Contents

Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 1
First Council of Nicaea – 325 AD ............................................................................................................. 2
First Council of Constantinople – 381 ..................................................................................................... 9
Council Of Ephesus – 431 A.D. .............................................................................................................. 17
Council of Chalcedon – 451 A.D. ........................................................................................................... 36
Second Council of Constantinople – 553 A.D........................................................................................ 53
Third Council of Constantinople : 680-681 A. D.................................................................................... 65
Second Council of Nicaea – 787 A.D. .................................................................................................... 69
Fourth Council of Constantinople : 869-870 ......................................................................................... 82
First Lateran Council 1123 A.D. ........................................................................................................... 104
Second Lateran Council – 1139 A.D. ................................................................................................... 110
Third Lateran Council – 1179 A.D. ...................................................................................................... 117
Fourth Lateran Council : 1215............................................................................................................. 130
First Council of Lyons – 1245 A.D. ....................................................................................................... 171
Second Council of Lyons – 1274.......................................................................................................... 194
Council of Vienne 1311-1312 A.D. ...................................................................................................... 215
Council of Constance 1414-18 ............................................................................................................ 272
Council of Basel-Ferrara-Florence, 1431-49 A.D. ................................................................................ 320
Fifth Lateran Council 1512-17 A.D. ..................................................................................................... 415

1
First Council of Nicaea – 325 AD
Council Fathers - 325 A.D.
INTRODUCTION

This council opened on 19 June in the presence of the emperor, but it is uncertain who
presided over the sessions. In the extant lists of bishops present, Ossius of Cordova, and the
presbyters Vitus and Vincentius are listed before the other names, but it is more likely that
Eustathius of Antioch or Alexander of Alexandria presided. (see Decrees of the Ecumenical
Councils, ed. Norman P. Tanner S.J.)

The bold text in the profession of faith of the 318 fathers constitutes, according to Tanner
“The additions made by the council to an underlying form of the creed”, and that the
underlying creed was most likely “derived from the baptismal formula of Caesarea put
forward by the bishop of that city Eusebius” or that it “developed from an original form
which existed in Jerusalem or at any rate Palestine”. “A direct descent from the creed of
Eusebius of Caesarea is manifestly out of the question.” Vol 1, p2)

The figure of 318 given in the heading below is from Hilary of Poitier and is the traditional
one. Other numbers are Eusebius 250, Eustathius of Antioch 270., Athanasius about 300,
Gelasius of Cyzicus at more than 300.

THE PROFESSION OF FAITH OF THE 318 FATHERS

1. We believe in one God the Father all powerful, maker of all things both seen and
unseen. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten begotten
from the Father, that is from the substance [Gr. ousias, Lat. substantia] of the Father,
God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten [Gr. gennethenta,
Lat. natum] not made [Gr. poethenta, Lat. factum], CONSUBSTANTIAL [Gr.
homoousion, Lat. unius substantiae (quod Graeci dicunt homousion)] with the Father,
through whom all things came to be, both those in heaven and those in earth; for us
humans and for our salvation he came down and became incarnate, became human,
suffered and rose up on the third day, went up into the heavens, is coming to judge the
living and the dead. And in the holy Spirit.
2. And those who say
a. “there once was when he was not”, and “before he was begotten he was not”,
and that
he came to be from
things that were not, or
from another hypostasis [Gr. hypostaseos] or substance [Gr. ousias, Lat.
substantia],
affirming that the Son of God is subject to change or alteration these the
catholic and apostolic church anathematises.

2
 CANONS
1. If anyone in sickness has undergone surgery at the hands of physicians or has been
castrated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy. But if anyone in good health
has castrated himself, if he is enrolled among the clergy he should be suspended, and in
future no such man should be promoted. But, as it is evident that this refers to those who
are responsible for the condition and presume to castrate themselves, so too if any have
been made eunuchs by barbarians or by their masters, but have been found worthy, the
canon admits such men to the clergy.
2. Since, either through necessity or through the importunate demands of certain individuals,
there have been many breaches of the church’s canon, with the result that men who have
recently come from a pagan life to the faith after a short catechumenate have been
admitted at once to the spiritual washing, and at the same time as their baptism have been
promoted to the episcopate or the presbyterate, it is agreed that it would be well for
nothing of the kind to occur in the future. For a catechumen needs time and further
probation after baptism, for the apostle’s words are clear: “Not a recent convert, or he
may be puffed up and fall into the condemnation and the snare of the devil”. But if with
the passage of time some sin of sensuality is discovered with regard to the person and he
is convicted by two or three witnesses, such a one will be suspended from the clergy. If
anyone contravenes these regulations, he will be liable to forfeit his clerical status for
acting in defiance of this great synod.
3. This great synod absolutely forbids a bishop, presbyter, deacon or any of the clergy to
keep a woman who has been brought in to live with him, with the exception of course of
his mother or sister or aunt, or of any person who is above suspicion.
4. It is by all means desirable that a bishop should be appointed by all the bishops of the
province. But if this is difficult because of some pressing necessity or the length of the
journey involved, let at least three come together and perform the ordination, but only
after the absent bishops have taken part in the vote and given their written consent. But in
each province the right of confirming the proceedings belongs to the metropolitan bishop.
5. Concerning those, whether of the clergy or the laity, who have been excommunicated, the
sentence is to be respected by the bishops of each province according to the canon which
forbids those expelled by some to be admitted by others. But let an inquiry be held to
ascertain whether anyone has been expelled from the community because of pettiness or
quarrelsomeness or any such ill nature on the part of the bishop. Accordingly, in order
that there may be proper opportunity for inquiry into the matter, it is agreed that it would
be well for synods to be held each year in each province twice a year, so that these
inquiries may be conducted by all the bishops of the province assembled together, and in
this way by general consent those who have offended against their own bishop may be
recognised by all to be reasonably excommunicated, until all the bishops in common may
decide to pronounce a more lenient sentence on these persons. The synods shall be held at
the following times: one before Lent, so that, all pettiness being set aside, the gift offered
to God may be unblemished; the second after the season of autumn.
6. The ancient customs of Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis shall be maintained, according to
which the bishop of Alexandria has authority over all these places since a similar custom
exists with reference to the bishop of Rome. Similarly in Antioch and the other provinces

3
 the prerogatives of the churches are to be preserved. In general the following principle is
evident: if anyone is made bishop without the consent of the metropolitan, this great
synod determines that such a one shall not be a bishop. If however two or three by reason
of personal rivalry dissent from the common vote of all, provided it is reasonable and in
accordance with the church’s canon, the vote of the majority shall prevail.
7. Since there prevails a custom and ancient tradition to the effect that the bishop of Aelia is
to be honoured, let him be granted everything consequent upon this honour, saving the
dignity proper to the metropolitan.
8. Concerning those who have given themselves the name of Cathars, and who from time to
time come over publicly to the catholic and apostolic church, this holy and great synod
decrees that they may remain among the clergy after receiving an imposition of hands.
But before all this it is fitting that they give a written undertaking that they will accept
and follow the decrees of the catholic church, namely that they will be in communion
with those who have entered into a second marriage and with those who have lapsed in
time of persecution and for whom a period [of penance] has been fixed and an occasion
[for reconciliation] allotted, so as in all things to follow the decrees of the catholic and
apostolic church. Accordingly, where all the ordained in villages or cities have been
found to be men of this kind alone, those who are so found will remain in the clergy in the
same rank; but when some come over in places where there is a bishop or presbyter
belonging to the catholic church, it is evident that the bishop of the church will hold the
bishop’s dignity, and that the one given the title and name of bishop among the so-called
Cathars will have the rank of presbyter, unless the bishop thinks fit to let him share in the
honour of the title. But if this does not meet with his approval, the bishop will provide for
him a place as chorepiscopus or presbyter, so as to make his ordinary clerical status
evident and so prevent there being two bishops in the city.
9. If any have been promoted presbyters without examination, and then upon investigation
have confessed their sins, and if after their confession men have imposed hands upon
such people, being moved to act against the canon, the canon does not admit these people,
for the catholic church vindicates only what is above reproach.
10. If any have been promoted to ordination through the ignorance of their promoters or even
with their connivance, this fact does not prejudice the church’s canon; for once
discovered they are to be deposed.
11. Concerning those who have transgressed without necessity or the confiscation of their
property or without danger or anything of this nature, as happened under the tyranny of
Licinius, this holy synod decrees that, though they do not deserve leniency, nevertheless
they should be treated mercifully. Those therefore among the faithful who genuinely
repent shall spend three years among the hearers, for seven years they shall be prostrators,
and for two years they shall take part with the people in the prayers, though not in the
offering.
12. Those who have been called by grace, have given evidence of first fervour and have cast
off their [military] belts, and afterwards have run back like dogs to their own vomit, so
that some have even paid money and recovered their military status by bribes — such
persons shall spend ten years as prostrators after a period of three years as hearers. In
every case, however, their disposition and the nature of their penitence should be

4
 examined. For those who through their fear and tears and perseverance and good works
give evidence of their conversion by deeds and not by outward show, when they have
completed their appointed term as hearers, may properly take part in the prayers, and the
bishop is competent to decide even more favourably in their regard. But those who have
taken the matter lightly, and have thought that the outward form of entering the church is
all that is required for their conversion, must complete their term to the full.
13. Concerning the departing, the ancient canon law is still to be maintained namely that
those who are departing are not to be deprived of their last, most necessary viaticum. But
if one whose life has been despaired of has been admitted to communion and has shared
in the offering and is found to be numbered again among the living, he shall be among
those who take part in prayer only [here a variant reading in Les canons des conciles
oecumeniques adds “until the term fixed by this great ecumenical synod has been
completed”]. But as a general rule, in the case of anyone whatsoever who is departing and
seeks to share in the eucharist, the bishop upon examining the matter shall give him a
share in the offering.
14. Concerning catechumens who have lapsed, this holy and great synod decrees that, after
they have spent three years as hearers only, they shall then be allowed to pray with the
catechumens.
15. On account of the great disturbance and the factions which are caused, it is decreed that
the custom, if it is found to exist in some parts contrary to the canon, shall be totally
suppressed, so that neither bishops nor presbyters nor deacons shall transfer from city to
city. If after this decision of this holy and great synod anyone shall attempt such a thing,
or shall lend himself to such a proceeding, the arrangement shall be totally annulled, and
he shall be restored to the church of which he was ordained bishop or presbyter or
deacon.
16. Any presbyters or deacons or in general anyone enrolled in any rank of the clergy who
depart from their church recklessly and without the fear of God before their eyes or in
ignorance of the church’s canon, ought not by any means to be received in another
church, but all pressure must be applied to them to induce them to return to their own
dioceses, or if they remain it is right that they should be excommunicated. But if anyone
dares to steal away one who belongs to another and to ordain him in his church without
the consent of the other’s own bishop among whose clergy he was enrolled before he
departed, the ordination is to be null.
17. Since many enrolled [among the clergy] have been induced by greed and avarice to forget
the sacred text, “who does not put out his money at interest”, and to charge one per cent
[a month] on loans, this holy and great synod judges that if any are found after this
decision to receive interest by contract or to transact the business in any other way or to
charge [a flat rate of] fifty per cent or in general to devise any other contrivance for the
sake of dishonourable gain, they shall be deposed from the clergy and their names struck
from the roll.
18. It has come to the attention of this holy and great synod that in some places and cities
deacons give communion to presbyters, although neither canon nor custom allows this,
namely that those who have no authority to offer should give the body of Christ to those
who do offer. Moreover it has become known that some of the deacons now receive the

5
 eucharist even before the bishops. All these practices must be suppressed. Deacons must
remain within their own limits, knowing that they are the ministers of the bishop and
subordinate to the presbyters. Let them receive the eucharist according to their order after
the presbyters from the hands of the bishop or the presbyter. Nor shall permission be
given for the deacons to sit among the presbyters, for such an arrangement is contrary to
the canon and to rank. If anyone refuses to comply even after these decrees, he is to be
suspended from the diaconate.
19. Concerning the former Paulinists who seek refuge in the catholic church, it is determined
that they must be rebaptised unconditionally. Those who in the past have been enrolled
among the clergy, if they appear to be blameless and irreproachable, are to be rebaptised
and ordained by the bishop of the catholic church. But if on inquiry they are shown to be
unsuitable, it is right that they should be deposed. Similarly with regard to deaconesses
and all in general whose names have been included in the roll, the same form shall be
observed. We refer to deaconesses who have been granted this status, for they do not
receive any imposition of hands, so that they are in all respects to be numbered among the
laity.
20. Since there are some who kneel on Sunday and during the season of Pentecost, this holy
synod decrees that, so that the same observances may be maintained in every diocese, one
should offer one’s prayers to the Lord standing.
THE LETTER OF THE SYNOD IN NICAEA TO THE EGYPTIANS

The bishops assembled at Nicaea, who constitute the great and holy synod, greet the
church of the Alexandrians, by the grace of God holy and great, and the beloved brethren in
Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis.

Since the grace of God and the most pious emperor Constantine have called us together
from different provinces and cities to constitute the great and holy synod in Nicaea, it seemed
absolutely necessary that the holy synod should send you a letter so that you may know what
was proposed and discussed, and what was decided and enacted.
3. First of all the affair of the impiety and lawlessness of Arius and his followers was
discussed in the presence of the most pious emperor Constantine. It was unanimously
agreed that anathemas should be pronounced against his impious opinion and his
blasphemous terms and expressions which he has blasphemously applied to the Son of
God,
saying
“he is from things that are not”, and
“before he was begotten he was not”, and
“there once was when he was not”,
saying too that
by his own power the Son of God is capable of
evil and
goodness,
and calling him
a creature and a work.

6
 Against all this the holy synod pronounced anathemas, and did not allow this impious and
abandoned opinion and these blasphemous words even to be heard.

Of that man and the fate which befell him, you have doubtless heard or will hear, lest we
should seem to trample upon one who has already received a fitting reward because of his
own sin. Such indeed was the power of his impiety that Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus
of Ptolemais shared in the consequences, for they too suffered the same fate.

But since, when the grace of God had freed Egypt from this evil and blasphemous opinion,
and from the persons who had dared to create a schism and a separation in a people which up
to now had lived in peace, there remained the question of the presumption of Meletius and
the men whom he had ordained, we shall explain to you, beloved brethren, the synod’s
decisions on this subject too. The synod was moved to incline towards mildness in its
treatment of Meletius for strictly speaking he deserved no mercy. It decreed that that he might
remain in his own city without any authority to nominate or ordain, and that he was not to
show himself for this purpose in the country or in another city, and that he was to retain the
bare name of his office.

It was further decreed that those whom he had ordained, when they had been validated by a
more spiritual ordination, were to be admitted to communion on condition that they would
retain their rank and exercise their ministry, but in every respect were to be second to all the
clergy in each diocese and church who had been nominated under our most honoured brother
and fellow minister Alexander; they were to have no authority to appoint candidates of their
choice or to put forward names or to do anything at all without the consent of the bishop of
the catholic church, namely the bishop of those who are under Alexander. But those who by
the grace of God and by our prayers have not been detected in any schism, and are spotless in
the catholic and apostolic church, are to have authority to appoint and to put forward the
names of men of the clergy who are worthy, and in general to do everything according to the
law and rule of the church.

In the event of the death of any in the church, those who have recently been accepted are
thereupon to succeed to the office of the deceased, provided that they appear worthy and are
chosen by the people; the bishop of Alexandria is to take part in the vote and confirm the
election. This privilege, which has been granted to all others, does not apply to the person of
Meletius because of his inveterate seditiousness and his mercurial and rash disposition, lest
any authority or responsibility should be given to one who is capable of returning to his
seditious practices.

These are the chief and most important decrees as far as concerns Egypt and the most holy
church of the Alexandrians. Whatever other canons and decrees were enacted in the presence
of our lord and most honoured fellow minister and brother Alexander, he will himself report
them to you in greater detail when he comes, for he was himself a leader as well as a
participant in the events.

7
 The following is not found in the latin text, but is found in the greek text :

We also send you the good news of the settlement concerning the holy pasch, namely that
in answer to your prayers this question also has been resolved. All the brethren in the East
who have hitherto followed the Jewish practice will henceforth observe the custom of the
Romans and of yourselves and of all of us who from ancient times have kept Easter together
with you. Rejoicing then in these successes and in the common peace and harmony and in the
cutting off of all heresy, welcome our fellow minister, your bishop Alexander, with all the
greater honour and love. He has made us happy by his presence, and despite his advanced age
has undertaken such great labour in order that you too may enjoy peace.

Pray for us all that our decisions may remain secure through almighty God and our lord
Jesus Christ in the holy Spirit, to whom is the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

8
First Council of Constantinople –
381
Council Fathers - 381 A.D.
INTRODUCTION

In the year 380 the emperors Gratian and Theodosius I decided to convoke this council to
counter the Arians, and also to judge the case of Maximus the Cynic, bishop of
Constantinople. The council met in May of the following year. One hundred and fifty bishops
took part, all of them eastern Orthodox, since the Pneumatomachi party had left at the start.

After Maximus had been condemned, Meletius, bishop of Antioch, appointed Gregory of
Nazianzus as the lawful bishop of Constantinople and at first presided over the council. Then
on Meletius’s sudden death, Gregory took charge of the council up to the arrival of Acholius,
who was to table Pope Damasus’s demands: namely, that Maximus should be expelled as an
interloper, and that the translation of bishops should be avoided. But when Timothy, bishop
of Alexandria, arrived he declared Gregory’s appointment invalid. Gregory resigned the
episcopacy and Nectarius, after baptism and consecration, was installed as bishop and
presided over the council until its closure.

No copy of the council’s doctrinal decisions, entitled tomos kai anathematismos engraphos
(record of the tome and anathemas), has survived. So what is presented here is the synodical
letter of the synod of Constantinople held in 382, which expounded these doctrinal decisions,
as the fathers witness, in summary form: namely, along the lines defined by the council of
Nicaea, the consubstantiality and coeternity of the three divine persons against the Sabellians,
Anomoeans, Arians and Pneumatomachi, who thought that the divinity was divided into
several natures; and the enanthropesis (taking of humanity) of the Word, against those who
supposed that the Word had in no way taken a human soul. All these matters were in close
agreement with the tome that Pope Damasus and a Roman council, held probably in 378, had
sent to the East.

Scholars find difficulties with the creed attributed to the council of Constantinople. Some say
that the council composed a new creed. But no mention is made of this creed by ancient
witnesses until the council of Chalcedon; and the council of Constantinople was said simply
to have endorsed the faith of Nicaea, with a few additions on the holy Spirit to refute the
Pneumatomachian heresy. Moreover, if the latter tradition is accepted, an explanation must
be given of why the first two articles of the so-called Constantinopolitan creed differ
considerably from the Nicene creed.

It was J. Lebon, followed by J. N. D. Kelly and A. M. Ritter, who worked at the solution of
this problem. Lebon said that the Nicene creed, especially since it was adapted to use at
baptism, had taken on a number of forms. It was one of these which was endorsed at the

9
council of Constantinople and developed by additions concerning the holy Spirit. All the
forms, altered to some extent or other, were described by a common title as “the Nicene
faith”. Then the council of Chalcedon mentioned the council of Constantinople as the
immediate source of one of them, marked it out by a special name “the faith of the 150
fathers”, which from that time onwards became its widely known title, and quoted it
alongside the original simple form of the Nicene creed. The Greek text of the
Constantinopolitan creed, which is printed below, is taken from the acts of the council of
Chalcedon.

The council of Constantinople enacted four disciplinary canons: against the Arian heresy and
its sects (can. 1), on limiting the power of bishops within fixed boundaries (can. 2), on
ranking the see of Constantinople second to Rome in honour and dignity (can. 3), on the
condemnation of Maximus and his followers (can. 4). Canons 2-4 were intended to put a stop
to aggrandisement on the part of the see of Alexandria. The two following canons, 5 and 6,
were framed at the synod which met in Constantinople in 382. The 7th canon is an extract
from a letter which the church of Constantinople sent to Martyrius of Antioch.

The council ended on 9 July 381, and on 30 July of the same year, at the request of the
council fathers, the emperor Theodosius ratified its decrees by edict .

