9.

But the bishop who receives a promise

But the bishop who receives a promise or oath from one to be ordained that he will not trouble him about seeking a title — or a presentator who receives a like pact — incurs a penalty. For the presentator is by the law itself suspended from the execution of orders for three years, while the ordainer and the ordained are suspended without definition of time from the conferral and execution of the order, until they obtain the grace of the Apostolic See: as [Extra] eodem, si quis ordinauerit, Gregorius.

If you ask why these different penalties are established

If you ask why these different penalties are established, I answer: the ordainer and the ordained transgress more than the presentator, since it is in their power to confer or receive the order; and therefore they are more severely punished in this — that no time is fixed, whence the term of three years or of ten years may be exceeded — and thus he punishes more, according to the rule above de translatione episcopi, inter corporalia §. ult., and de clericis, nihil, at the end, R. 1, 1, de clericis excommunicatis ministrantibus, latores. But the presentator too is more severely punished in another respect: because he suspends from the execution of all orders, whereas the ordainer only from the conferral of the order which he conferred, and the ordained from the execution of the same order; and thus they are punished in that in which they transgressed, according to the rule above de tempore ordinationum, literas, and de iure patronatus, pastoralis. Likewise, because they are burdened in one thing, they are relieved in another. For this is the approved rule, as noted above proximo, verse sed quod est ratio, as at the end; and it is proved above de parochiis, c. 1, and de translatione episcopi, inter corporalia §. ult., and ff. de iureiurando, eum qui.

But why are all these not degraded

But why are all these not degraded, since they are seculars? Some say that they are not truly simoniacs, for at the time when the pact was made, nothing was in

obligation. But certainly this response is of no avail, since there was an expectation that the debt would arise: argument from Institutes, de verborum obligationibus §. ex conditionali. Whence it cannot be denied that even that expectation, which afterwards came entirely into existence, has been remitted; and thus it is true simony, since remitting is the same as giving: [Extra] eodem, querelam, and above de testamentis, veniens. For the bishop or presentator, in the very act of ordination or presentation, is bound to assign a title to the one ordained: as above de prebendis, episcopus, and c. cum secundum §. aliquod commodum sentiret inde — if, however, the pact were to be valid; and thus it is simoniacal, as has been expressed: argument from ff. de calumniatoribus, l. 1 at the end, and l. 2 and 3, R. 1. [As to] why the decretal of Gregorius is to be understood in the penitential forum and not the judicial — what he says is: let the ordainer and the ordained and the presentator who introduces and accepts such a pact beware; for although it be hidden and cannot be proved, nevertheless they suffer this penalty by the very act, by force of the canon, and thus by the law itself one is suspended.

But if the crime cannot be proved

But if the crime cannot be proved, purgation is enjoined upon the one defamed; and if he fails in it, he is punished as one convicted: as below eodem, de hoc, and c. insinuata.

What dispensation, and from whom, is to be applied in their regard

What dispensation, and from whom, is to be applied in their regard is here treated: whether one is a simoniac and was simoniacally promoted; or simoniacally promoted but not a simoniac; or a simoniac but not simoniacally promoted. Likewise, whether the simony is committed in the order or in the benefice.

If someone is a simoniac in an order

If someone is a simoniac in an order — that is, because he gave money to be ordained subdeacon, or deacon, or priest — here the bishop cannot dispense: [Extra] eodem, nobis. For he cannot dispense except in adulteries and lesser crimes, as above de iudiciis, at si clerici. Indeed, according to some, he cannot even dispense with such a one, because the simoniac is bound to renounce that which he acquired simoniacally: as below q. 1, si quis. But he cannot renounce the order, since it is imprinted upon the soul: C. 30 q. 7, licite; nor the execution, since that he does not have; therefore the vice cannot be pur-

ged: C. 14 q. 6, si res. But this I do not believe: indeed, the pope can dispense with such a one, since he can voluntarily offer himself for deposition: D. 21, nunc autem. If he can renounce it as far as in him lies, and if the pope dispenses with him, the vice of orders will be purged: C. 1 q. 5, vitium. For the vice of theft too is purged by the stolen property remaining with the thief, the owner being willing: ff. de usucapionibus, si fur; C. 1 q. 1, quidam, verse si forte. The same in a violent detainer: ff. de precario, certe, c. Iulianus. And this is confirmed by [Extra] eodem, per tuas, and q. 2, c. pen. Much more so if he is not a simoniac — although simoniacally promoted, that is, because the money was given without his knowing — and so perhaps in this case, if it is hidden, the bishops will be able to dispense: argument from [Extra] eodem, simoniace.