Already from 382 onwards, in the synodical letter of the synod which met at Constantinople,
the council of Constantinople was given the title of “ecumenical”. The word denotes a
general and plenary council. But the council of Constantinople was criticised and censured by
Gregory of Nazianzus. In subsequent years it was hardly ever mentioned. In the end it
achieved its special status when the council of Chalcedon, at its second session and in its
definition of the faith, linked the form of the creed read out at Constantinople with the Nicene
form, as being a completely reliable witness of the authentic faith. The fathers of Chalcedon
acknowledged the authority of the canons — at least as far as the eastern church was
concerned — at their sixteenth session. The council’s dogmatic authority in the western
church was made clear by words of Pope Gregory I: “I confess that I accept and venerate the
four councils (Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon) in the same way as I do the
four books of the holy Gospel….”

The bishop of Rome’s approval was not extended to the canons, because they were never
brought “to the knowledge of the apostolic see”. Dionysius Exiguus knew only of the first
four — the ones to be found in the western collections. Pope Nicholas I wrote of the sixth
canon to Emperor Michael III: “It is not found among us, but is said to be in force among
you”.

The English translation is from the Greek text, which is the more authoritative version.

The exposition of the 150 fathers

10
We believe in one God the Father all-powerful, maker of heaven and of earth, and of all
things both seen and unseen. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all the ages, light from light, true God from true God,
begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father, through whom all things came to be; for
us humans and for our salvation he came down from the heavens and became incarnate from
the holy Spirit and the virgin Mary, became human and was crucified on our behalf under
Pontius Pilate; he suffered and was buried and rose up on the third day in accordance with the
scriptures; and he went up into the heavens and is seated at the Father’s right hand; he is
coming again with glory to judge the living and the dead; his kingdom will have no end. And
in the Spirit, the holy, the lordly and life-giving one, proceeding forth from the Father, co-
worshipped and co-glorified with Father and Son, the one who spoke through the prophets; in
one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. We confess one baptism for the forgiving of sins.
We look forward to a resurrection of the dead and life in the age to come. Amen.

A letter of the bishops gathered in Constantinople [1]

To the most honoured lords and most reverend brethren and fellow-ministers, Damasus,
Ambrose, Britton, Valerian, Acholius, Anemius, Basil, and the rest of the holy bishops who
met in the great city of Rome: the sacred synod of orthodox bishops who met in the great city
of Constantinople sends greetings in the Lord.

It may well be unnecessary to instruct your reverence by describing the many sufferings that
have been brought upon us under Arian domination, as if you did not know already. Nor do
we imagine that your piety considers our affairs so trivial that you need to learn what you
must be suffering along with us. Nor were the storms which beset us such as to escape your
notice on grounds of insignificance. The period of persecution is still recent and ensures that
the memory remains fresh not only among those who have suffered but also among those
who have through love made the lot of those who suffered their own. It was barely yesterday
or the day before that some were freed from the bonds of exile and returned to their own
churches through a thousand tribulations. The remains of others who died in exile were
brought back. Even after their return from exile some experienced a ferment of hatred from
the heretics and underwent a more cruel fate in their own land than they did abroad, by being
stoned to death by them in the manner of the blessed Stephen. Others were torn to shreds by
various tortures and still carry around on their bodies the marks of Christ’s wounds and
bruises. Who could number the financial penalties, the fines imposed on cities, the
confiscations of individual property, the plots, the outrages, the imprisonments? Indeed all
our afflictions increased beyond number: perhaps because we were paying the just penalty for
our sins; perhaps also because a loving God was disciplining us by means of the great number
of our sufferings.

So thanks be to God for this. He has instructed his own servants through the weight of their
afflictions, and in accordance with his numerous mercies he has brought us back again to a
place of refreshment The restoration of the churches demanded prolonged attention, much
time and hard work from us if the body of the church which had been weak for so long was to

11
be cured completely by gradual treatment and brought back to its original soundness in
religion. We may seem on the whole to be free from violent persecutions and to be at the
moment recovering the churches which have long been in the grip of the heretics. But in fact
we are oppressed by wolves who even after expulsion from the fold go on ravaging the flocks
up and down dale, making so bold as to hold rival assemblies, activating popular uprisings
and stopping at nothing which might harm the churches. As we have said, this made us take a
longer time over our affairs.

But now you have shown your brotherly love for us by convoking a synod in Rome, in
accordance with God’s will, and inviting us to it, by means of a letter from your most God-
beloved emperor, as if we were limbs of your very own, so that whereas in the past we were
condemned to suffer alone, you should not now reign in isolation from us, given the complete
agreement of the emperors in matters of religion. Rather, according to the word of the
apostle, we should reign along with you’. So it was our intention that if it were possible we
should all leave our churches together and indulge our desires rather than attend to their
needs. But who will give us wings as of a dove, so we shall fly and come to rest with you?
This course would leave the churches entirely exposed, just as they are beginning their
renewal; and it is completely out of the question for the majority. As a consequence of last
year’s letter sent by your reverence after the synod of Aquileia to our most God-beloved
emperor Theodosius, we came together in Constantinople. We were equipped only for this
stay in Constantinople and the bishops who remained in the provinces gave their agreement
to this synod alone. We foresaw no need for a longer absence, nor did we hear of it in
advance at all, before we gathered in Constantinople. On top of this the tightness of the
schedule proposed allowed no opportunity to prepare for a longer absence, nor to brief all the
bishops in the provinces who are in communion with us and to get their agreement. Since
these considerations, and many more besides, prevented most of us from coming, we have
done the next best thing both to set matters straight and to make your love for us appreciated:
we have managed to convince our most venerable and reverend brethren and fellow-
ministers, Bishops Cyriacus, Eusebius and Priscian to be willing to undertake the wearisome
journey to you. Through them we wish to show that our intentions are peaceful and have
unity as their goal. We also want to make clear that what we are zealously seeking is sound
faith.

What we have undergone — persecutions, afflictions, imperial threats, cruelty from officials,
and whatever other trial at the hands of heretics — we have put up with for the sake of the
gospel faith established by the 318 fathers at Nicaea in Bithynia. You, we and all who are not
bent on subverting the word of the true faith should give this creed our approval. It is the
most ancient and is consistent with our baptism. It tells us how to believe in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit: believing also, of course, that the Father, the Son
and the holy Spirit have a single Godhead and power and substance, a dignity deserving the
same honour and a co-eternal sovereignty, in three most perfect hypostases, or three perfect
persons. So there is no place for Sabellius’s diseased theory in which the hypostases are
confused and thus their proper characteristics destroyed. Nor may the blasphemy of
Eunomians and Arians and Pneumatomachi prevail, with its division of substance or of nature

12
or of Godhead, and its introduction of some nature which was produced subsequently, or was
created, or was of a different substance, into the uncreated and consubstantial and co-eternal
Trinity. And we preserve undistorted the accounts of the Lord’s taking of humanity,
accepting as we do that the economy of his flesh was not soulless nor mindless nor imperfect.
To sum up, we know that he was before the ages fully God the Word, and that in the last days
he became fully man for the sake of our salvation.

So much, in summary, for the faith which is openly preached by us. You can take even more
heart concerning these matters if you think fit to consult the tome that was issued in Antioch
by the synod which met there as well as the one issued last year in Constantinople by the
ecumenical synod. In these documents we confessed the faith in broader terms and we have
issued a written condemnation of the heresies which have recently erupted.

With regard to particular forms of administration in the churches, ancient custom, as you
know, has been in force, along with the regulation of the saintly fathers at Nicaea, that in each
province those of the province, and with them-should the former so desire — their
neighbours, should conduct ordinations as need might arise. Accordingly, as you are aware,
the rest of the churches are administered, and the priests [= bishops] of the most prominent
churches have been appointed, by us. Hence at the ecumenical council by common agreement
and in the presence of the most God-beloved emperor Theodosius and all the clergy, and with
the approval of the whole city, we have ordained the most venerable and God-beloved
Nectarius as bishop of the church newly set up, as one might say, in Constantinople — a
church which by God’s mercy we just recently snatched from the blasphemy of the heretics
as from the lion’s jaws. Over the most ancient and truly apostolic church at Antioch in Syria,
where first the precious name of “Christians” came into use, the provincial bishops and those
of the diocese of the East came together and canonically ordained the most venerable and
God-beloved Flavian as bishop with the consent of the whole church, as though it would give
the man due honour with a single voice. The synod as a whole also accepted that this
ordination was legal. We wish to inform you that the most venerable and God-beloved Cyril
is bishop of the church in Jerusalem, the mother of all the churches. He was canonically
ordained some time ago by those of the province and at various times he has valiantly
combated the Arians.

We exhort your reverence to join us in rejoicing at what we have legally and canonically
enacted. Let spiritual love link us together, and let the fear of the Lord suppress all human
prejudice and put the building up of the churches before individual attachment or favour. In
this way, with the account of the faith agreed between us and with christian love established
among us, we shall cease to declare what was condemned by the apostles, “I belong to Paul, I
to Apollo, I to Cephas”; but we shall all be seen to belong to Christ, who has not been divided
up among us; and with God’s good favour, we shall keep the body of the church undivided,
and shall come before the judgment-seat of the Lord with confidence.

CANONS

13
1
The profession of faith of the holy fathers who gathered in Nicaea in Bithynia is not to be
abrogated, but it is to remain in force. Every heresy is to be anathematised and in particular
that of the Eunomians or Anomoeans, that of the Arians or Eudoxians, that of the Semi-
Arians or Pneumatomachi, that of the Sabellians that of the Marcellians, that of the
Photinians and that of the Apollinarians.

2
Diocesan bishops are not to intrude in churches beyond their own boundaries nor are they to
confuse the churches: but in accordance with the canons, the bishop of Alexandria is to
administer affairs in Egypt only; the bishops of the East are to manage the East alone (whilst
safeguarding the privileges granted to the church of the Antiochenes in the Nicene canons);
and the bishops of the Asian diocese are to manage only Asian affairs; and those in Pontus
only the affairs of Pontus; and those in Thrace only Thracian affairs. Unless invited bishops
are not to go outside their diocese to perform an ordination or any other ecclesiastical
business. If the letter of the canon about dioceses is kept, it is clear that the provincial synod
will manage affairs in each province, as was decreed at Nicaea. But the churches of God
among barbarian peoples must be administered in accordance with the custom in force at the
time of the fathers.

3
Because it is new Rome, the bishop of Constantinople is to enjoy the privileges of honour
after the bishop of Rome.

4
Regarding Maximus the Cynic and the disorder which surrounded him in Constantinople: he
never became, nor is he, a bishop; nor are those ordained by him clerics of any rank
whatsoever. Everything that was done both to him and by him is to be held invalid.

5
Regarding the Tome [2] of the Westerns: we have also recognised those in Antioch who
confess a single Godhead of Father and Son and holy Spirit.

6
There are many who are bent on confusing and overturning the good order of the church and
so fabricate, out of hatred and a wish to slander, certain accusations against orthodox bishops
in charge of churches. Their intention is none other than to blacken priests’ reputations and to
stir up trouble among peace- loving laity. For this reason the sacred synod of bishops
assembled at Constantinople has decided not to admit accusers without prior examination,
and not to allow everyone to bring accusations against church administrators — but with- out
excluding everyone. So if someone brings a private (that is a personal) complaint against the
bishop on the grounds that he has been defrauded or in some other way unjustly dealt with by
him, in the case of this kind of accusation neither the character nor the religion of the accuser
will be subject to examination. It is wholly essential both that the bishop should have a clear

14
conscience and that the one who alleges that he has been wronged, whatever his religion may
be, should get justice.

But if the charge brought against the bishop is of an ecclesiastical kind, then the characters of
those making it should be examined, in the first place to stop heretics bringing charges
against orthodox bishops in matters of an ecclesiastical kind. (We define “heretics” as those
who have been previously banned from the church and also those later anathematised by
ourselves: and in addition those who claim to confess a faith that is sound, but who have
seceded and hold assemblies in rivalry with the bishops who are in communion with us.) In
the second place, persons previously condemned and expelled from the church for whatever
reason, or those excommunicated either from the clerical or lay rank, are not to be permitted
to accuse a bishop until they have first purged their own crime. Similarly, those who are
already accused are not permitted to accuse a bishop or other clerics until they have proved
their own innocence of the crimes with which they are charged. But if persons who are
neither heretics nor excommunicates, nor such as have been previously condemned or
accused of some transgression or other, claim that they have some ecclesiastical charge to
make against the bishop, the sacred synod commands that such persons should first lay the
accusations before all the bishops of the province and prove before them the crimes
committed by the bishop in the case. If it emerges that the bishops of the province are not
able to correct the crimes laid at the bishop’s door, then a higher synod of the bishops of that
diocese, convoked to hear this case, must be approached, and the accusers are not to lay their
accusations before it until they have given a written promise to submit to equal penalties
should they be found guilty of making false accusations against the accused bishop, when the
matter is investigated.

If anyone shows contempt of the prescriptions regarding the above matters and presumes to
bother either the ears of the emperor or the courts of the secular authorities, or to dishonour
all the diocesan bishops and trouble an ecumenical synod, there is to be no question whatever
of allowing such a person to bring accusations forward, because he has made a mockery of
the canons and violated the good order of the church.

7
Those who embrace orthodoxy and join the number of those who are being saved from the
heretics, we receive in the following regular and customary manner: Arians, Macedonians,
Sabbatians, Novatians, those who call themselves Cathars and Aristae, Quartodeciman or
Tetradites, Apollinarians-these we receive when they hand in statements and anathematise
every heresy which is not of the same mind as the holy, catholic and apostolic church of God.
They are first sealed or anointed with holy chrism on the forehead, eyes, nostrils, mouth and
ears. As we seal them we say: “Seal of the gift of the holy Spirit”. But Eunomians, who are
baptised in a single immersion, Montanists (called Phrygians here), Sabellians, who teach the
identity of Father and Son and make certain other difficulties, and all other sects — since
there are many here, not least those who originate in the country of the Galatians — we
receive all who wish to leave them and embrace orthodoxy as we do Greeks. On the first day
we make Christians of them, on the second catechumens, on the third we exorcise them by

15
breathing three times into their faces and their ears, and thus we catechise them and make
them spend time in the church and listen to the scriptures; and then we baptise them.

16
Council Of Ephesus – 431 A.D.
Council Fathers - 431 A.D.
Introduction

Nestorius, who had been condemned in a council at Rome on 11 August 430, asked the
emperor Theodosius II to summon this council. The emperor therefore decided to summon it
together with his co-emperor Valentinian III and with the agreement of Pope Celestine I.
Theodosius’s letter of 19 November 430 requested all those who had been summoned to be
present at Ephesus on 7 June 431, the feast of Pentecost.

On 22 June, however,

before the arrival either of the Roman legates or the eastern bishops led by John of
Antioch,
Cyril of Alexandria began the council.
Nestorius was summoned three times but did not come.
His teaching was examined and judgment passed upon it, which 197 bishops subscribed at
once and others later accepted.Shortly afterwards John of Antioch and the easterners arrived:
they refused communion with Cyril and set up another council. The Roman legates (the
bishops Arcadius and Projectus and the priest Philip), on arriving, joined Cyril and confirmed
the sentence against Nestorius. Then the council in its fifth session on 17 July
excommunicated John and his party.The documents of the Cyrilline council, the only one
which is ecumenical, are included below and are as follows.
The central dogmatic act of the council is its judgment about whether the second letter
of Cyril to Nestorius, or Nestorius’s second letter to Cyril, was in conformity with the Nicene
creed which was recited at the opening of the council’s proceedings.
Cyril’s letter was declared by the fathers to be in agreement with Nicaea,
Nestorius’s was condemned

Both are here printed. Mention is made of Cyril’s letter in the definition of Chalcedon.
The 12 anathemas and the preceding explanatory letter, which had been produced by
Cyril and the synod of Alexandria in 430 and sent to Nestorius, were read at Ephesus and
included in the proceedings.
The decision about Nestorius.
The letter of the council advising all the bishops, clergy and people about the
condemnation of John of Antioch; and some paragraphs dealing with the discipline of the
Nestorian party.
A decree on the faith, approved in the sixth session on 22 July, which confirmed the
Nicene creed, ordered adherence to that alone and forbade the production of new creeds.
A definition against the Messalians.
A decree about the autonomy of the church of Cyprus.

17
 Both councils sent legates to the emperor Theodosius, who approved neither and sent the
bishops away. Nestorius had already been given permission to revisit his monastery at
Antioch, and on 25 October 431 Maximianus was ordained patriarch at Constantinople. The
decrees of the council were approved by Pope Sixtus III shortly after his own ordination on
31 July 432.

The reconciliation between the Cyrilline party and the eastern bishops was not easy. In the
end, on 23 April 433, Cyril and John of Antioch made peace. John’s profession of faith was
accepted by Cyril and became the doctrinal formula of union. It is included here, together
with Cyril’s letter in which he at some length praises John’s profession and accepts it, adding
to it some explanation about his own expressions; this letter is mentioned in the definition of
Chalcedon. Shortly afterwards, probably in 436, Nestorius was definitely sent into exile by
the emperor .

The English translation is from the Greek text, which is the more authoritative version.

Second letter of Cyril to Nestorius

[Declared by the council of Ephesus to be in agreement with Nicaea]

Cyril sends greeting in the Lord to the most religious and reverend fellow-minister
Nestorius

I understand that there are some who are talking rashly of the reputation in which I hold
your reverence, and that this is frequently the case when meetings of people in authority give
them an opportunity. I think they hope in this way to delight your ears and so they spread
abroad uncontrolled expressions. They are people who have suffered no wrong, but have
been exposed by me for their own profit, one because he oppressed the blind and the poor, a
second because he drew a sword on his mother, a third because he stole someone else’s
money in collusion with a maidservant and since then has lived with such a reputation as one
would hardly wish for one’s worst enemy. For the rest I do not intend to spend more words
on this subject in order not to vaunt my own mediocrity above my teacher and master or
above the fathers. For however one may try to live, it is impossible to escape the malice of
evil people, whose mouths are full of cursing and bitterness and who will have to defend
themselves before the judge of all.

But I turn to a subject more fitting to myself and remind you as a brother in Christ always
to be very careful about what you say to the people in matters of teaching and of your thought
on the faith. You should bear in mind that to scandalise even one of these little ones that
believe in Christ lays you open to unendurable wrath. If the number of those who are
distressed is very large, then surely we should use every skill and care to remove scandals
and to expound the healthy word of faith to those who seek the truth. The most effective way
to achieve this end will be zealously to occupy ourselves with the words of the holy fathers,

18
to esteem their words, to examine our words to see if we are holding to their faith as it is
written, to conform our thoughts to their correct and irreproachable teaching.

The holy and great synod, therefore, stated that

1. the only begotten Son, begotten of God the Father according to nature, true God from
true God, the light from the light, the one through whom the Father made all things, came
down, became incarnate, became man,
2. suffered, rose on the third day and ascended to heaven.
1. We too ought to follow these words and these teachings and consider what is meant by
saying that the Word from God took flesh and became man. For we do not say that the nature
of the Word was changed and became flesh, nor that he was turned into a whole man made of
body and soul. Rather do we claim that the Word in an unspeakable, inconceivable manner
united to himself hypostatically flesh enlivened by a rational soul, and so became man and
was called son of man, not by God’s will alone or good pleasure, nor by the assumption of a
person alone. Rather did two different natures come together to form a unity, and from both
arose one Christ, one Son. It was not as though the distinctness of the natures was destroyed
by the union, but divinity and humanity together made perfect for us one Lord and one Christ,
together marvellously and mysteriously combining to form a unity. So he who existed and
was begotten of the Father before all ages is also said to have been begotten according to the
flesh of a woman, without the divine nature either beginning to exist in the holy virgin, or
needing of itself a second begetting after that from his Father. (For it is absurd and stupid to
speak of the one who existed before every age and is coeternal with the Father, needing a
second beginning so as to exist.) The Word is said to have been begotten according to the
flesh, because for us and for our salvation he united what was human to himself
hypostatically and came forth from a woman. For he was not first begotten of the holy virgin,
a man like us, and then the Word descended upon him; but from the very womb of his mother
he was so united and then underwent begetting according to the flesh, making his own the
begetting of his own flesh.
2. In a similar way we say that he suffered and rose again, not that the Word of God
suffered blows or piercing with nails or any other wounds in his own nature (for the divine,
being without a body, is incapable of suffering), but because the body which became his own
suffered these things, he is said to have suffered them for us. For he was without suffering,
while his body suffered. Something similar is true of his dying. For by nature the Word of
God is of itself immortal and incorruptible and life and life-giving, but since on the other
hand his own body by God’s grace, as the apostle says, tasted death for all, the Word is said
to have suffered death for us, not as if he himself had experienced death as far as his own
nature was concerned (it would be sheer lunacy to say or to think that), but because, as I have
just said, his flesh tasted death. So too, when his flesh was raised to life, we refer to this again
as his resurrection, not as though he had fallen into corruption–God forbid–but because his
body had been raised again.So we shall confess one Christ and one Lord. We do not adore the
man along with the Word, so as to avoid any appearance of division by using the word
“with”. But we adore him as one and the same, because the body is not other than the Word,
and takes its seat with him beside the Father, again not as though there were two sons seated
together but only one, united with his own flesh. If, however, we reject the hypostatic union

19
as being either impossible or too unlovely for the Word, we fall into the fallacy of speaking
of two sons. We shall have to distinguish and speak both of the man as honoured with the
title of son, and of the Word of God as by nature possessing the name and reality of sonship,
each in his own way. We ought not, therefore, to split into two sons the one Lord Jesus
Christ. Such a way of presenting a correct account of the faith will be quite unhelpful, even
though some do speak of a union of persons. For scripture does not say that the Word united
the person of a man to himself, but that he became flesh. The Word’s becoming flesh means
nothing else than that he partook of flesh and blood like us; he made our body his own, and
came forth a man from woman without casting aside his deity, or his generation from God the
Father, but rather in his assumption of flesh remaining what he was.This is the account of the
true faith everywhere professed. So shall we find that the holy fathers believed. So have they
dared to call the holy virgin, mother of God, not as though the nature of the Word or his
godhead received the origin of their being from the holy virgin, but because there was born
from her his holy body rationally ensouled, with which the Word was hypostatically united
and is said to have been begotten in the flesh. These things I write out of love in Christ
exhorting you as a brother and calling upon you before Christ and the elect angels, to hold
and teach these things with us, in order to preserve the peace of the churches and that the
priests of God may remain in an unbroken bond of concord and love.

Second letter of Nestorius to Cyril

[condemned by the council of Ephesus]

Nestorius sends greeting in the Lord to the most religious and reverend fellow-minister
Cyril. I pass over the insults against us contained in your extraordinary letter. They will, I
think, be cured by my patience and by the answer which events will offer in the course of
time. On one matter, however, I cannot be silent, as silence would in that case be very
dangerous. On that point, therefore avoiding longwindedness as far as I can, I shall attempt a
brief discussion and try to be as free as possible from repelling obscurity and undigestible
prolixity. I shall begin from the wise utterances of your reverence, setting them down word
for word. What then are the words in which your remarkable teaching finds expression ?

“The holy and great synod states that the only begotten Son, begotten of God the Father
according to nature, true God from true God, the light from the light, the one through whom
the Father made all things, came down, became incarnate, became man, suffered, rose.”

These are the words of your reverence and you may recognise them. Now listen to what we
say, which takes the form of a brotherly exhortation to piety of the type of which the great
apostle Paul gave an example in addressing his beloved Timothy: “Attend to the public
reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. For by so doing you will save both yourself
and your hearers”. Tell me, what does “attend” mean? By reading in a superficial way the
tradition of those holy men (you were guilty of a pardonable ignorance), you concluded that
they said that the Word who is coeternal with the Father was passible. Please look more

20
closely at their language and you will find out that that divine choir of fathers never said that
the consubstantial godhead was capable of suffering, or that the whole being that was
coeternal with the Father was recently born, or that it rose again, seeing that it had itself been
the cause of resurrection of the destroyed temple. If you apply my words as fraternal
medicine, I shall set the words of the holy fathers before you and shall free them from the
slander against them and through them against the holy scriptures.

“I believe”, they say, “also in our Lord Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son”. See how they
first lay as foundations “Lord” and “Jesus” and “Christ” and “only begotten” and “Son”, the
names which belong jointly to the divinity and humanity. Then they build on that foundation
the tradition of the incarnation and resurrection and passion. In this way, by prefixing the
names which are common to each nature, they intend to avoid separating expressions
applicable to sonship and lordship and at the same time escape the danger of destroying the
distinctive character of the natures by absorbing them into the one title of “Son”. In this Paul
was their teacher who, when he remembers the divine becoming man and then wishes to
introduce the suffering, first mentions “Christ”, which, as I have just said, is the common
name of both natures and then adds an expression which is appropriate to both of the natures.
For what does he say ? “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus
who though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be
grasped”, and so on until, “he became obedient unto death, even death on a cross”. For when
he was about to mention the death, to prevent anyone supposing that God the Word suffered,
he says “Christ”, which is a title that expresses in one person both the impassible and the
passible natures, in order that Christ might be called without impropriety both impassible and
passible impassible in godhead, passible in the nature of his body.

I could say much on this subject and first of all that those holy fathers, when they discuss
the economy, speak not of the generation but of the Son becoming man. But I recall the
promise of brevity that I made at the beginning and that both restrains my discourse and
moves me on to the second subject of your reverence. In that I applaud your division of
natures into manhood and godhead and their conjunction in one person. I also applaud your
statement that God the Word needed no second generation from a woman, and your
confession that the godhead is incapable of suffering. Such statements are truly orthodox and
equally opposed to the evil opinions of all heretics about the Lord’s natures. If the remainder
was an attempt to introduce some hidden and incomprehensible wisdom to the ears of the
readers, it is for your sharpness to decide. In my view these subsequent views seemed to
subvert what came first. They suggested that he who had at the beginning been proclaimed as
impassible and incapable of a second generation had somehow become capable of suffering
and freshly created, as though what belonged to God the Word by nature had been destroyed
by his conjunction with his temple or as though people considered it not enough that the
sinless temple, which is inseparable from the divine nature, should have endured birth and
death for sinners, or finally as though the Lord’s voice was not deserving of credence when it
cried out to the Jews: “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” He did not
say, “Destroy my godhead and in three days it will be raised up.”

21
 Again I should like to expand on this but am restrained by the memory of my promise. I
must speak therefore but with brevity. Holy scripture, wherever it recalls the Lord’s
economy, speaks of the birth and suffering not of the godhead but of the humanity of Christ,
so that the holy virgin is more accurately termed mother of Christ than mother of God. Hear
these words that the gospels proclaim: “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of
David, son of Abraham.” It is clear that God the Word was not the son of David. Listen to
another witness if you will: “Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born
Jesus, who is called the Christ. ” Consider a further piece of evidence: “Now the birth of
Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, she
was found to be with child of the holy Spirit.” But who would ever consider that the godhead
of the only begotten was a creature of the Spirit? Why do we need to mention: “the mother of
Jesus was there”? And again what of: “with Mary the mother of Jesus”; or “that which is
conceived in her is of the holy Spirit”; and “Take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt”;
and “concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh”? Again,
scripture says when speaking of his passion: “God sending his own Son in the likeness of
sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh”; and again “Christ died for our sins”
and “Christ having suffered in the flesh”; and “This is”, not “my godhead”, but “my body,
broken for you”.

Ten thousand other expressions witness to the human race that they should not think that it
was the godhead of the Son that was recently killed but the flesh which was joined to the
nature of the godhead. (Hence also Christ calls himself the lord and son of David: ” ‘What do
you think of the Christ ? Whose son is he ?’ They said to him, ‘The son of David.’ Jesus
answered and said to them, ‘How is it then that David inspired by the Spirit, calls him Lord,
saying, “The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand”?'”. He said this as being indeed son
of David according to the flesh, but his Lord according to his godhead.) The body therefore is
the temple of the deity of the Son, a temple which is united to it in a high and divine
conjunction, so that the divine nature accepts what belongs to the body as its own. Such a
confession is noble and worthy of the gospel traditions. But to use the expression “accept as
its own” as a way of diminishing the properties of the conjoined flesh, birth, suffering and
entombment, is a mark of those whose minds are led astray, my brother, by Greek thinking or
are sick with the lunacy of Apollinarius and Arius or the other heresies or rather something
more serious than these.

For it is necessary for such as are attracted by the name “propriety” to make God the Word
share, because of this same propriety, in being fed on milk, in gradual growth, in terror at the
time of his passion and in need of angelical assistance. I make no mention of circumcision
and sacrifice and sweat and hunger, which all belong to the flesh and are adorable as having
taken place for our sake. But it would be false to apply such ideas to the deity and would
involve us in just accusation because of our calumny.

These are the traditions of the holy fathers. These are the precepts of the holy scriptures. In
this way does someone write in a godly way about the divine mercy and power, “Practise
these duties, devote yourself to them, so that all may see your progress”. This is what Paul

22
says to all. The care you take in labouring for those who have been scandalised is well taken
and we are grateful to you both for the thought you devote to things divine and for the
concern you have even for those who live here. But you should realise that you have been
misled either by some here who have been deposed by the holy synod for Manichaeism or by
clergy of your own persuasion. In fact the church daily progresses here and through the grace
of Christ there is such an increase among the people that those who behold it cry out with the
words of the prophet, “The earth will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the water
covers the sea”. As for our sovereigns, they are in great joy as the light of doctrine is spread
abroad and, to be brief, because of the state of all the heresies that fight against God and of
the orthodoxy of the church, one might find that verse fulfilled “The house of Saul grew
weaker and weaker and the house of David grew stronger and stronger”.

This is our advice from a brother to a brother. “If anyone is disposed to be contentious”,
Paul will cry out through us to such a one, “we recognize no other practice, neither do the
churches of God”. I and those with me greet all the brotherhood with you in Christ. May you
remain strong and continue praying for us, most honoured and reverent lord.

Third letter of Cyril to Nestorius

[Read at the council of Ephesus and included in the proceedings . We omit the preface of
the letter]

We believe in one God . . .[Nicene Creed]

Following in all points the confessions of the holy fathers, which they made with the holy
Spirit speaking in them, and following the direction of their opinions and going as it were in
the royal way, we say that the only-begotten Word of God, who was begotten from the very
essence of the Father, true God from true God, the light from the light and the one through
whom all things in heaven and earth were made, for our salvation came down and emptying
himself he became incarnate and was made man. This means that
he took flesh from the holy virgin and made it his own, undergoing a birth like ours from
her womb and coming forth a man from a woman.
He did not cast aside what he was, but although he assumed flesh and blood, he remained
what he was, God in nature and truth.
We do not say that his flesh was turned into the nature of the godhead or that the
unspeakable Word of God was changed into the nature of the flesh. For he (the Word) is
unalterable and absolutely unchangeable and remains always the same as the scriptures say.
For although visible as a child and in swaddling cloths, even while he was in the bosom of
the virgin that bore him, as God he filled the whole of creation and was fellow ruler with him
who begot him. For the divine is without quantity and dimension and cannot be subject to
circumscription.We confess the Word to have been made one with the flesh hypostatically,
and we adore one Son and Lord, Jesus Christ. We do not divide him into parts and separate
man and God in him, as though the two natures were mutually united only through a unity of

23
dignity and authority; that would be an empty expression and nothing more. Nor do we give
the name Christ in one sense to the Word of God and in another to him who was born of
woman, but we know only one Christ, the Word from God the Father with his own flesh. As
man he was anointed with us, even though he himself gives the Spirit to those who are
worthy to receive it and not in measure, as the blessed evangelist John says.But we do not say
that the Word of God dwelt as in an ordinary man born of the holy virgin, in order that Christ
may not be thought of as a God-bearing man. For even though “the Word dwelt among us”,
and it is also said that in Christ dwelt “all the fullness of the godhead bodily”, we understand
that, having become flesh, the manner of his indwelling is not defined in the same way as he
is said to dwell among the saints, he was united by nature and not turned into flesh and he
made his indwelling in such a way as we may say that the soul of man does in his own
body.There is therefore one Christ and Son and Lord, but not with the sort of conjunction that
a man might have with God as unity of dignity or authority. Equality of honour by itself is
unable to unite natures. For Peter and John were equal in honour to each other, being both of
them apostles and holy disciples, but they were two, not one. Neither do we understand the
manner of conjunction to be one of juxtaposition for this is not enough for natural union. Nor
yet is it a question of relative participation, as we ourselves, being united to the Lord, are as it
is written in the words of scripture “one spirit with him”. Rather do we deprecate the term
“conjunction” as being inadequate to express the idea of union.Nor do we call the Word from
God the Father, the God or Lord of Christ. To speak in that way would appear to split into
two the one Christ and Son and Lord and we might in this way fall under the charge of
blasphemy, making him the God and Lord of himself. For, as we have already said, the Word
of God was united hypostatically with the flesh and is God of all and Lord of the universe,
but is neither his own slave or master. For it is foolish or rather impious to think or to speak
in this way. It is true that he called the Father “God” even though he was himself God by
nature and of his being, we are not ignorant of the fact that at the same time as he was God he
also became man, and so was subject to God according to the law that is suitable to the nature
of manhood. But how should he become God or Lord of himself? Consequently as man and
as far as it was fitting for him within the limits of his self-emptying it is said that he was
subject to God like ourselves. So he came to be under the law while at the same time himself
speaking the law and being a lawgiver like God.When speaking of Christ we avoid the
expression: “I worship him who is carried because of the one who carries him; because of
him who is unseen, I worship the one who is seen.” It is shocking to say in this connexion:
“The assumed shares the name of God with him who assumes.” To speak in this way once
again divides into two Christs and puts the man separately by himself and God likewise by
himself. This saying denies openly the union, according to which one is not worshipped
alongside the other, nor do both share in the title “God”, but Jesus Christ is considered as one,
the only begotten Son, honoured with one worship, together with his own flesh.We also
confess that the only begotten Son born of God the Father, although according to his own
nature he was not subject to suffering, suffered in the flesh for us according to the scriptures,
and was in his crucified body, and without himself suffering made his own the sufferings of
his own flesh, for “by the grace of God he tasted death for all”. For that purpose he gave his
own body to death though he was by nature life and the resurrection, in order that, having
trodden down death by his own unspeakable power, he might first in his own flesh become

24
the firstborn from the dead and “the first fruits of them that sleep”. And that he might make a
way for human nature to return to incorruption by the grace of God, as we have just said, “he
tasted death for all” and on the third day he returned to life, having robbed the underworld.
Accordingly, even though it is said that “through man came the resurrection of the dead”, yet
we understand that man to have been the Word which came from God, through whom the
power of death was overcome. At the right time he will come as one Son and Lord in the
glory of the Father, to judge the world in justice, as it is written.

We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death according to the flesh of the only
begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, and professing his return to life from the dead and
his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody worship [sacrificii servitutem] in the
churches and so proceed to the mystical thanksgivings and are sanctified having partaken of
the holy flesh [corpus] and precious blood of Christ, the saviour of us all. This we receive not
as ordinary flesh, heaven forbid, nor as that of a man who has been made holy and joined to
the Word by union of honour, or who had a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and
real flesh of the Word [ut vere vivificatricem et ipsius Verbi propriam factam.]. For being life
by nature as God, when he became one with his own flesh, he made it also to be life-giving,
as also he said to us: “Amen I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink
his blood” . For we must not think that it is the flesh of a man like us (for how can the flesh of
man be life-giving by its own nature?), but as being made the true flesh [vere proprium eius
factam] of the one who for our sake became the son of man and was called so.

For we do not divide up the words of our Saviour in the gospels among two hypostases or
persons. For the one and only Christ is not dual, even though he be considered to be from two
distinct realities, brought together into an unbreakable union. In the same sort of way a
human being, though he be composed of soul and body, is considered to be not dual, but
rather one out of two. Therefore, in thinking rightly, we refer both the human and divine
expressions to the same person. For when he speaks about himself in a divine manner as “he
that sees me sees the Father”, and “I and the Father are one”, we think of his divine and
unspeakable nature, according to which he is one with his own Father through identity of
nature and is the “image and impress and brightness of his glory”. But when, not
dishonouring the measure of his humanity, he says to the Jews: “But now you seek to kill me,
a man who has spoken the truth to you”, again no less than before, we recognise that he who,
because of his equality and likeness to God the Father is God the Word, is also within the
limits of his humanity. For if it is necessary to believe that being God by nature he became
flesh, that is man ensouled with a rational soul, whatever reason should anyone have for
being ashamed at the expressions uttered by him should they happen to be suitable to him as
man ? For if he should reject words suitable to him as man, who was it that forced him to
become a man like us? Why should he who submitted himself to voluntary self-emptying for
our sake, reject expressions that are suitable for such self-emptying? All the expressions,
therefore, that occur in the gospels are to be referred to one person, the one enfleshed
hypostasis of the Word. For there is one Lord Jesus Christ, according to the scriptures.

25
 Even though he is called “the apostle and high priest of our confession”, as offering to the
God and Father the confession of faith we make to him and through him to the God and
Father and also to the holy Spirit, again we say that he is the natural and only-begotten Son of
God and we shall not assign to another man apart from him the name and reality of
priesthood. For he became the “mediator between God and humanity” and the establisher of
peace between them, offering himself for an odour of sweetness to the God and Father.
Therefore also he said: “Sacrifice and offering you would not, but a body you have prepared
for me; [in burnt offerings and sacrifice for sin you have no pleasure]. Then I said, ‘Behold I
come to do your will, O God’, as it is written of me in the volume of the book”. For our sake
and not for his own he brought forward his own body in the odour of sweetness. Indeed, of
what offering or sacrifice for himself would he have been in need, being as God superior to
all manner of sin? For though “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”, and so we
are prone to disorder and human nature has fallen into the weakness of sin, he is not so and
consequently we are behind him in glory. How then can there be any further doubt that the
true lamb was sacrificed for us and on our behalf? The suggestion that he offered himself for
himself as well as for us is impossible to separate from the charge of impiety. For he never
committed a fault at all, nor did he sin in any way. What sort of offering would he need then
since there was no sin for which offering might rightly be made?

When he says of the Spirit, “he will glorify me”, the correct understanding of this is not to
say that the one Christ and Son was in need of glory from another and that he took glory from
the holy Spirit, for his Spirit is not better than he nor above him. But because he used his own
Spirit to display his godhead through his mighty works, he says that he has been glorified by
him, just as if any one of us should perhaps say for example of his inherent strength or his
knowledge of anything that they glorify him. For even though the Spirit exists in his own
hypostasis and is thought of on his own, as being Spirit and not as Son, even so he is not alien
to the Son. He has been called “the Spirit of truth”, and Christ is the truth, and the Spirit was
poured forth by the Son, as indeed the Son was poured forth from the God and Father.
Accordingly the Spirit worked many strange things through the hand of the holy apostles and
so glorified him after the ascension of our lord Jesus Christ into heaven. For it was believed
that he is God by nature and works through his own Spirit. For this reason also he said: “He
(the Spirit) will take what is mine and declare it to you”. But we do not say that the Spirit is
wise and powerful through some sharing with another, for he is all perfect and in need of no
good thing. Since he is the Spirit of the power and wisdom of the Father, that is the Son, he is
himself, evidently, wisdom and power.Therefore, because the holy virgin bore in the flesh
God who was united hypostatically with the flesh, for that reason we call her mother of God,
not as though the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh (for
“the Word was in the beginning and the Word was God and the Word was with God”, and he
made the ages and is coeternal with the Father and craftsman of all things), but because, as
we have said, he united to himself hypostatically the human and underwent a birth according
to the flesh from her womb. This was not as though he needed necessarily or for his own
nature a birth in time and in the last times of this age, but in order that he might bless the
beginning of our existence, in order that seeing that it was a woman that had given birth to
him united to the flesh, the curse against the whole race should thereafter cease which was

26
consigning all our earthy bodies to death, and in order that the removal through him of the
curse, “In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children”, should demonstrate the truth of the words
of the prophet: “Strong death swallowed them Up”, and again, “God has wiped every tear
away from all face”. It is for this cause that we say that in his economy he blessed marriage
and, when invited, went down to Cana in Galilee with his holy apostles.We have been taught
to hold these things by
the holy apostles and evangelists and by
all the divinely inspired scriptures and by the true confession of
the blessed fathers.To all these your reverence ought to agree and subscribe without any
deceit. What is required for your reverence to anathematise we subjoin to this epistle.