But what if it concerns one simoniacally promoted to some religious order? Say as above pri. §. si vero. A dispensation can be applied by the bishop, if the money was given without his knowledge. Others say it should be referred for discussion to a general council: [Extra] eodem, quoniam. But if someone has simoniacally obtained another benefice, if it was a simple one, after his free resignation of it he can recover that benefice by dispensation of the bishop — or even of the chapter, the bishop consenting: above de electione, si alicui, at the end; [Extra] eodem, ex insinuatione. But if he has obtained a prelacy or dignity, if he comes to repentance without any accusation, and of his own motion has renounced, humbly petitioning that his renunciation be admitted, then once the renunciation is made he can recover that prelacy by dispensation of his bishop — who in this has not transgressed — provided the utility or necessity of the church requires it: as C. 1 q. 5, vitium, r. c. quibus. But if he has contested in court, or being summoned has confessed for fear of the proofs, the bishop cannot dispense with him on that occasion: as above de electione, si alicuius, et c.; [Extra] eodem, nobis fuit §. 1. According to this, understand C. 1 q. 1, erga; C. 7 q. 1, vitium; above de electione, super eo, r.; C. 1 q. 1, c. 1, and c. ult. Or more briefly say that in a simple benefice the bishop dispenses with the chapter — with or without cause — provided that the prerogative of merits requires it: thus understand above de electione, si alicuius, at the end; below eodem, ex insinuatione.

In a double [benefice] he is able to dispense, even on this occasion, if the necessity of the church requires it: as in c. vitium. Otherwise the bishop cannot dispense: as in the said c. nobis fuit §. verum est, on that occasion; but the see [Apostolic] is able to dispense: as in c. si alicuius at the beginning. And so the ancient decretum of Stephanus determines, si alicui; Bernardus determines, with Innocentius, nobis fuit: ff. de legibus, non est nouum, and l. sequenti. What I said — that the bishop can dispense — is to be understood when the money was given not to him but to one of his associates without his knowledge; otherwise, if he himself had transgressed, he would be unworthy of the power of dispensing: argument from above de clericis coniugatis, diuersis. This is intimated in C. 1 q. 5, vitium, where it says that money was given not to the bishop, but to one of his princes. And these things are to be understood of one simoniacally promoted, not of a simo-

niac. For if he were a simoniac — that is, because he had known simony to have intervened — the bishop could in no way dispense in a double [benefice]; but perhaps in a simple one he could, with the necessity of the church urging it — otherwise not.

But on the contrary: for the Council of Chalcedon condemns a simoniac in a benefice as much as a simoniac in an order: as C. 1 q. 1, ex multis; and yet [the Gospel] has its force, D. 15, sicut; and to this point, C. 1 q. 1, si de episcopis. Solution: that case applies when one is a simoniac — here, on the other hand, he is wounded [only] when simoniacally promoted, as I said. But whether they can dispense in simony committed concerning the offices of the dead, the blessings of those marrying, burials, chrismations, sales of sacred vessels or vestments, blessings, and similar lesser species — the masters say so, after penance has been performed, since it is not prohibited: argument from [Extra] de sententia excommunicationis, nuper. Nor is it an objection that C. 1 q. 1, erga, for it speaks of a simoniac in a dignity, as [Extra] eodem, nobis, at the end, according to Hostiensis.

What of money given on occasion of simoniacal depravity

And certainly, as for the giver: let him give it to that church to whose injury it was given: as [Extra] eodem, de hoc, c. consulere, c. audiuimus, and in the Authentic de sanctissimis episcopis §. sed neque, r. §. si vero laicus.

But the question: that it is to be restored to him to whom he gave it, as [Extra] eodem, veniens. Solution according to S. [na.]: I say that where the whole chapter has transgressed, it is to be restored to the one who gave it, as in that decretal veniens; but if one or two, or some outsider, has transgressed, then the place of the decretal de hoc applies. Such base gains are to be exacted from the heirs: ff. de calumniatoribus, in herede, idem usus, tua. But according to T., if the one who gave the money wishes to remain in the world, it is not restored to him. But if he wishes to enter religion, then it is to be restored to him, lest he be burdensome to the monastery to which he transfers: C. 16 q. 5, de lapsis; C. 17 q. 3, si autem in atrio; C. 32 q. 1, si quis rapuerit; [Extra] de sepulturis, c. 1; ff. de iure dotium, iure successum est. And to this add ff. de calumniatoribus, l. generaliter §. illud, and l. in heredem §. sed etiam.

A prelate, however, who extorts something from the church through simony must repay double: as [Extra] eodem, audiuimus. But if through pressure, then he shall repay fourfold: D. 17, quoniam quidem; C. 1 q. 1, concussionis. Concutere [is the verb for what] those do who, under pretext of an office committed to them, by menacing extort something from an unwilling person: ff. de concussione, l. 1, q. 1, and C. 22 q. 1, militare.