Twelve Anathemas Proposed by Cyril and accepted by the Council of

Ephesus

1. If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy
virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let
him be anathema.

2. If anyone does not confess that the Word from God the Father has been united by
hypostasis with the flesh and is one Christ with his own flesh, and is therefore God and man
together, let him be anathema.

3. If anyone divides in the one Christ the hypostases after the union, joining them only by a
conjunction of dignity or authority or power, and not rather by a coming together in a union
by nature, let him be anathema.

4. If anyone distributes between the two persons or hypostases the expressions used either
in the gospels or in the apostolic writings, whether they are used by the holy writers of Christ
or by him about himself, and ascribes some to him as to a man, thought of separately from the
Word from God, and others, as befitting God, to him as to the Word from God the Father, let
him be anathema.

5. If anyone dares to say that Christ was a God-bearing man and not rather God in truth,
being by nature one Son, even as “the Word became flesh”, and is made partaker of blood
and flesh precisely like us, let him be anathema.

6. If anyone says that the Word from God the Father was the God or master of Christ, and
does not rather confess the same both God and man, the Word having become flesh,
according to the scriptures, let him be anathema.

7. If anyone says that as man Jesus was activated by the Word of God and was clothed
with the glory of the Only-begotten, as a being separate from him, let him be anathema.

27
 8. If anyone dares to say that the man who was assumed ought to be worshipped and
glorified together with the divine Word and be called God along with him, while being
separate from him, (for the addition of “with” must always compel us to think in this way),
and will not rather worship Emmanuel with one veneration and send up to him one doxology,
even as “the Word became flesh”, let him be anathema.

9. If anyone says that the one Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, as making use
of an alien power that worked through him and as having received from him the power to
master unclean spirits and to work divine wonders among people, and does not rather say that
it was his own proper Spirit through whom he worked the divine wonders, let him be
anathema.

10. The divine scripture says Christ became “the high priest and apostle of our
confession”; he offered himself to God the Father in an odour of sweetness for our sake. If
anyone, therefore, says that it was not the very Word from God who became our high priest
and apostle, when he became flesh and a man like us, but as it were another who was separate
from him, in particular a man from a woman, or if anyone says that he offered the sacrifice
also for himself and not rather for us alone (for he who knew no sin needed no offering), let
him be anathema.

11. If anyone does not confess that the flesh of the Lord is life-giving and belongs to the
Word from God the Father, but maintains that it belongs to another besides him, united with
him in dignity or as enjoying a mere divine indwelling, and is not rather life-giving, as we
said, since it became the flesh belonging to the Word who has power to bring all things to
life, let him be anathema.

12. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God suffered in the flesh and was crucified
in the flesh and tasted death in the flesh and became the first born of the dead, although as
God he is life and life-giving, let him be anathema.
The judgment against Nestorius

The holy synod said: As, in addition to all else, the excellent Nestorius has declined to
obey our summons and has not received the holy and God-fearing bishops we sent to him, we
have of necessity started upon an investigation of his impieties. We have found him out
thinking and speaking in an impious fashion, from his letters, from his writings that have
been read out, and from the things that he has recently said in this metropolis which have
been witnessed to by others; and as a result we have been compelled of necessity both by
the canons and by
the letter of our most holy father and fellow servant Celestine, bishop of the church of the
Romans, to issue this sad condemnation against him, though we do so with many tears.Our
lord Jesus Christ, who has been blasphemed by him, has determined through this most holy
synod that the same Nestorius should be stripped of his episcopal dignity and removed from
the college of priests.

28
 Synodical letter about the expulsion of the eastern bishops (et al.)

The holy and ecumenical synod, gathered together in Ephesus at the behest of the most
pious princes, [sends greeting] to the bishops, priests, deacons and the whole people in every
province and city.

When we had gathered together in accordance with the pious decree in the metropolis of
Ephesus, some separated themselves from us, a little more than thirty in number. The leader
of this apostasy was John, bishop of Antioch, and their names are as follows: First the same
John, bishop of Antioch in Syria, [the names of 33 other eastern bishops follow]

These men, despite the fact that they were members of the ecclesiastical community, had
no licence either to do harm through their priestly dignity or to do good, because some among
their number had already been deposed. Their support of the views of Nestorius and Celestius
was clearly shown by their refusal to condemn Nestorius together with us. By a common
decree the sacred synod has expelled them from ecclesiastical communion and deprived them
of the exercise of their priestly office, through which they have been able to harm some and
help others.

Since it is necessary that those who were absent from the synod and remained in the
country or the city, on account of their own church affairs or because of their health, should
not be ignorant of the decisions formulated concerning these matters, we make it known to
your holinesses that if any metropolitan of a province dissents from the holy and ecumenical
synod and attaches himself to the assembly of the revolters, or should do so later, or should
he have adopted the opinions of Celestius, or do so in the future, such a one is deprived of all
power to take steps against the bishops of his province. He is thereby cast out by the synod
from all ecclesiastical communion and is deprived of all ecclesiastical authority. Instead he is
to be subjected to the bishops of his own province and the surrounding metropolitans,
provided they be orthodox, even to the extent of being completely deposed from the rank of
bishop.

If any provincial bishops have absented themselves from the holy synod and have either
attached themselves or attempted to attach themselves to the apostasy, or after subscribing the
deposition of Nestorius have returned to the assembly of apostates, these, according to the
decision of the holy synod, are to be deprived of the priesthood and deposed from their rank.

If any clerics either in city or country have been suspended by Nestorius and those with
him from their priesthood because of their orthodoxy, we have thought it right that these
should regain their proper rank; and in general we decree that those clerics who are in
agreement with the orthodox and ecumenical synod should in no way be subject to those
bishops who have revolted or may revolt from it. If any clerics should apostatise and in
private or in public dare to hold the views of Nestorius or Celestius, it is thought right that
such should stand deposed by the holy synod.

29
 Whoever have been condemned of improper practices by the holy synod or by their own
bishops, and have been uncanonically restored to communion and rank by Nestorius or his
sympathisers, with their habitual lack of discrimination, such persons we have decreed gain
nothing by this and are to remain deposed as before.

Similarly if anyone should wish in any way to upset the decisions in each point taken in the
holy synod of Ephesus, the holy synod decides that if they are bishops or clerics they should
be completely deprived of their own rank and if they are laity they should be
excommunicated.
Definition of the faith at Nicaea [6th session 22 July 431]

The synod of Nicaea produced this creed: We believe … [the Nicene Creed follows]

It seems fitting that all should assent to this holy creed. It is pious and sufficiently helpful
for the whole world. But since some pretend to confess and accept it, while at the same time
distorting the force of its expressions to their own opinion and so evading the truth, being
sons of error and children of destruction, it has proved necessary to add testimonies from the
holy and orthodox fathers that can fill out the meaning they have given to the words and their
courage in proclaiming it. All those who have a clear and blameless faith will understand,
interpret and proclaim it in this way.

When these documents had been read out, the holy synod decreed the following.
It is not permitted to produce or write or compose any other creed except the one which
was defined by the holy fathers who were gathered together in the holy Spirit at Nicaea.
Any who dare to compose or bring forth or produce another creed for the benefit of
those who wish to turn from Hellenism or Judaism or some other heresy to the knowledge of
the truth, if they are bishops or clerics they should be deprived of their respective charges and
if they are laymen they are to be anathematised.
In the same way if any should be discovered, whether bishops, clergy or laity, thinking
or teaching the views expressed in his statement by the priest Charisius about the incarnation
of the only-begotten Son of God or the disgusting, perverted views of Nestorius, which
underlie them, these should be subject to the condemnation of this holy and ecumenical
synod. A bishop clearly is to be stripped of his bishopric and deposed, a cleric to be deposed
from the clergy, and a lay person is to be anathematised, as was said before.
Definition against the impious Messalians or Euchites

The most pious and religious bishops Valerian and Amphilochius came together to us and
made a joint enquiry about the so called Messalians or Euchites or Enthusiasts, or whatever
name this appalling heresy goes under, who dwell in the region of Pamphylia. We made
investigation and the god-fearing and reverent Valerian produced a synodical document
concerning these people, which had been drawn up in great Constantinople in the time of
Sisinnius of blessed memory. When this had been read out in the presence of all, it was
agreed that it had been well made and was correct. We all agreed, as did the most religious

30
bishops Valerian and Amphilochius and all the pious bishops of the provinces of Pamphylia
and Lycaonia, that what had been inscribed in the synodical document should be confirmed
and in no way disobeyed, clearly without prejudice to the acts of Alexandria. Consequently
those anywhere in that province who subscribed to the heresy of the Messalians or
Enthusiasts, or who were suspected of the disease, whether clerical or lay, are to come
together; if they sign the anathemas according to what was promulgated in the
aforementioned synod, should they be clergy they should remain such and if laity they are to
remain in communion. But if they decline and do not anathematise, if they are presbyters or
deacons or hold any other rank in the church, they are to forfeit their clerical status and grade
and communion, and if they are laity let them be anathematised.

In addition, those who have been condemned are not to be permitted to govern
monasteries, lest tares be sown and increase. The vigorous and zealous execution of all these
decrees is enjoined upon the reverent bishops Valerian and Amphilochius and the other
reverent bishops throughout the whole province. Furthermore it seemed good that the filthy
book of this heresy, which has been published and is called by them Asceticon, should be
anathematised, as being composed by heretics, a copy of which the most pious and religious
Valerian brought with him. Any other production savouring of the like impiety which is
found anywhere is to be treated similarly.

In addition, when they come together, they should commit clearly to writing whatever
conduces to the creation of concord, communion and order. But if any discussion should arise
in connexion with the present business among the most godly bishops Valerian,
Amphilochius and the other reverent bishops in the province, and if something difficult or
ambiguous crops up, then in such a case it seems good that the godly bishops of Lycia and
Lycaonia should be brought in, and the metropolitan of whatever province these choose
should not be left out. In this way the disputed questions should through their means be
brought to an appropriate solution.

Resolution : that the bishops of Cyprus may themselves conduct ordinations.

The holy synod declared:

The most reverent bishop Rheginus and with him Zenon and Evagrius, revered bishops of
the province of Cyprus, have brought forward what is both an innovation against the
ecclesiastical customs and the canons of the holy fathers and concerns the freedom of all.
Therefore, since common diseases need more healing as they bring greater harm with them, if
it has not been a continuous ancient custom for the bishop of Antioch to hold ordinations in
Cyprus–as it is asserted in memorials and orally by the religious men who have come before
the synod — the prelates of the holy churches of Cyprus shall, free from molestation and
violence, use their right to perform by themselves the ordination of reverent bishops for their
island, according to the canons of the holy fathers and the ancient custom.

31
 The same principle will be observed for other dioceses and provinces everywhere. None of
the reverent bishops is to take possession of another province which has not been under his
authority from the first or under that of his predecessors. Any one who has thus seized upon
and subjected a province is to restore it, lest the canons of the fathers be transgressed and the
arrogance of secular power effect an entry through the cover of priestly office. We must
avoid bit by bit destroying the freedom which our lord Jesus Christ the liberator of all people,
gave us through his own blood. It is therefore the pleasure of the holy and ecumenical synod
to secure intact and inviolate the rights belonging to each province from the first, according to
the custom which has been in force from of old. Each metropolitan has the right to take a
copy of the proceedings for his own security. If any one produces a version which is at
variance with what is here decided, the holy and ecumenical synod unanimously decrees it to
be of no avail.

Formula of union between Cyrill and John of Antioch

We will state briefly what we are convinced of and profess about

the God-bearing virgin and
the manner of the incarnation of the only begotten Son of God —
not by way of addition but in the manner of a full statement, even as we have received
and possess it from of old from
the holy scriptures and from
the tradition of the holy fathers,
adding nothing at all to the creed put forward by the holy fathers at Nicaea.

For, as we have just said, that creed is sufficient both for the knowledge of godliness and
for the repudiation of all heretical false teaching. We shall speak not presuming to approach
the unapproachable; but we confess our own weakness and so shut out those who would
reproach us for investigating things beyond the human mind.

We confess, then, our lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God perfect God and
perfect man of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his
godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the virgin,
according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in godhead and
consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we
confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused
union, we confess the holy virgin to be the mother of God because God the Word took flesh
and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her.
As to the evangelical and apostolic expressions about the Lord, we know that theologians
treat some in common as of one person and distinguish others as of two natures, and interpret
the god-befitting ones in connexion with the godhead of Christ and the lowly ones with his
humanity.

32
 Letter of Cyril to John of Antioch about peace

Having read these holy phrases and finding ourselves in agreement (for “there is one Lord,
one faith, one baptism”), we have given glory to God who is the saviour of all and rejoice
together that our churches and yours are at one in professing the same faith as the inspired
scriptures and the tradition of our holy fathers. But since I discovered that there are some
always eager to find fault, who buzz around like angry wasps and spit forth evil words
against me, to the effect that I say that the holy body of Christ came down from heaven and
not from the holy virgin, I thought it necessary in answer to them to say a little about this
matter to you.

O fools, whose only competence is in slander! How did you become so perverted in
thought and fall into such a sickness of idiocy? For you must surely know that almost all our
fight for the faith arose in connexion with our insistence that the holy virgin is the mother of
God. But if we claim that the holy body of our common saviour Christ is born from heaven
and was not of her, why should she still be considered God-bearer? For whom indeed did she
bear, if it is untrue that she bore Emmanuel according to the flesh? It is rather they who speak
such nonsense against me who deserve to be ridiculed. For the holy prophet Isaiah does not
lie when he says, “Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and they shall call his name
Emmanuel, which is interpreted God with us”. Again the holy Gabriel speaks total truth when
he says to the blessed virgin: “Do not fear, Mary. You have found favour with God, and
behold you will conceive in your womb and bear a son and you will call his name Jesus . For
he will save his people from their sins”.

But when we say that our lord Jesus Christ came from heaven and above, we do not apply
such expressions as “from above” and “from heaven” to his holy flesh. Rather do we follow
the divine Paul who clearly proclaimed: “The first man was of the earth, earthly, the second
man is the Lord from heaven”.

We also recall our Saviour who said: “No one has gone up into heaven except him who
came down from heaven, the son of man”. Yet he was born, as I have just said, from the holy
virgin according to the flesh.

But since God the Word, who came down from above and from heaven, “emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave”, and was called son of man though all the while he remained what
he was, that is God (for he is unchangeable and immutable by nature), he is said to have come
down from heaven, since he is now understood to be one with his own flesh, and he has
therefore been designated the man from heaven, being both perfect in godhead and perfect in
humanity and thought of as in one person. For there is one lord Jesus Christ, even though we
do not ignore the difference of natures, out of which we say that the ineffable union was
effected. As for those who say that there was a mixture or confusion or blending of God the
Word with the flesh, let your holiness see fit to stop their mouths. For it is quite likely that
some should spread it abroad that I have thought or said such things. But I am so far from
thinking anything of the kind that I think that those are quite mad who suppose that “a

33
shadow of change” is conceivable in connexion with the divine nature of the Word. For he
remains what he is always and never changes, nor could he ever change or be susceptible of
it. Furthermore we all confess that the Word of God is impassible though in his all-wise
economy of the mystery he is seen to attribute to himself the sufferings undergone by his own
flesh. So the all-wise Peter speaks of “Christ suffering for us in the flesh” and not in the
nature of his unspeakable godhead. For in order that he might be believed to be the saviour of
all, in accordance with our economic appropriation, as I said, he refers to himself the
sufferings of his own flesh, in much the same way as is suggested through the voice of the
prophet coming as it were from him in advance: “I gave my back to the smiters and my
cheeks to blows; I hid not my face from shame and spitting” .

Let your holiness be persuaded and let no one else cherish any doubt, that we everywhere
follow the opinions of the holy fathers especially those of our blessed and glorious father
Athanasius, with whose opinions we differ not in the slightest. I would have added many of
their testimonies, proving my opinions from theirs, had I not feared that the length of the
letter would be made tedious thereby. We do not permit anyone in any way to upset the
defined faith or the creed drawn up by the holy fathers who assembled at Nicaea as the times
demanded. We give neither ourselves nor them the licence to alter any expression there or to
change a single syllable, remembering the words: “Remove not the ancient landmarks which
your fathers have set”.

For it was not they that spoke, but the Spirit of God the Father, who proceeds from him and
who is not distinct from the Son in essence. We are further confirmed in our view by the
words of our holy spiritual teachers. For in the Acts of the Apostles it is written: “When they
came to Mysia, they tried to go to Bithynia and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them”. And
the divine Paul writes as follows: “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are
not in the flesh, you are in the spirit, if the Spirit of God really dwells in you. And anyone
who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him”. When, therefore, any of those
who love to upset sound doctrine pervert my words to their way of thinking, your holiness
should not be surprised at this, but should remember that the followers of every heresy extract
from inspired scripture the occasion of their error, and that all heretics corrupt the true
expressions of the holy Spirit with their own evil minds and they draw down on their own
heads an inextinguishable flame.

Since therefore we have learnt that even the letter of our glorious father Athanasius to the
blessed Epictetus, which is completely orthodox, has been corrupted and circulated by some,
with the result that many have been injured therefore, thinking it both useful and necessary
for the brethren, we have despatched to your holiness accurate copies of the original,
unadulterated writings which we have.
Excerpt from the Council of Chalcedon

The Council of Chalcedon “has accepted the synodical letters of the blessed Cyril, pastor
of the church in Alexandria, to Nestorius and to the Orientals, as being well-suited to refuting

34
Nestorius’s mad folly and to providing an interpretation for those who in their religious zeal
might desire understanding of the saving creed.”.

35
Council of Chalcedon – 451 A.D.
Council Fathers - 451 A.D.
Introduction

It was the emperor Marcian who, after the “robber” council of Ephesus (449), commanded
this council to meet. Pope Leo I was opposed to it. His view was that all the bishops should
repent of their ways and individually sign his earlier dogmatic letter to Flavian, patriarch of
Constantinople, and so avoid a new round of argument and debate. Moreover, the provinces
of the West were being laid waste by Attila’s invasions. But before the pope’s view became
known, the emperor Marcian had, by an edict of 17 May 451, convoked the council for 1
September 451. Although the pope was displeased, he sent legates: Paschasinus bishop of
Lilybaeum, Bishop Lucentius, the priests Boniface and Basil, and Bishop Julian of Cos. No
doubt Leo thought that the council would cause people to leave the church and go into
schism. So he wanted it to be postponed for a time, and he implored the emperor that the faith
handed down from ancient times should not become the subject of debate. The only business
should be the restoration of the exiled bishops to their former positions.

The council was convoked at Nicaea but later transferred to Chalcedon, so as to be close to
Constantinople and the emperor. It began on 8 October 451. The legates Paschasinus, Bishop
Lucentius and the priest Boniface presided, while Julian of Cos sat among the bishops. By
their side were the imperial commissars and those serving on the Senate, whose responsibility
was simply to keep order in the council’s deliberations.

The lists we have of those present are unsatisfactory. According to Leo there were 600
bishops at the council, whereas according to a letter to him there were 500.

The “Definition of the faith” was passed at the council’s fifth session, and was solemnly
promulgated at the sixth session in the presence of the emperor and the imperial authorities.
The formula accepted in the decree is: Christ is one in two natures. This is in agreement with
Leo’s letter to Flavian of Constantinople, and Leo’s letter is expressly mentioned in the
Definition of the faith .

The council also issued 27 disciplinary canons (it is unclear at which session).

What is usually called canon 28 (on the honour to be accorded the see of Constantinople) is
in fact a resolution passed by the council at the 16th session. It was rejected by the Roman
legates.

In the ancient Greek collections, canons 29 and 30 are also attributed to the council:

canon 29 is an extract from the minutes of the 19th session; and

36
 canon 30 is an extract from the minutes of the 4th session.Because of canon 28, which the
Roman legates had opposed, the emperor Marcian and Anatolius, patriarch of Constantinople,
sought approval for the council from the pope. This is clear from a letter of Anatolius which
tries to defend the canon, and especially from a letter of Marcian which explicitly requests
confirmation. Because heretics were misinterpreting his withholding approval, the pope
ratified the doctrinal decrees on 21 March 453, but rejected canon 28 since it ran counter to
the canons of Nicaea and to the privileges of particular churches.The imperial promulgation
was made by Emperor Marcian in 4 edicts of February 452.Apart from Pope Leo’s letter to
Flavian, which is in Latin, the English translation is from the Greek text, since this is the
more authoritative version.

The letter of Pope Leo to Flavian, bishop of Constantinople, about Eutyches

Surprised as we were at the late arrival of your charity’s letter, we read it and examined the
account of what the bishops had done. We now see what scandal against the integrity of the
faith had reared its head among you. What had previously been kept secret now became
clearly revealed to us. Eutyches, who was considered a man of honour because he had the
title of priest, is shown to be very rash and extremely ignorant. What the prophet said can be
applied to him: He did not want to understand and do good: he plotted evil in his bed. What
can be worse than to have an irreligious mind and to pay no heed to those who are wiser and
more learned? The people who fall into this folly are those in whom knowledge of the truth is
blocked by a kind of dimness. They do not refer to
the sayings of the prophets, nor to
the letters of the apostles, nor even to
the authoritative words of the gospels,

but to themselves. By not being pupils of the truth, they turn out to be masters of error. A
man who has not the most elementary understanding even of the creed itself can have learnt
nothing from the sacred texts of the New and Old Testaments. This old man has not yet taken
to heart what is pronounced by every baptismal candidate the world over!

He had no idea how he ought to think about the incarnation of the Word of God; and he
had no desire to acquire the light of understanding by working through the length and breadth
of the holy scriptures. So at least he should have listened carefully and accepted the common
and undivided creed by which the whole body of the faithful confess that they believe in
God the Father almighty and in
Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord,
who was born of the holy Spirit and the virgin Mary.

These three statements wreck the tricks of nearly every heretic. When God is believed to
be both almighty and Father, the Son is clearly proved to be co-eternal with him, in no way
different from the Father, since he was born God from God, almighty from the Almighty, co-
eternal from the Eternal, not later in time, not lower in power, not unlike in glory, not distinct

37
in being. The same eternal, only-begotten of the eternal begetter was born of the holy Spirit
and the virgin Mary. His birth in time in no way subtracts from or adds to that divine and
eternal birth of his: but its whole purpose is to restore humanity, who had been deceived, so
that it might defeat death and, by its power, destroy the devil who held the power of death.
Overcoming the originator of sin and death would be beyond us, had not he whom sin could
not defile, nor could death hold down, taken up our nature and made it his own. He was
conceived from the holy Spirit inside the womb of the virgin mother. Her virginity was as
untouched in giving him birth as it was in conceiving him.

But if it was beyond Eutyches to derive sound understanding from this, the purest source of
the christian faith, because the brightness of manifest truth had been darkened by his own
peculiar blindness, then he should have subjected himself to the teaching of the gospels.
When Matthew says, The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of
Abraham, Eutyches should have looked up the further development in the apostolic
preaching. When he read in the letter to the Romans, Paul, the servant of Christ Jesus, called
to be an apostle, set apart for God’s gospel, which he had formerly promised through his
prophets in the holy writings which refer to his Son, who was made for him of David’s seed
according to the flesh, he should have paid deep and devout attention to the prophetic texts.
And when he discovered God making the promise to Abraham that in your seed shall all
nations be blessed, he should have followed the apostle, in order to eliminate any doubt about
the identity of this seed, when he says, The promises were spoken to Abraham and his seed .
He does not say “to his seeds”–as if referring to a multiplicity–but to a single one, “and to thy
seed ” which is Christ. His inward ear should also have heard Isaiah preaching Behold, a
virgin will receive in the womb and will bear a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel,
which is translated “God is with us”. With faith he should have read the same prophet’s
words, A child is born to us, a son is given to us. His power is on his shoulders. They will call
his name “Angel of great counsel, mighty God, prince of peace, father of the world to come”.
Then he would not deceive people by saying that the Word was made flesh in the sense that
he emerged from the virgin’s womb having a human form but not having the reality of his
mother’s body.

Or was it perhaps that he thought that our lord Jesus Christ did not have our nature because
the angel who was sent to the blessed Mary said, The holy Spirit will come upon you and the
power of the most High will overshadow you, and so that which will be born holy out of you
will be called Son of God, as if it was because the conception by the virgin was worked by
God that the flesh of the one conceived did not share the nature of her who conceived it? But
uniquely wondrous and wondrously unique as that act of generation was, it is not to be
understood as though the proper character of its kind was taken away by the sheer novelty of
its creation. It was the holy Spirit that made the virgin pregnant, but the reality of the body
derived from body. As Wisdom built a house for herself, the Word was made flesh and dwelt
amongst us: that is, in that flesh which he derived from human kind and which he animated
with the spirit of a rational life.

38
 So the proper character of both natures was maintained and came together in a single
person. Lowliness was taken up by majesty, weakness by strength, mortality by eternity. To
pay off the debt of our state, invulnerable nature was united to a nature that could suffer; so
that in a way that corresponded to the remedies we needed, one and the same mediator
between God and humanity the man Christ Jesus, could both on the one hand die and on the
other be incapable of death. Thus was true God born in the undiminished and perfect nature
of a true man, complete in what is his and complete in what is ours. By “ours” we mean what
the Creator established in us from the beginning and what he took upon himself to restore.
There was in the Saviour no trace of the things which the Deceiver brought upon us, and to
which deceived humanity gave admittance. His subjection to human weaknesses in common
with us did not mean that he shared our sins. He took on the form of a servant without the
defilement of sin, thereby enhancing the human and not diminishing the divine. For that self-
emptying whereby the Invisible rendered himself visible, and the Creator and Lord of all
things chose to join the ranks of mortals, spelled no failure of power: it was an act of merciful
favour. So the one who retained the form of God when he made humanity, was made man in
the form of a servant. Each nature kept its proper character without loss; and just as the form
of God does not take away the form of a servant, so the form of a servant does not detract
from the form of God.

It was the devil’s boast that humanity had been deceived by his trickery and so had lost the
gifts God had given it; and that it had been stripped of the endowment of immortality and so
was subject to the harsh sentence of death. He also boasted that, sunk as he was in evil, he
himself derived some consolation from having a partner in crime; and that God had been
forced by the principle of justice to alter his verdict on humanity, which he had created in
such an honourable state. All this called for the realisation of a secret plan whereby the
unalterable God, whose will is indistinguishable from his goodness, might bring the original
realisation of his kindness towards us to completion by means of a more hidden mystery, and
whereby humanity, which had been led into a state of sin by the craftiness of the devil, might
be prevented from perishing contrary to the purpose of God.

So without leaving his Father’s glory behind, the Son of God comes down from his
heavenly throne and enters the depths of our world, born in an unprecedented order by an
unprecedented kind of birth. In an unprecedented order, because one who is invisible at his
own level was made visible at ours. The ungraspable willed to be grasped. Whilst remaining
pre-existent, he begins to exist in time. The Lord of the universe veiled his measureless
majesty and took on a servant’s form. The God who knew no suffering did not despise
becoming a suffering man, and, deathless as he is, to be subject to the laws of death. By an
unprecedented kind of birth, because it was inviolable virginity which supplied the material
flesh without experiencing sexual desire. What was taken from the mother of the Lord was
the nature without the guilt. And the fact that the birth was miraculous does not imply that in
the lord Jesus Christ, born from the virgin’s womb, the nature is different from ours. The
same one is true God and true man.

39
 There is nothing unreal about this oneness, since both the lowliness of the man and the
grandeur of the divinity are in mutual relation. As God is not changed by showing mercy,
neither is humanity devoured by the dignity received. The activity of each form is what is
proper to it in communion with the other: that is, the Word performs what belongs to the
Word, and the flesh accomplishes what belongs to the flesh. One of these performs brilliant
miracles the other sustains acts of violence. As the Word does not lose its glory which is
equal to that of the Father, so neither does the flesh leave the nature of its kind behind. We
must say this again and again: one and the same is truly Son of God and truly son of man.
God, by the fact that in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God; man, by the fact that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. God, by
the fact that all things were made through him, and nothing was made without him, man, by
the fact that he was made of a woman, made under the law. The birth of flesh reveals human
nature; birth from a virgin is a proof of divine power. A lowly cradle manifests the infancy of
the child; angels’ voices announce the greatness of the most High. Herod evilly strives to kill
one who was like a human being at the earliest stage the Magi rejoice to adore on bended
knee one who is the Lord of all. And when he came to be baptised by his precursor John, the
Father’s voice spoke thunder from heaven, to ensure that he did not go unnoticed because the
divinity was concealed by the veil of flesh: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well
pleased. Accordingly, the same one whom the devil craftily tempts as a man, the angels
dutifully wait on as God. Hunger, thirst, weariness, sleep are patently human. But to satisfy
five thousand people with five loaves; to dispense living water to the Samaritan woman, a
drink of which will stop her being thirsty ever again; to walk on the surface of the sea with
feet that do not sink; to rebuke the storm and level the mounting waves; there can be no doubt
these are divine.

So, if I may pass over many instances, it does not belong to the same nature to weep out of
deep-felt pity for a dead friend, and to call him back to life again at the word of command,
once the mound had been removed from the four-dayold grave; or to hang on the cross and,
with day changed into night, to make the elements tremble; or to be pierced by nails and to
open the gates of paradise for the believing thief. Likewise, it does not belong to the same
nature to say I and the Father are one, and to say The Father is greater than I. For although
there is in the Lord Jesus Christ a single person who is of God and of man, the insults shared
by both have their source in one thing, and the glory that is shared in another. For it is from
us that he gets a humanity which is less than the Father; it is from the Father that he gets a
divinity which is equal to the Father.

So it is on account of this oneness of the person, which must be understood in both natures,
that we both read that the son of man came down from heaven, when the Son of God took
flesh from the virgin from whom he was born, and again that the Son of God is said to have
been crucified and buried, since he suffered these things not in the divinity itself whereby the
Only-begotten is co-eternal and consubstantial with the Father, but in the weakness of the
human nature. That is why in the creed, too, we all confess that the only-begotten Son of God
was crucified and was buried, following what the apostle said, If they had known, they would
never have crucified the Lord of majesty. And when our Lord and Saviour himself was

40
questioning his disciples and instructing their faith, he says, Who do people say 1, the son of
man, am? And when they had displayed a variety of other people’s opinions, he says, Who do
you say I am ? –in other words, I who am the son of man and whom you behold in the form
of a servant and in real flesh: Who do you say I am? Whereupon the blessed Peter, inspired
by God and making a confession that would benefit all future peoples, says, You are the
Christ, the Son of the living God. He thoroughly deserved to be declared “blessed” by the
Lord. He derived the stability of both his goodness and his name from the original Rock, for
when the Father revealed it to him, he confessed that the same one is both the Son of God and
also the Christ. Accepting one of these truths without the other was no help to salvation; and
to have believed that the Lord Jesus Christ was either only God and not man, or solely man
and not God, was equally dangerous.

After the Lord’s resurrection–which was certainly the resurrection of a real body, since the
one brought back to life is none other than the one who had been crucified and had died–the
whole point of the forty-day delay was to make our faith completely sound and to cleanse it
of all darkness. Hence he talked to his disciples and lived and ate with them, and let himself
be touched attentively and carefully by those who were in the grip of doubt; he would go in
among his disciples when the doors were locked, and impart the holy Spirit by breathing on
them, and open up the secrets of the holy scriptures after enlightening their understanding;
again, he would point out the wound in his side, the holes made by the nails, and all the signs
of the suffering he had just recently undergone, saying, Look at my hands and feet–it is I.
Feel and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have. All this
was so that it would be recognised that the proper character of the divine and of the human
nature went on existing inseparable in him; and so that we would realise that the Word is not
the same thing as the flesh, but in such a way that we would confess belief in the one Son of
God as being both Word and flesh.

This Eutyches must be judged to be extremely destitute of this mystery of the faith. Neither
the humility of the mortal life nor the glory of the resurrection has made him recognise our
nature in the only-begotten of God. Nor has even the statement of the blessed apostle and
evangelist John put fear into him: Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ came in the
flesh is from God, and every spirit which puts Jesus asunder is not from God, and this is
Antichrist. But what does putting Jesus as under consist in if not in separating his human
nature from him, and in voiding, through the most barefaced fictions, the one mystery by
which we have been saved? Once in the dark about the nature of Christ’s body, it follows that
the same blindness leads him into raving folly about his suffering too. If he does not think
that the Lord’s cross was unreal and if he has no doubt that the suffering undergone for the
world’s salvation was real, then let him acknowledge the flesh of the one whose death he
believes in. And let him not deny that a man whom he knows to have been subject to
suffering had our kind of body, for to deny the reality of the flesh is also to deny the bodily
suffering. So if he accepts the christian faith and does not turn a deaf ear to the preaching of
the gospel, let him consider what nature it was that hung, pierced with nails, on the wood of
the cross. With the side of the crucified one laid open by the soldier’s spear, let him identify

41
the source from which blood and water flowed, to bathe the church of God with both font and
cup.

Let him heed what the blessed apostle Peter preaches, that sanctification by the Spirit is
effected by the sprinkling of Christ’s blood; and let him not skip over the same apostle’s
words, knowing that you have been redeemed from the empty way of life you inherited from
your fathers, not with corruptible gold and silver but by the precious blood of Jesus Christ, as
of a lamb without stain or spot. Nor should he withstand the testimony of blessed John the
apostle: and the blood of Jesus, the Son of God, purifies us from every sin; and again, This is
the victory which conquers the world, our faith. Who is there who conquers the world save
one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God ? It is he, Jesus Christ who has come through
water and blood, not in water only, but in water and blood. And because the Spirit is truth, it
is the Spirit who testifies. For there are three who give testimony–Spirit and water and blood.
And the three are one. In other words, the Spirit of sanctification and the blood of redemption
and the water of baptism. These three are one and remain indivisible. None of them is
separable from its link with the others. The reason is that it is by this faith that the catholic
church lives and grows, by believing that neither the humanity is without true divinity nor the
divinity without true humanity.

When you cross-examined Eutyches and he replied, “I confess that our Lord was of two
natures before the union, but I confess one nature after the union”, I am amazed that such an
absurd and corrupt declaration of faith was not very severely censured by the judges; and that
an extremely foolish statement was disregarded, as if nothing whatever offensive had been
heard. It is just as wicked to say that the only-begotten Son of God was of two natures before
the incarnation as it is abominable to claim that there was a single nature in him after the
Word was made flesh. Eutyches must not suppose that what he said was either correct or
tolerable just because no clear statement of yours refuted it. So we remind you, dearest
brother, of your charity’s responsibility to see to it that if through God’s merciful inspiration
the case is ever settled, the rash and ignorant fellow is also purged of what is blighting his
mind. As the minutes have made clear, he made a good start at abandoning his opinion when,
under pressure from your statement, he professed to say what he had not previously said, and
to find satisfaction in the faith to which he had previously been a stranger. But when he had
refused to be party to the anathematising of his wicked doctrine, your fraternity would have
realised that he was persisting in his false belief and that he deserved a verdict of
condemnation. If he is honestly and suitably sorry about this, and acknowledges even at this
late stage how rightly episcopal authority was set in motion, or if, to make full amends, he
condemns every wrong thought he had by word of mouth and by his actual signature, then no
amount of mercy towards one who has reformed is excessive. Our Lord, the true and good
shepherd who laid down his life for his sheep, and who came not to destroy but to save the
souls of men and women, wants us to be imitators of his goodness, so that whilst justice
represses sinners, mercy does not reject the converted. The defence of the true faith is never
so productive as when false opinion is condemned even by its adherents.

42
 In place of ourself, we have arranged for our brothers, Bishop Julius and the priest Renatus
of the church of St Clement, and also my son, the deacon Hilary, to ensure a good and
faithful conclusion to the whole case. To their company we have added our notary Dulcitius,
of proven loyalty to us. We trust that with God’s help he who has fallen into error might
condemn the wickedness of his own mind and find salvation.

God keep you safe, dearest brother.

Definition of the faith

The sacred and great and universal synod by God’s grace and by decree of your most
religious and Christ-loving emperors Valentinian Augustus and Marcian Augustus assembled
in Chalcedon, metropolis of the province of Bithynia, in the shrine of the saintly and
triumphant martyr Euphemia, issues the following decrees.

In establishing his disciples in the knowledge of the faith, our lord and saviour Christ said:
“My peace I give you, my peace I leave to you”‘, so that no one should disagree with his
neighbour regarding religious doctrines but that the proclamation of the truth would be
uniformly presented. But the evil one never stops trying to smother the seeds of religion with
his own tares and is for ever inventing some novelty or other against the truth; so the Master,
exercising his usual care for the human race, roused this religious and most faithful emperor
to zealous action, and summoned to himself the leaders of the priesthood from everywhere,
so that through the working of the grace of Christ, the master of all of us, every injurious
falsehood might be staved off from the sheep of Christ and they might be fattened on fresh
growths of the truth.

This is in fact what we have done. We have driven off erroneous doctrines by our
collective resolution and we have renewed the unerring creed of the fathers. We have
proclaimed to all the creed of the 318; and we have made our own those fathers who accepted
this agreed statement of religion — the 150 who later met in great Constantinople and
themselves set their seal to the same creed.

Therefore, whilst we also stand by

the decisions and all the formulas relating to the creed from the sacred synod which took
place formerly at Ephesus,
whose leaders of most holy memory were Celestine of Rome and Cyril of Alexandria

we decree that
pre-eminence belongs to the exposition of the right and spotless creed of the 318 saintly
and blessed fathers who were assembled at Nicaea when Constantine of pious memory was
emperor: and that

43
 those decrees also remain in force which were issued in Constantinople by the 150 holy
fathers in order to destroy the heresies then rife and to confirm this same catholic and
apostolic creed.
The creed of the 318 fathers at Nicaea.
And the same of the 150 saintly fathers assembled in Constantinople.

This wise and saving creed, the gift of divine grace, was sufficient for a perfect
understanding and establishment of religion. For its teaching about the Father and the Son
and the holy Spirit is complete, and it sets out the Lord’s becoming human to those who
faithfully accept it.

But there are those who are trying to ruin the proclamation of the truth, and through their
private heresies they have spawned novel formulas:
some by daring to corrupt the mystery of the Lord’s economy on our behalf, and
refusing to apply the word “God-bearer” to the Virgin; and
others by introducing a confusion and mixture, and mindlessly imagining that there is a
single nature of the flesh and the divinity, and fantastically supposing that in the confusion
the divine nature of the Only-begotten is passible.

Therefore this sacred and great and universal synod, now in session, in its desire to exclude
all their tricks against the truth, and teaching what has been unshakeable in the proclamation
from the beginning,
decrees that the creed of the 318 fathers is, above all else, to remain inviolate. And
because of those who oppose the holy Spirit, it
ratifies the teaching about the being of the holy Spirit handed down by the 150 saintly
fathers who met some time later in the imperial city
— the teaching they made known to all,
not introducing anything left out by their predecessors, but clarifying their ideas about
the holy Spirit by the use of scriptural testimonies against those who were trying to do away
with his sovereignty.

And because of those who are attempting to corrupt the mystery of the economy and are
shamelessly and foolishly asserting that he who was born of the holy virgin Mary was a mere
man, it has accepted
the synodical letters of the blessed Cyril, [already accepted by the Council of
Ephesus]pastor of the church in Alexandria, to Nestorius and to the Orientals, as being well-
suited to refuting Nestorius’s mad folly and to providing an interpretation for those who in
their religious zeal might desire understanding of the saving creed.To these it has suitably
added, against false believers and for the establishment of orthodox doctrines

the letter of the primate of greatest and older Rome,the most blessed and most saintly
Archbishop Leo, written to the sainted Archbishop Flavian to put down Eutyches’s evil-
mindedness, because it is in agreement with great Peter’s confession and represents a support

44
we have in common.It is opposed to those who attempt to tear apart the mystery of the
economy into a duality of sons; and
it expels from the assembly of the priests those who dare to say that the divinity of the
Only-begotten is passible, and
it stands opposed to those who imagine a mixture or confusion between the two natures
of Christ; and
it expels those who have the mad idea that the servant-form he took from us is of a
heavenly or some other kind of being; and
it anathematises those who concoct two natures of the Lord before the union but imagine
a single one after the union.

So, following the saintly fathers, we all with one voice teach the confession of one and the
same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the
same truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and a body; consubstantial with the Father as
regards his divinity, and the same consubstantial with us as regards his humanity; like us in
all respects except for sin; begotten before the ages from the Father as regards his divinity,
and in the last days the same for us and for our salvation from Mary, the virgin God-bearer as
regards his humanity; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, acknowledged in
two natures which undergo no confusion, no change, no division, no separation; at no point
was the difference between the natures taken away through the union, but rather the property
of both natures is preserved and comes together into a single person and a single subsistent
being; he is not parted or divided into two persons, but is one and the same only-begotten
Son, God, Word, Lord Jesus Christ, just as the prophets taught from the beginning about him,
and as the Lord Jesus Christ himself instructed us, and as the creed of the fathers handed it
down to us.

Since we have formulated these things with all possible accuracy and attention, the sacred
and universal synod decreed that no one is permitted to produce, or even to write down or
compose, any other creed or to think or teach otherwise. As for those who dare either to
compose another creed or even to promulgate or teach or hand down another creed for those
who wish to convert to a recognition of the truth from Hellenism or from Judaism, or from
any kind of heresy at all: if they be bishops or clerics, the bishops are to be deposed from the
episcopacy and the clerics from the clergy; if they be monks or layfolk, they are to be
anathematised.

CANONS

We have deemed it right that the canons hitherto issued by the saintly fathers at each and
every synod should remain in force.

45
 If any bishop performs an ordination for money and puts the unsaleable grace on sale, and
ordains for money a bishop, a chorepiscopus, a presbyter or a deacon or some other of those
numbered among the clergy; or appoints a manager, a legal officer or a warden for money, or
any other ecclesiastic at all for personal sordid gain; led him who has attempted this and been
convicted stand to lose his personal rank; and let the person ordained profit nothing from the
ordination or appointment he has bought; but let him be removed from the dignity or
responsibility which he got for money. And if anyone appears to have acted even as a go-
between in such disgraceful and unlawful dealings, let him too, if he is a cleric, be demoted
from his personal rank, and if he is a lay person or a monk, let him be anathematised.

It has come to the notice of the sacred synod that some of those enrolled in the clergy are,
for sordid gain, acting as hired managers of other people’s property, and are involving
themselves in worldly business, neglecting the service of God, frequenting the houses of
worldly persons and taking over the handling of property out of avarice. So the sacred and
great synod has decreed that in future no one, whether a bishop, a cleric or a monk, should
either manage property or involve himself as an administrator of worldly business, unless he
is legally and unavoidably summoned to take care of minors, or the local bishop appoints him
to attend, out of fear of the Lord, to ecclesiastical business or to orphans and unprovided
widows and persons in special need of ecclesiastical support. If in future anyone attempts to
transgress these decrees, he must be subject to ecclesiastical penalties.

Those who truly and sincerely live the monastic life should be accorded appropriate
recognition. But since there are some who don the monastic habit and meddle with the
churches and in civil matters, and circulate indiscriminately in the cities and even are
involved in founding monasteries for themselves, it has been decided that no one is to build
or found a monastery or oratory anywhere against the will of the local bishop; and that monks
of each city and region are to be subject to the bishop, are to foster peace and quiet, and
attend solely to fasting and prayer, staying set apart in their places. They are not to abandon
their own monasteries and interfere, or take part, in ecclesiastical or secular business unless
they are perhaps assigned to do so by the local bishop because of some urgent necessity. No
slave is to be taken into the monasteries to become a monk against the will of his own master.
We have decreed that anyone who transgresses this decision of ours is to be
excommunicated, lest God’s name be blasphemed. However, it is for the local bishop to
exercise the care and attention that the monasteries need.

In the matter of bishops or clerics who move from city to city, it has been decided that the
canons issued by the holy fathers concerning them should retain their proper force.

46
 6

No one, whether presbyter or deacon or anyone at all who belongs to the ecclesiastical
order, is to be ordained without title, unless the one ordained is specially assigned to a city or
village church or to a martyr’s shrine or a monastery. The sacred synod has decreed that the
ordination of those ordained without title is null, and that they cannot operate anywhere,
because of the presumption of the one who ordained them.

We decree that those who have once joined the ranks of the clergy or have become monks
are not to depart on military service or for secular office. Those who dare do this, and do not
repent and return to what, in God, they previously chose, are to be anathematised.

Clerics in charge of almshouses and monasteries and martyrs’ shrines are, in accordance
with the tradition of the holy fathers, to remain under the jurisdiction of the bishop in each
city. They are not to be self-willed and rebellious towards their own bishop. Those who dare
to break a rule of this kind in any way whatever, and are not obedient to their own bishop,
are, if they are clerics, to be subject to the canonical penalties; and if they are monks or
layfolk they are to be made excommunicate.

If any cleric has a case to bring against a cleric, let him not leave his own bishop and take
himself off to the secular courts, but let him first air the problem before his own bishop, or at
least, with the permission of the bishop himself, before those whom both parties are willing
to see act as arbiters of their lawsuit. If anyone acts in a contrary fashion, let him be subject to
canonical penalties. If a cleric has a case to bring either against his own or against another
bishop, let him bring the case to the synod of the province. If a bishop or a cleric is in dispute
with the metropolitan of the same province, let him engage either the exarch of the diocese or
the see of imperial Constantinople, and let him bring his case before him.

10

A cleric is not allowed to be appointed to churches in two cities at the same time: to the
one where he was originally ordained, and to another more important one to which he has
betaken himself out of desire to increase a baseless reputation. Those who do this are to be
sent back to their own church in which they were ordained at the beginning, and only there
are they to serve. But if some have already been transferred from one church to another, they
are not to take part in any of the affairs of their former church, or of the martyrs’ shrines or
almshouses or hospices that come under it. The sacred synod has decreed that those who,

47
subsequent to this decree of this great and universal synod, dare to do anything that is now
forbidden are to lose their personal rank.

11

We have decreed that, subject to examination, all paupers and needy persons are to travel
with ecclesiastical letters or letters of peace only, and not of commendation, since it befits
only reputable persons to be provided with letters of commendation.

12

It has come to our notice that, contrary to the ecclesiastical regulations, some have made
approaches to the civil authorities and have divided one province into two by official
mandate, with the result that there are two metropolitans in the same province. The sacred
synod therefore decrees that in future no bishop should dare do such a thing, since he who
attempts it stands to lose his proper station. Such places as have already been honoured by
imperial writ with the title of metropolis must treat it simply as honorary, and that goes also
for the bishop who is in charge of the church there, without prejudice of course to the proper
rights of the real metropolis.

13

Foreign clerics and readers without letters of commendation from their own bishop are
absolutely forbidden to serve in another city.

14

Since in certain provinces readers and cantors have been allowed to marry, the sacred
synod decrees that none of them is permitted to marry a wife of heterodox views. If those
thus married have already had children, and if they have already had the children baptised
among heretics, they are to bring them into the communion of the catholic church. If they
have not been baptised, they may no longer have them baptised among heretics; nor indeed
marry them to a heretic or a Jew or a Greek, unless of course the person who is to be married
to the orthodox party promises to convert to the orthodox faith. If anyone transgresses this
decree of the sacred synod, let him be subject to canonical penalty.

15

No woman under forty years of age is to be ordained a deacon, and then only after close
scrutiny. If after receiving ordination and spending some time in the ministry she despises
God’s grace and gets married, such a person is to be anathematised along with her spouse.

16

48
 It is not permitted for a virgin who has dedicated herself to the Lord God, or similarly for a
monk, to contract marriage. If it is discovered that they have done so, let them be made
excommunicate. However, we have decreed that the local bishop should have discretion to
deal humanely with them.

17

Rural or country parishes belonging to a church are to stay firmly tied to the bishops who
have possession of them, and especially if they have continually and peacefully administered
them over a thirty-year period. If, however, within the thirty years any dispute about them has
arisen, or should arise, those who are claiming to be wronged are permitted to bring the case
before the provincial synod. If there are any who are wronged by their own metropolitan, let
their case be judged either by the exarch of the diocese or by the see of Constantinople, as has
already been said. If any city has been newly erected, or is erected hereafter, by imperial
decree, let the arrangement of ecclesiastical parishes conform to the civil and public
regulations.

18

The crime of conspiracy or secret association is entirely prohibited even by the laws of the
land; so all the more properly is this forbidden in the church of God. So if any clerics or
monks are found to be either forming a conspiracy or a secret society or hatching plots
against bishops or fellow clergy, let them lose their personal rank completely.

19

We have heard that in the provinces the synods of bishops prescribed by canon law are not
taking place, and that as a result many ecclesiastical matters that need putting right are being
neglected. So the sacred synod decrees that in accordance with the canons of the fathers, the
bishops in each province are to foregather twice a year at a place approved by the bishop of
the metropolis and put any matters arising to rights. Bishops failing to attend who enjoy good
health and are free from all unavoidable and necessary engagements, but stay at home in their
own cities, are to be fraternally rebuked.

20

As we have already decreed, clerics who are serving a church are not permitted to join a
church in another city, but are to be content with the one in which they were originally
authorised to minister, apart from those who have been displaced from their own country and
been forced to move to another church. If subsequent to this decision any bishop receives a
cleric who belongs to another bishop, it is decreed that both the received and the receiver are
to be excommunicate until such time as the cleric who has moved returns to his own church.

21

49
 Clerics or layfolk who bring allegations against bishops or clerics are not to be admitted to
make their charges without more ado and before any examination, but their reputation must
first be investigated.

22

It is not permitted for clerics, following the death of their own bishop, to seize the things
that belong to him, as has been forbidden even by earlier canons. Those who do this risk
losing their personal rank.

23

It has come to the notice of the sacred synod that certain clerics and monks who have no
employment from their own bishop and have sometimes even been excommunicated by him,
are frequenting imperial Constantinople and spending long periods there causing
disturbances, upsetting the ecclesiastical establishment and ruining people’s homes. So the
sacred synod decrees that such people are first to be warned by the public attorney of the
most holy Constantinopolitan church to get out of the imperial city; and if they shamelessly
persist in the same kinds of behaviour, they are to be expelled by the same public attorney
even against their will, and are to betake themselves to their own places.

24

Monasteries once consecrated in accordance with the will of the bishop are to remain
monasteries in perpetuity, and the effects which belong to them are reserved to the
monastery, and they must not be turned into secular hostelries. Those who allow this to
happen are to be subject to the canonical penalties.

25

According to our information, certain metropolitans are neglecting the flocks entrusted to
them and are delaying the ordination of bishops, so the sacred synod has decided that the
ordination of bishops should take place within three months, unless the period of delay has
been caused to be extended by some unavoidable necessity. If a metropolitan fails to do this,
he is to be subject to ecclesiastical penalties. The income of the widowed church is to be kept
safe by the administrator of the said church.

26

According to our information, in some churches the bishops handle church business
without administrators; so it has been decided that every church which has a bishop is also to
have an administrator, drawn from its own clergy, to administer ecclesiastical matters
according to the mind of the bishop concerned so that the church’s administration may not go

50
unaudited, and that consequently the church’s property is not dispersed and the episcopate not
exposed to serious criticism. If he does not comply with this, he is to be subject to the divine
canons.

27

The sacred synod decrees that those who carry off girls under pretext of cohabitation, or
who are accomplices or co-operate with those who carry them off, are to lose their personal
rank if they are clerics, and are to be anathematised if they are monks or layfolk.

28 [in fact a resolution passed by the council at the 16th session but rejected by the Pope]

Following in every way the decrees of the holy fathers and recognising the canon which
has recently been read out–the canon of the 150 most devout bishops who assembled in the
time of the great Theodosius of pious memory, then emperor, in imperial Constantinople,
new Rome — we issue the same decree and resolution concerning the prerogatives of the
most holy church of the same Constantinople, new Rome. The fathers rightly accorded
prerogatives to the see of older Rome, since that is an imperial city; and moved by the same
purpose the 150 most devout bishops apportioned equal prerogatives to the most holy see of
new Rome, reasonably judging that the city which is honoured by the imperial power and
senate and enjoying privileges equalling older imperial Rome, should also be elevated to her
level in ecclesiastical affairs and take second place after her. The metropolitans of the
dioceses of Pontus, Asia and Thrace, but only these, as well as the bishops of these dioceses
who work among non-Greeks, are to be ordained by the aforesaid most holy see of the most
holy church in Constantinople. That is, each metropolitan of the aforesaid dioceses along
with the bishops of the province ordain the bishops of the province, as has been declared in
the divine canons; but the metropolitans of the aforesaid dioceses, as has been said, are to be
ordained by the archbishop of Constantinople, once agreement has been reached by vote in
the usual way and has been reported to him.

29 [an extract from the minutes of the 19th session]

The most eminent and illustrious officials asked: What does the sacred synod advise in the
case of the bishops ordained by the most reverend Bishop Photius and removed by the most
reverend Bishop Eustathius and consigned to be priests after losing the episcopacy? The most
reverend Bishops Paschasinus and Lucentius and the priest Bonifatius, representatives of the
apostolic see of Rome, replied: It is sacrilege to reduce a bishop to the rank of priest. But if
whatever cause there is for removing those persons from the exercise of episcopacy is just,
they ought not to occupy the position even of a priest. And if they have been removed from
office and are without fault, they shall be restored to the episcopal dignity. The most reverend
archbishop of Constantinople, Anatolius, replied: If those who are said to have descended
from the episcopal dignity to the rank of priest have been condemned on what are reasonable
grounds, they are clearly not worthy to hold even the office of a priest. But if they have been

51
demoted to the lower rank without reasonable cause, then as long as they are seen to be
innocent, they have every right to resume the dignity and priesthood of the episcopacy .

30 [an extract from the minutes of the 4th session]

The most eminent and illustrious officials and the exalted assembly declared: Since the
most reverend bishops of Egypt have up to now put off subscribing to the letter of the most
holy Archbishop Leo, not because they are in opposition to the catholic faith, but because
they claim that it is customary in the Egyptian diocese not to do such things in contravention
of the will and ordinance of their archbishop, and because they consider they should be given
until the ordination of the future bishop of the great city of Alexandria, we think it reasonable
and humane that, retaining their present rank in the imperial city, they should be granted a
moratorium until such time as an archbishop of the great city of Alexandria is ordained. Most
reverend Bishop Paschasinus, representative of the apostolic see, said: If your authority
demands it, and you order that some measure of kindness be shown them, let them give
guarantees that they will not leave this city before Alexandria receives its bishop. The most
eminent and illustrious officials and the exalted assembly replied: Let the resolution of the
most holy Bishop Paschasinus be upheld. So let the most reverend bishops of the Egyptians
maintain their present rank and, either providing guarantees if they can, or pledging
themselves on solemn oath, let them await the ordination of the future bishop of the great city
of Alexandria.

52
Second Council of Constantinople –
553 A.D.
Council Fathers - 553 A.D.
Introduction

The emperor Justinian and Pope Vigilius decided to summon this council after the latter
withdrew his “Judgment” condemning the “Three Chapters” of Theodore of Mopsuestia,
Theodoret and Ibas. This “Judgment” had been issued on 11 April 548 but the bishops of the
west and especially of Africa unanimously opposed it. The council was summoned by
Justinian to Constantinople, although Vigilius would have preferred to convene it in Sicily or
Italy so that western bishops might be present. It assembled on 5 May 553 in the great hall
attached to Hagia Sophia cathedral.

Since the Roman pontiff refused to take part in the council, because Justinian had summoned
bishops in equal numbers from each of the five patriarchal sees, so that there would be many
more eastern than western bishops present, Eutychius, patriarch of Constantinople, presided.
The decrees of the council were signed by 160 bishops, of whom 8 were Africans.

On 14 May 553 Pope Vigilius issued his “Constitution”, which was signed by 16 bishops (9
from Italy, 2 from Africa, 2 from Illyricum and 3 from Asia Minor). This rejected sixty
propositions of Theodore of Mopsuestia, but spared his personal memory and refused to
condemn either Theodoret or Ibas since, on the testimony of the council of Chalcedon, all
suspicion of heresy against them had been removed. Nevertheless, the council in its 8th
session on 2 June 553 again condemned the “Three Chapters”, for the same reasons as
Justinian had done so, in a judgment which concludes with 14 anathemas.

After carefully considering the matter for six months, Vigilius ,weighing up the persecutions
of Justinian against his clergy and having sent a letter to Eutychius of Constantinople,
approved the council, thus changing his mind “after the example of Augustine”. Furthermore
he anathematized Theodore and condemned his writings and those of Theodoret and Ibas. On
23 February 554, in a second “Constitution”, he tried to reconcile the recent condemnation
with what had been decreed at the council of Chalcedon.

The council did not debate ecclesiastical discipline nor did it issue disciplinary canons. Our
edition does not include the text of the anathemas against Origen since recent studies have
shown that these anathemas cannot be attributed to this council.

For the 14 anathemas (pp. 114-122) the translation is from the Greek text, since this is the
more authoritative version.

Sentence against the “Three Chapters”

53
Our great God and saviour Jesus Christ, as we are told in the parable in the gospel, gives
talents to each one according to his ability, and at the proper time asks for an account of what
has been done by each one. If the person to whom only one talent has been given is
condemned because he has not worked and increased it, but has only preserved it without
diminishment, how much more serious and more frightening must be the condemnation to
which the person is subjected who not only fails to look after himself but scandalizes others
and is a cause of offence to them ? It is clear to all believers that when a problem about the
faith comes up it is not only the heretical person who is condemned but also the person who
is in a position to correct the heresy of others and fails to do so. To those of us to whom the
task has been given of governing the church of the Lord, there comes a fear of the
condemnation which threatens those who neglect to do the Lord’s work. We hurry to take
care of the good seed of faith protecting it from the weeds of heresy which have been planted
by the enemy. We observed that the pupils of Nestorius were trying to bring their heresy into
the church of God by means of the heretical Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia and his books as
also by the writings of the heretical Theodoret and the disgraceful letter which is alleged to
have been sent by Ibas to Mari the Persian. Our observations prompted us to correct what was
happening. We assembled in this imperial city, summoned here by the will of God and the
command of the most religious emperor.

The most religious Vigilius happened to be present in this imperial city and took part in all
the criticisms against the three chapters. He had frequently condemned them by word of
mouth and in his writings. Later he gave a written agreement to take part in our council and
to study with us the three chapters so that we could all issue an appropriate definition of the
true faith. The most pious emperor, prompted by what was acceptable to us, encouraged a
meeting between Vigilius and ourselves because it is proper that the priesthood should
impose a common conclusion to matters of common concern. Consequently we asked his
reverence to carry out his written undertakings. It did not seem right that the scandal over
these three chapters should continue and that the church of God should be further disturbed.
In order to persuade him, we reminded him of the great example left us by the apostles and of
the traditions of the fathers. Even though the grace of the holy Spirit was abundant in each of
the apostles, so that none of them required the advice of another in order to do his work,
nevertheless they were loathe to come to a decision on the issue of the circumcision of
gentiles until they had met together to test their various opinions against the witness of the
holy scriptures.

In this way they unanimously reached the conclusion which they wrote to the gentiles: It has
seemed good to the holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these
necessary things; that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and
from what is strangled and from unchastity.

The holy fathers, who have gathered at intervals in the four holy councils, have followed the
examples of antiquity. They dealt with heresies and current problems by debate in common,

54
since it was established as certain that when the disputed question is set out by each side in
communal discussions, the light of truth drives out the shadows of lying.

The truth cannot be made clear in any other way when there are debates about questions of
faith, since everyone requires the assistance of his neighbour. As Solomon says in his
proverbs: A brother who helps a brother shall be exalted like a strong city; he shall be as
strong as a well-established kingdom. Again in Ecclesiastes he says: Two are better than one,
for they have a good reward for their toil. And the Lord himself says: Amen I say to you, if
two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in
heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Vigilius was frequently invited by us all, and most distinguished judges were sent to him by
the most pious emperor. Eventually he promised to give judgment personally on the three
chapters. When we heard this promise, we remembered the warning of the Apostle that each
of us shall give an account of himself to God. We were afraid of the condemnation which
threatens those who scandalize one of the least important, and of the much more serious one
which threatens those who scandalize so very christian an emperor, the people and all the
churches. We also remembered what was said by God to Paul: Do not be afraid, but speak,
and do not be silent; for I am with you, and nobody shall be able to harm you. When we met
together, therefore, we first of all briefly made a confession of the faith which our lord Jesus
Christ true God, handed down to his holy apostles and by means of them to the holy
churches, the same faith which those who afterwards were holy fathers and doctors handed
down to the people entrusted to them. We confessed that we believe, protect and preach to the
holy churches that confession of faith which was set out at greater length by the 318 holy
fathers who met in council at Nicaea and handed down the holy doctrine or creed. The 150
who met in council at Constantinople also set out the same faith and made a confession of it
and explained it. The 200 holy fathers who met in the first council of Ephesus agreed to the
same faith. We follow also the definitions of the 630 who met in council at Chalcedon,
regarding the same faith which they both followed and preached. We confessed that we held
to be condemned and anathematized all those who had been previously condemned and
anathematized by the catholic church and by the aforesaid four councils. When we had made
this confession in this way, we made a start on the examination of the three chapters. First,
we considered Theodore of Mopsuestia. When all the blasphemies in his works were
exposed, we were astonished at God’s patience, that the tongue and mind which had formed
such blasphemies were not straightaway burned up by divine fire. We would not even have
allowed the official reader of these blasphemies to continue, such was our fear of the anger of
God at even a rehearsal of them (since each blasphemy was worse than the one before in the
extent of its heresy and shook to their foundation the minds of their listeners), if it had not
been the case that those who revelled in these blasphemies seemed to us to require the
humiliation which their exposure would bring upon them. All of us, angered by the
blasphemies against God, burst into attacks and anathemas against Theodore, during and after
the reading, as if he had been living and present there. We said: Lord, be favourable to us; not
even the demons themselves have dared to speak such things against you.

55
O his intolerable tongue! O the wickedness of the man ! O the proud hand he raised against
his creator! This disgraceful man, who had made a promise to understand the scriptures, did
not remember the words of the prophet Hosea: Woe to them, for they have strayed from me!
They have become notorious because of their impiety towards me. They spoke evil things
about me, and after they had considered them, they spoke even worse things against me. They
will fall into a trap because of the depravity of their tongues. Their contempt will be turned
inwards on themselves, because they have broken my covenant and acted impiously against
my law. The impious Theodore deserves to come under these curses. He dismissed the
prophecies about Christ and he vilified, as far as he could, the great mystery of the
arrangements that have been made for our salvation. In many ways he tried to demonstrate
that the divine word was nothing but fables composed for the amusement of the gentiles. He
ridiculed the other condemnations of the impious made by the prophets, especially the one in
which holy Habakkuk says of those who teach false doctrines: Woe to him who makes his
neighbours drink of the cup of his wrath, and makes them drunk, to gaze on their caverns.
This refers to their teachings which are full of darkness and quite separate from the light.

Why ought we to add anything more? Anyone who wishes can consult the volumes of the
heretical Theodore or the heretical chapters from his heretical books which have been
included in our acts. Anyone can see his unbelievable folly and the disgraceful utterances
made by him. We fear to continue and to rehearse again those shameful things. The writings
of the holy fathers against him were also read out to us. We heard what had been written
against his folly which was more than all the other heretics, and the historical records and
imperial laws which set out his heresy from its beginning. Despite all this, those who
defended his heresy, delighting in the insults offered by him to his creator, declared that it
was improper to anathematize him after his death. Although we were aware of the
ecclesiastical tradition concerning heretics, that they are anathematized even after death, we
deemed it necessary to go into this matter as well and it can be found in the acts how several
heretics were anathematized after they were dead. In many ways it has become clear to us
that those who put forward this argument have no concern for God’s judgments, nor for the
pronouncements of the apostles, nor for the traditions of the fathers. We would willingly
question them concerning what they would say about the Lord, who said of himself: He who
believes in him is not condemned, he who does not believe in him is condemned already,
because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And about that
claim of the Apostle: Even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel
contrary to what you have received, let him be accursed. As we said earlier, I repeat once
more: If anyone preaches to you a gospel contrary to what you have received, let him be
accursed.

Since the Lord declares that the person is judged already, and the Apostle curses even the
angels if they instruct in anything different from what we have preached, how is it possible
even for the most presumptuous to assert that these condemnations apply only to those who
are still alive? Are they unaware, or rather pretending to be unaware, that to be judged
anathematized is just the same as to be separated from God? The heretic, even though he has
not been condemned formally by any individual, in reality brings anathema on himself,

56
having cut himself off from the way of truth by his heresy. What reply can such people make
to the Apostle when he writes: As for someone who is factious, after admonishing him once
or twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is perverted and
sinful; he is self-condemned.

It was in the spirit of this text that Cyril of holy memory, in the books which he wrote against
Theodore, declared as follows: “Whether or not they are alive, we ought to keep clear of
those who are in the grip of such dreadful errors. It is necessary always to avoid what is
harmful, and not to be worried about public opinion but rather to consider what is pleasing to
God”. The same Cyril of holy memory, writing to bishop John of Antioch and to the synod
which met there about Theodore who was condemned with Nestorius, says, “It was necessary
that a brilliant festival should be kept since all those who had expressed opinions in
accordance with Nestorius had been rejected, whoever they were. Action was taken against
all those who believed, or had at any time believed, in these mistaken views. This is exactly
what we and your holiness pronounced: ‘We anathematize those who assert that there exist
two sons and two Christs. He who is preached by you and us is, as was said, the single Christ,
both Son and Lord, the only-begotten as man, as learned Paul says'”. Moreover in his letter to
the priests and fathers of monks, Alexander, Martinian, John, Paregorious and Maximus, and
to those who were living as solitaries along with them, he says: “The holy synod of Ephesus,
meeting in accordance with the will of God, has pronounced sentence against the heresy of
Nestorius and has condemned according to justice and with accuracy both Nestorius himself
and all those who might later, in inane fashion, adopt the same opinions as he held, and those
who had previously adhered to the same opinions and who were bold enough to put them in
writing, placing upon them all an equal condemnation. It was quite logical that when a
condemnation was issued against one person for such stupidity in what he said, then that
condemnation should apply not only to that person alone but also, so to speak, against all
those who spread the heresies and untruths. They express these falsehoods against the true
dogmas of the church, offering worship to two sons, trying to divide what cannot be divided,
and introducing to both heaven and earth the offence of the worship of man. But the sacred
band of heavenly spirits worship along with us only one lord Jesus Christ”. Moreover, several
letters of Augustine of sacred memory, who was particularly outstanding among the African
bishops, were read in which he indicates that it is correct to condemn heretics even after their
death. Other most reverend bishops of Africa have also observed this church custom;
moreover the holy church of Rome has issued anathemas against certain bishops even after
they were dead, although they had not been accused on matters of faith while they were alive;
the acts of our deliberations bear witness to both these cases. Since the followers of Theodore
and his heresy, who are plainly opposed to the truth, have tried to adduce some sections of
the writings of Cyril and Proclus of holy memory, as though these were in favour of
Theodore, it is appropriate to apply to these attempts the observation of the prophet when he
writes: The ways of the Lord are right, and the upright walk in them, but transgressors
stumble in them. These followers have willfully misunderstood what the holy fathers wrote,
even though it was true and appropriate; they have quoted these writings, dissembling
excuses for their own iniquities. It seems that the fathers did not lift the anathema against
Theodore but rather used the language of concession in order to lead away from their mistake

57
those who offered some defence of Nestorius and his heresy; their aim was to lead them to
perfection and to instruct them that not only was Nestorius, the disciple of heresy, condemned
but also his teacher Theodore. The fathers indicate their intention in this matter despite the
conciliatory forms used: Theodore was to be anathematized. This has been very clearly
shown to be the case by us in our acts from the works of Cyril and Proclus of blessed
memory in respect of the condemnation of Theodore and his heresy. This conciliatory attitude
is also to be found in the holy scriptures. The apostle Paul employed this tactic at the start of
his ministry when he was dealing with those who had been Jews; he circumcised Timothy so
that by this conciliation and concession he might lead them to perfection. Afterwards,
however, he ruled against circumcision, writing on the subject to the Galatians: Now I Paul
say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. We found
that the defenders of Theodore have done exactly what the heretics were accustomed to do.
They have tried to lift the anathema on the said heretical Theodore by omitting some of the
things which the holy fathers had written, by including certain confusing falsehoods of their
own, and by quoting a letter of Cyril of blessed memory, as if all this were the evidence of
the fathers. The passages which they quoted made the truth absolutely clear once the omitted
sections were put back in their proper place. The falsehoods were quite apparent when the
true writings were collated. In this matter those who issued these empty statements are those
who, in the words of scripture, rely on lies, they make empty pleas; they conceive mischief
and bring forth iniquity, they weave the spider’s web.

After we had investigated in this way Theodore and his heresy, we took the trouble to quote
and include in our acts a few of Theodoret’s heretical writings against true faith, against the
twelve chapters of holy Cyril and against the first synod of Ephesus. We also included some
of Theodoret’s writings on the side of the heretical Theodore and Nestorius so that it would
be made clear, to the satisfaction of anyone reading our acts, that these opinions had been
properly rejected and anathematized.

Thirdly, the letter which is alleged to have been written by Ibas to Mari the Persian was
brought under scrutiny and we discovered that it too ought to be officially read out. When the
letter was read out, its heretical character was immediately apparent to everyone. Until this
time there had been some dispute as to whether the aforesaid three chapters ought to be
condemned and anathematized. Since the supporters of the heretics Theodore and Nestorius
were conspiring to strengthen in another way the case of these men and their heresy, and
were alleging that this heretical letter, which approves and defends Theodore and Nestorius,
had been accepted by the holy council of Chalcedon, it was therefore necessary for us to
demonstrate that that holy synod was unaffected by the heresy which is present in that letter,
and that clearly those who make such allegations are doing so not with the assistance of the
holy council but so as to give some support to their own heresy by associating it with the
name of Chalcedon. It was demonstrated in our acts that Ibas was previously accused of the
same heresy which is contained in this letter. This accusation was levelled first by Proclus of
holy memory, bishop of Constantinople, and afterwards by Theodosius of blessed memory
and Flavian, the bishop there after Proclus, both of whom gave the task of examining the
whole matter to Photius, bishop of Tyre, and to Eustathius, bishop of the city of Beirut. When

58
Ibas was later found to be blameworthy, he was deposed from the episcopate. This being the
state of affairs, how could anyone be so bold as to allege that that heretical letter was
accepted by the holy council of Chalcedon or that the holy council of Chalcedon agreed with
it in its entirety? So as to prevent those who misrepresent the holy council of Chalcedon in
this way from having any further opportunity to do so we instructed that there should be a
formal reading of the official pronouncements of the holy synods, namely the first of Ephesus
and that of Chalcedon, on the subject of the letters of Cyril of holy memory and of Leo of
blessed memory, formerly pope of older Rome. We gathered from these authorities that
nothing which has been written by anyone ought to be accepted unless it has been shown
conclusively that it is in accord with the true faith of the holy fathers. Therefore we broke off
from our deliberations so as to reiterate in a formal declaration the definition of faith which
was promulgated by the holy council of Chalcedon. We compared what was written in the
letter with this official statement. When this comparison was made, it was quite apparent that
the contents of the letter were quite contradictory to those of the definition of faith. The
definition was in accord with the unique, permanent faith set out by the 318 holy fathers, and
by the 150, and by those who gathered for the first council at Ephesus. The heretical letter, on
the other hand, included the blasphemies of the heretical Theodore and Nestorius and even
gave support to them and describes them as doctors, while it condemns the holy fathers as
heretics. We make it quite clear to everyone that we do not intend to omit what the fathers
had to say in the first and second investigations, which are adduced by the supporters of
Theodore and Nestorius in support of their case. Rather these statements and all the others
were formally read out and what they contained was submitted to official scrutiny, and we
found that they had not allowed the said Ibas to be accepted until they had obliged him to
anathematize Nestorius and his heretical doctrines which were affirmed in that letter. This
was the view not only of the two bishops whose interventions some have tried to misapply
but also of the other religious bishops of that holy council. They also acted thus in the case of
Theodoret and insisted that he anathematize those opinions about which he was accused. If
they would permit the acceptance of Ibas only if he condemned the heresy which was to be
found in his letter, and on condition that he subscribed to a definition of faith set out by the
council, how can an attempt be made to allege that this heretical letter was accepted by the
same holy council? We are rightly told: What partnership has righteousness with iniquity? Or
what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what has a
believer in common with an unbeliever? What participation has the temple of God with idols?

Now that we have given the details of what our council has achieved, we repeat our formal
confession that we accept the four holy synods, that is, of Nicaea, of Constantinople, the first
of Ephesus, and of Chalcedon. Our teaching is and has been all that they have defined
concerning the one faith. We consider those who do not respect these things as foreign to the
catholic church. Furthermore, we condemn and anathematize, along with all other heretics
who have been condemned and anathematized by the same four holy councils and by the
holy, catholic and apostolic church, Theodore, formerly bishop of Mopsuestia, and his
heretical writings, and also what Theodoret heretically wrote against the true faith, against the
twelve chapters of holy Cyril and against the first synod of Ephesus, and we condemn also
what he wrote defending Theodore and Nestorius. Additionally, we anathematize the

59
heretical letter which Ibas is alleged to have written to Mari the Persian. This letter denies
that God the Word was made incarnate of the ever virgin Mary, the holy mother of God, and
that he was made man. It also condemns as a heretic Cyril of holy memory, who taught the
truth, and suggests that he held the same opinions as Apollinarius. The letter condemns the
first synod of Ephesus for deposing Nestorius without proper process and investigation. It
calls the twelve chapters of holy Cyril heretical and contrary to the orthodox faith, while it
supports Theodore and Nestorius and their heretical teachings and writings. Consequently we
anathematize the aforesaid three chapters, that is, the heretical Theodore of Mopsuestia along
with his detestable writings, and the heretical writings of Theodoret, and the heretical letter
which Ibas is alleged to have written. We anathematize the supporters of these works and
those who write or have written in defence of them, or who are bold enough to claim that
they are orthodox, or who have defended or tried to defend their heresy in the names of holy
fathers or of the holy council of Chalcedon.

These matters having been treated with thorough-going exactness, we bear in mind what was
promised about the holy church and him who said that the gates of hell will not prevail
against it (by these we understand the death-dealing tongues of heretics); we also bear in
mind what was prophesied about the church by Hosea when he said, I shall betroth you to me
in faithfulness and you shall know the Lord; and we count along with the devil, the father of
lies, the uncontrolled tongues of heretics and their heretical writings, together with the
heretics themselves who have persisted in their heresy even to death. So we declare to them:
Behold all you who kindle a fire, who set brands alight! Walk by the light of your fire, and by
the brands which you have kindled! Since we are under command to encourage the people
with orthodox teaching and to speak to the heart of Jerusalem, that is the church of God, we
very properly hurry to sow in righteousness and to reap the fruit of life. In doing this we are
lighting for ourselves the lamp of knowledge from the scriptures and the teachings of the
fathers. It has therefore seemed necessary to us to sum up in certain statements both our
declarations of the truth and our condemnations of heretics and their heretical teachings.

Anathemas against the “Three Chapters”

1. If anyone will not confess that the Father, Son and holy Spirit have one nature or
substance, that they have one power and authority, that there is a consubstantial Trinity,
one Deity to be adored in three subsistences or persons: let him be anathema. There is
only one God and Father, from whom all things come, and one Lord, Jesus Christ,
through whom all things are, and one holy Spirit, in whom all things are.
2. If anyone will not confess that the Word of God has two nativities, that which is before all
ages from the Father, outside time and without a body, and secondly that nativity of these
latter days when the Word of God came down from the heavens and was made flesh of
holy and glorious Mary, mother of God and ever-virgin, and was born from her: let him
be anathema.
3. If anyone declares that the [Word] of God who works miracles is not identical with the
Christ who suffered, or alleges that God the Word was with the Christ who was born of
woman, or was in him in the way that one might be in another, but that our lord Jesus

60
 Christ was not one and the same, the Word of God incarnate and made man, and that the
miracles and the sufferings which he voluntarily underwent in the flesh were not of the
same person: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone declares that it was only in respect of grace, or of principle of action, or of
dignity or in respect of equality of honour, or in respect of authority, or of some relation,
or of some affection or power that there was a unity made between the Word of God and
the man, or if anyone alleges that it is in respect of good will, as if God the Word was
pleased with the man, because he was well and properly disposed to God, as Theodore
claims in his madness; or if anyone says that this union is only a sort of synonymity, as
the Nestorians allege, who call the Word of God Jesus and Christ, and even designate the
human separately by the names “Christ” and “Son”, discussing quite obviously two
different persons, and only pretending to speak of one person and one Christ when the
reference is to his title, honour, dignity or adoration; finally if anyone does not accept the
teaching of the holy fathers that the union occurred of the Word of God with human flesh
which is possessed by a rational and intellectual soul, and that this union is by synthesis
or by person, and that therefore there is only one person, namely the lord Jesus Christ,
one member of the holy Trinity: let him be anathema. The notion of “union” can be
understood in many different ways. The supporters of the wickedness of Apollinarius and
Eutyches have asserted that the union is produced by a confusing of the uniting elements,
as they advocate the disappearance of the elements that unite. Those who follow
Theodore and Nestorius, rejoicing in the division, have brought in a union which is only
by affection. The holy church of God, rejecting the wickedness of both sorts of heresy,
states her belief in a union between the Word of God and human flesh which is by
synthesis, that is by a union of subsistence. In the mystery of Christ the union of synthesis
not only conserves without confusing the elements that come together but also allows no
division.
5. If anyone understands by the single subsistence of our lord Jesus Christ that it covers the
meaning of many subsistences, and by this argument tries to introduce into the mystery of
Christ two subsistences or two persons, and having brought in two persons then talks of
one person only in respect of dignity, honour or adoration, as both Theodore and
Nestorius have written in their madness; if anyone falsely represents the holy synod of
Chalcedon, making out that it accepted this heretical view by its terminology of “one
subsistence”, and if he does not acknowledge that the Word of God is united with human
flesh by subsistence, and that on account of this there is only one subsistence or one
person, and that the holy synod of Chalcedon thus made a formal statement of belief in
the single subsistence of our lord Jesus Christ: let him be anathema. There has been no
addition of person or subsistence to the holy Trinity even after one of its members, God
the Word, becoming human flesh.
6. If anyone declares that it can be only inexactly and not truly said that the holy and
glorious ever-virgin Mary is the mother of God, or says that she is so only in some
relative way, considering that she bore a mere man and that God the Word was not made
into human flesh in her, holding rather that the nativity of a man from her was referred, as
they say, to God the Word as he was with the man who came into being; if anyone
misrepresents the holy synod of Chalcedon, alleging that it claimed that the virgin was the

61
 mother of God only according to that heretical understanding which the blasphemous
Theodore put forward; or if anyone says that she is the mother of a man or the Christ-
bearer, that is the mother of Christ, suggesting that Christ is not God; and does not
formally confess that she is properly and truly the mother of God, because he who before
all ages was born of the Father, God the Word, has been made into human flesh in these
latter days and has been born to her, and it was in this religious understanding that the
holy synod of Chalcedon formally stated its belief that she was the mother of God: let him
be anathema.
7. If anyone, when speaking about the two natures, does not confess a belief in our one lord
Jesus Christ, understood in both his divinity and his humanity, so as by this to signify a
difference of natures of which an ineffable union has been made without confusion, in
which neither the nature of the Word was changed into the nature of human flesh, nor was
the nature of human flesh changed into that of the Word (each remained what it was by
nature, even after the union, as this had been made in respect of subsistence); and if
anyone understands the two natures in the mystery of Christ in the sense of a division into
parts, or if he expresses his belief in the plural natures in the same lord Jesus Christ, God
the Word made flesh, but does not consider the difference of those natures, of which he is
composed, to be only in the onlooker’s mind, a difference which is not compromised by
the union (for he is one from both and the two exist through the one) but uses the plurality
to suggest that each nature is possessed separately and has a subsistence of its own: let
him be anathema.
8. If anyone confesses a belief that a union has been made out of the two natures divinity
and humanity, or speaks about the one nature of God the Word made flesh, but does not
understand these things according to what the fathers have taught, namely that from the
divine and human natures a union was made according to subsistence, and that one Christ
was formed, and from these expressions tries to introduce one nature or substance made
of the deity and human flesh of Christ: let him be anathema. In saying that it was in
respect of subsistence that the only-begotten God the Word was united, we are not
alleging that there was a confusion made of each of the natures into one another, but
rather that each of the two remained what it was, and in this way we understand that the
Word was united to human flesh. So there is only one Christ, God and man, the same
being consubstantial with the Father in respect of his divinity, and also consubstantial
with us in respect of our humanity. Both those who divide or split up the mystery of the
divine dispensation of Christ and those who introduce into that mystery some confusion
are equally rejected and anathematized by the church of God.
9. If anyone says that Christ is to be worshipped in his two natures, and by that wishes to
introduce two adorations, a separate one for God the Word and another for the man; or if
anyone, so as to remove the human flesh or to mix up the divinity and the humanity,
monstrously invents one nature or substance brought together from the two, and so
worships Christ, but not by a single adoration God the Word in human flesh along with
his human flesh, as has been the tradition of the church from the beginning: let him be
anathema.

62
10. If anyone does not confess his belief that our lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified in his
human flesh, is truly God and the Lord of glory and one of the members of the holy
Trinity: let him be anathema.
11. If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinarius Nestorius,
Eutyches and Origen, as well as their heretical books, and also all other heretics who have
already been condemned and anathematized by the holy, catholic and apostolic church
and by the four holy synods which have already been mentioned, and also all those who
have thought or now think in the same way as the aforesaid heretics and who persist in
their error even to death: let him be anathema.
12. If anyone defends the heretical Theodore of Mopsuestia, who said that God the Word is
one, while quite another is Christ, who was troubled by the passions of the soul and the
desires of human flesh, was gradually separated from that which is inferior, and became
better by his progress in good works, and could not be faulted in his way of life, and as a
mere man was baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, and
through this baptism received the grace of the holy Spirit and came to deserve sonship
and to be adored, in the way that one adores a statue of the emperor, as if he were God the
Word, and that he became after his resurrection immutable in his thoughts and entirely
without sin. Furthermore this heretical Theodore claimed that the union of God the Word
to Christ is rather like that which, according to the teaching of the Apostle, is between a
man and his wife: The two shall become one. Among innumerable other blasphemies he
dared to allege that, when after his resurrection the Lord breathed on his disciples and
said, Receive the holy Spirit, he was not truly giving them the holy Spirit, but he breathed
on them only as a sign. Similarly he claimed that Thomas’s profession of faith made
when, after his resurrection, he touched the hands and side of the Lord, namely My Lord
and my God, was not said about Christ, but that Thomas was in this way extolling God
for raising up Christ and expressing his astonishment at the miracle of the resurrection.
This Theodore makes a comparison which is even worse than this when, writing about the
acts of the Apostles, he says that Christ was like Plato, Manichaeus, Epicurus and
Marcion, alleging that just as each of these men arrived at his own teaching and then had
his disciples called after him Platonists, Manichaeans, Epicureans and Marcionites, so
Christ found his teaching and then had disciples who were called Christians. If anyone
offers a defence for this more heretical Theodore, and his heretical books in which he
throws up the aforesaid blasphemies and many other additional blasphemies against our
great God and saviour Jesus Christ, and if anyone fails to anathematize him and his
heretical books as well as all those who offer acceptance or defence to him, or who allege
that his interpretation is correct, or who write on his behalf or on that of his heretical
teachings, or who are or have been of the same way of thinking and persist until death in
this error: let him be anathema.
13. If anyone defends the heretical writings of Theodoret which were composed against the
true faith, against the first holy synod of Ephesus and against holy Cyril and his Twelve
Chapters, and also defends what Theodoret wrote to support the heretical Theodore and
Nestorius and others who think in the same way as the aforesaid Theodore and Nestorius
and accept them or their heresy and if anyone, because of them, shall accuse of being
heretical the doctors of the church who have stated their belief in the union according to

63
 subsistence of God the Word; and if anyone does not anathematize these heretical books
and those who have thought or now think in this way, and all those who have written
against the true faith or against holy Cyril and his twelve chapters, and who persist in
such heresy until they die: let him be anathema.
14. If anyone defends the letter which Ibas is said to have written to Mari the Persian, which
denies that God the Word, who became incarnate of Mary the holy mother of God and
ever virgin, became man, but alleges that he was only a man born to her, whom it
describes as a temple, as if God the Word was one and the man someone quite different;
which condemns holy Cyril as if he were a heretic, when he gives the true teaching of
Christians, and accuses holy Cyril of writing opinions like those of the heretical
Apollinarius ;which rebukes the first holy synod of Ephesus, alleging that it condemned
Nestorius without going into the matter by a formal examination; which claims that the
twelve chapters of holy Cyril are heretical and opposed to the true faith; and which
defends Theodore and Nestorius and their heretical teachings and books. If anyone
defends the said letter and does not anathematize it and all those who offer a defence for
it and allege that it or a part of it is correct, or if anyone defends those who have written
or shall write in support of it or the heresies contained in it, or supports those who are
bold enough to defend it or its heresies in the name of the holy fathers of the holy synod
of Chalcedon, and persists in these errors until his death: let him be anathema.

Such then are the assertions we confess. We have received them from

1. holy Scripture, from

2. the teaching of the holy fathers, and from
3. the definitions about the one and the same faith made by the aforesaid four holy synods.

Moreover, condemnation has been passed by us against the heretics and their impiety, and
also against those who have justified or shall justify the so-called “Three Chapters”, and
against those who have persisted or will persist in their own error. If anyone should attempt
to hand on, or to teach by word or writing, anything contrary to what we have regulated, then
if he is a bishop or somebody appointed to the clergy, in so far as he is acting contrary to
what befits priests and the ecclesiastical status, let him be stripped of the rank of priest or
cleric, and if he is a monk or lay person, let him be anathema.

64
Third Council of Constantinople :
680-681 A. D.
Council Fathers - 680-681 A.D.
INTRODUCTION

To make an end of the Monothelite controversy, Emperor Constantine IV asked Pope Donus
in 678 to send twelve bishops and four western Greek monastic superiors to represent the
pope at an assembly of eastern and western theologians. Pope Agatho, who meanwhile had
succeeded Donus, ordered consultation in the west on this important matter. Around Easter
680 a synod in Rome of 125 Italian bishops, with Pope Agatho presiding, assessed the replies
of the regional synods of the west and composed a profession of faith in which
Monothelitism was condemned. Legates of the pope took this profession to Constantinople,
arriving at the beginning of September 680.

On 10 September 680 the emperor issued an edict to Patriarch George of Constantinople,

ordering a council of bishops to be convoked. The council assembled on 7 November in the
hall of the imperial palace in Constantinople. It immediately called itself an ecumenical
council. There were 18 sessions, at the first eleven of which the emperor presided.

In the 8th session, on 7 March 681, the council adopted the teaching of Pope Agatho in
condemnation of Monothelitism. Patriarch Macarius of Antioch was one of the few who
refused his assent; he was deposed in the 12th session.

The doctrinal conclusions of the council were defined in the 17th session and promulgated in
the 18th and last session on 16 September 681. The acts of the council, signed both by 174
fathers and finally by the emperor himself, were sent to Pope Leo II, who had succeeded
Agatho, and he, when he had approved them, ordered them to be translated into Latin and to
be signed by all the bishops of the west. Constantine IV, however, promulgated the decrees of
the council in all parts of the empire by imperial edict. The council did not debate church
discipline and did not establish any disciplinary cannons.
Exposition of faith

The only Son and Word of God the Father, who became a man like us in all things but sin,
Christ our true God, proclaimed clearly in the words of the gospel; I am the light of the
world; anyone who follows me shall not walk in darkness but shall have the light of life, and
again, My peace I leave to you, my peace I give you. Our most mild emperor, champion of
right belief and adversary of wrong belief, guided in godly wisdom by this teaching of peace
spoken by God, has brought together this holy and universal assembly of ours and set at one
the whole judgment of the church.

65
Wherefore this holy and universal synod of ours, driving afar the error of impiety which
endured for some time even till the present, following without deviation in a straight path
after the holy and accepted fathers, has piously accorded in all things with the five holy and
universal synods: that is to say, with

1. the synod of 318 holy fathers who gathered at Nicaea against the madman Arius, and
2. that which followed it at Constantinople of 150 God-led men against Macedonius,
opponent of the Spirit, and the impious Apollinarius; similarly too, with
3. the first at Ephesus of 200 godly men brought together against Nestorius, who thought as
the Jews and
4. that at Chalcedon of 630 God-inspired fathers against Eutyches and Dioscorus, hateful to
God; also, in addition to these, with
5. the fifth holy synod, the latest of them, which was gathered here against Theodore of
Mopsuestia, Origen, Didymus and Evagrius, and the writings of Theodoret against the
twelve chapters of the renowned Cyril, and the letter said to have been written by Ibas to
Mari the Persian.

Reaffirming the divine tenets of piety in all respects unaltered, and banishing the profane
teachings of impiety, this holy and universal synod of ours has also, in its turn, under God’s
inspiration, set its seal on the creed which was made out by the 318 fathers and confirmed
again with godly prudence by the 150 and which the other holy synods too accepted gladly
and ratified for the elimination of all soul-corrupting heresy

We believe in one God …[Creed of Nicaea and of Constantinople 1]

The holy and universal synod said:

This pious and orthodox creed of the divine favour was enough for a complete knowledge of
the orthodox faith and a complete assurance therein. But since from the first, the contriver of
evil did not rest, finding an accomplice in the serpent and through him bringing upon human
nature the poisoned dart of death, so too now he has found instruments suited to his own
purpose–namely Theodore, who was bishop of Pharan, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter, who
were bishops of this imperial city, and further Honorius, who was pope of elder Rome, Cyrus,
who held the see of Alexandria, and Macarius, who was recently bishop of Antioch, and his
disciple Stephen — and has not been idle in raising through them obstacles of error against
the full body of the church sowing with novel speech among the orthodox people the heresy
of a single will and a single principle of action in the two natures of the one member of the
holy Trinity Christ our true God, a heresy in harmony with the evil belief, ruinous to the
mind, of the impious Apollinarius, Severus and Themistius, and one intent on removing the
perfection of the becoming man of the same one lord Jesus Christ our God, through a certain
guileful device, leading from there to the blasphemous conclusion that his rationally animate
flesh is without a will and a principle of action.

66
Therefore Christ our God has stirred up the faithful emperor, the new David, finding in him a
man after his own heart, who, as the scripture says, did not allow his eyes sleep or his eyelids
drowsing until through this holy assembly of ours, brought together by God, he found the
perfect proclamation of right belief; for according to the God-spoken saying, Where there are
two or three gathered in my name, there am I in their midst.

This same holy and universal synod, here present, faithfully accepts and welcomes with open
hands the report of Agatho, most holy and most blessed pope of elder Rome, that came to our
most reverend and most faithful emperor Constantine, which rejected by name those who
proclaimed and taught, as has been already explained, one will and one principle of action in
the incarnate dispensation of Christ our true God; and likewise it approves as well the other
synodal report to his God-taught serenity, from the synod of 125 bishops dear to God meeting
under the same most holy pope, as according with the holy synod at Chalcedon and with the
Tome of the all-holy and most blessed Leo, pope of the same elder Rome, which was sent to
Flavian, who is among the saints, and which that synod called a pillar of right belief, and
furthermore with the synodal letters written by the blessed Cyril against the impious
Nestorius and to the bishops of the east.

Following the five holy and universal synods and the holy and accepted fathers, and defining
in unison, it professes our lord Jesus Christ our true God, one of the holy Trinity, which is of
one same being and is the source of life, to be perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the
same truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and a body; consubstantial with the Father as
regards his divinity, and the same consubstantial with us as regards his humanity, like us in
all respects except for sin; begotten before the ages from the Father as regards his divinity,
and in the last days the same for us and for our salvation from the holy Spirit and the virgin
Mary, who is properly and truly called mother of God, as regards his humanity; one and the
same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, acknowledged in two natures which undergo no
confusion, no change, no separation, no division; at no point was the difference between the
natures taken away through the union, but rather the property of both natures is preserved and
comes together into a single subsistent being [in unam personam et in unam subsistentiam
concurrente]; he is not parted or divided into two persons, but is one and the same only-
begotten Son, Word of God, lord Jesus Christ, just as the prophets taught from the beginning
about him, and as Jesus the Christ himself instructed us, and as the creed of the holy fathers
handed it down to us.

And we proclaim equally two natural volitions or wills in him and two natural principles of
action which undergo no division, no change, no partition, no confusion, in accordance with
the teaching of the holy fathers. And the two natural wills not in opposition, as the impious
heretics said, far from it, but his human will following, and not resisting or struggling, rather
in fact subject to his divine and all powerful will. For the will of the flesh had to be moved,
and yet to be subjected to the divine will, according to the most wise Athanasius. For just as
his flesh is said to be and is flesh of the Word of God, so too the natural will of his flesh is
said to and does belong to the Word of God, just as he says himself: I have come down from
heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me, calling his own will

67
that of his flesh, since his flesh too became his own. For in the same way that his all holy and
blameless animate flesh was not destroyed in being made divine but remained in its own limit
and category, so his human will as well was not destroyed by being made divine, but rather
was preserved, according to the theologian Gregory, who says: “For his willing, when he is
considered as saviour, is not in opposition to God, being made divine in its entirety.” And we
hold there to be two natural principles of action in the same Jesus Christ our lord and true
God, which undergo no division, no change, no partition, no confusion, that is, a divine
principle of action and a human principle of action, according to the godly-speaking Leo,
who says most clearly: “For each form does in a communion with the other that activity
which it possesses as its own, the Word working that which is the Word’s and the body
accomplishing the things that are the body’s”. For of course we will not grant the existence of
only a single natural principle of action of both God and creature, lest we raise what is made
to the level of divine being, or indeed reduce what is most specifically proper to the divine
nature to a level befitting creatures for we acknowledge that the miracles and the sufferings
are of one and the same according to one or the other of the two natures out of which he is
and in which he has his being, as the admirable Cyril said. Therefore, protecting on all sides
the “no confusion” and “no division”, we announce the whole in these brief words: Believing
our lord Jesus Christ, even after his incarnation, to be one of the holy Trinity and our true
God, we say that he has two natures [naturas] shining forth in his one
subsistence[subsistentia] in which he demonstrated the miracles and the sufferings throughout
his entire providential dwelling here, not in appearance but in truth, the difference of the
natures being made known in the same one subsistence in that each nature wills and performs
the things that are proper to it in a communion with the other; then in accord with this
reasoning we hold that two natural wills and principles of action meet in correspondence for
the salvation of the human race.

So now that these points have been formulated by us with all precision in every respect and
with all care, we definitely state that it is not allowable for anyone to produce another faith,
that is, to write or to compose or to consider or to teach others; those who dare to compose
another faith, or to support or to teach or to hand on another creed to those who wish to turn
to knowledge of the truth, whether from Hellenism or Judaism or indeed from any heresy
whatsoever, or to introduce novelty of speech, that is, invention of terms, so as to overturn
what has now been defined by us, such persons, if they are bishops or clerics, are deprived of
their episcopacy or clerical rank, and if they are monks or layfolk they are excommunicated.

68
Second Council of Nicaea – 787 A.D.
Council Fathers - 787 A.D.
INTRODUCTION

A recommendation to summon an ecumenical council, in order to correct the iconoclast

heretics, had been addressed to Empress Irene, then acting as regent for her son Emperor
Constantine VI (780-797) who was still a minor, both by Patriarch Paul IV of Constantinople
(who had repented of his earlier iconoclast views) before his abdication from the see in 784
and by his successor as patriarch, Tarasius. The aim was to unite the church and to condemn
the decrees passed by the council of 338 bishops held at Hiereia and St Mary of Blachernae
in 754.

The convocation of the council was announced to Pope Hadrian I (772-795) in a letter of
Constantine VI and Irene, dated 29 August 784. They urged him either to attend in person or
to send legates. Patriarch Tarasius sent the same message in synodal letters to the pope and
the three eastern patriarchs. Pope Hadrian I gave his approval for the convocation of the
council, stipulating various conditions, and sent as his legates the archpriest Peter and Peter,
abbot of the Greek monastery of St Sabas in Rome.

The council, which was summoned by an imperial edict in the summer of 786, met for the
first time on 1 August 786, in the presence of Emperor Constantine and Empress Irene. When
the proceedings were interrupted by the violent entry of iconoclast soldiers, faithful to the
memory of Emperor Constantine V (741-775), the council was adjourned until the arrival of a
reliable army under Staurakios. It assembled again at Nicaea on 24 September 787, the papal
legates having been recalled from Sicily.

After the bishops suspected of heresy had been admitted, 263 fathers embraced the doctrine
concerning the cult of sacred images as explained in the letters of Pope Hadrian I, which were
read out at the second session.

The question of the intercession of saints was dealt with in the fourth session.

Once all these matters had been approved, a doctrinal definition was decreed at the seventh
session.

At the eighth and last session, which was held at the request of Constantine and Irene in the
Magnaura palace in Constantinople, the definition was again decreed and proclaimed and 22
canons were read out. The papal legates presided over the council and were the first to sign
the acts; but in reality it was Patriarch Tarasius who presided, and it was he, at the command
of the council, who informed Pope Hadrian I about it: “the occasion when the letters of your
fraternal holiness were read out and all acclaimed them”.

69
Pope Hadrian I wrote no letter in reply, yet the defence he made of the council in 794 against
Charlemagne shows that he accepted what the council had decreed, and that he had sent no
acknowledgement because the concessions which he had requested in his letter of 26 October
785 to Constantine and Irene had not been granted to him, especially concerning the
restoration of the papacy’s patrimony to the state at which it had been prior to 731, that is,
before Illyricum had been confiscated by the emperor Leo III. Emperor Constantine VI and
his mother Irene signed the acts of the council but it is unclear whether or not they
promulgated a decree on the matter.

The translation is from the Greek text, since this is the more authoritative version. {Material
in curly parentheses ,{ }, paragraphing, italicizing and bolding, are added by the hypertext
editor. The material in square brackets [ ] is found in the hardcopy book from which the
translation was taken.}

Definition

The holy, great and universal synod, by the grace of God and by order of our pious and
Christ-loving emperor and empress, Constantine and his mother Irene, assembled for the
second time in the famous metropolis of the Nicaeans in the province of the Bithynians, in
the holy church of God named after Wisdom, following the tradition of the catholic church,
has decreed what is here laid down.

{The council bases itself on the inspiration of Tradition & of itself}

The one who granted us the light of recognizing him, the one who redeemed us from the
darkness of idolatrous insanity, Christ our God, when he took for his bride his holy catholic
church, having no blemish or wrinkle, promised he would guard her and assured his holy
disciples saying, I am with you every day until the consummation of this age. This promise
however he made not only to them but also to us, who thanks to them have come to believe in
his name. To this gracious offer some people paid no attention, being hoodwinked by the
treacherous foe they abandoned the true line of reasoning, and setting themselves against the
tradition of the catholic church they faltered in their grasp of the truth. As the proverbial
saying puts it, they turned askew the axles of their farm carts and gathered no harvest in their
hands. Indeed they had the effrontery to criticise the beauty pleasing to God established in the
holy monuments; they were priests in name, but not in reality. They were those of whom God
calls out by prophecy, Many pastors have destroyed my vine, they have defiled my portion.
For they followed unholy men and trusting to their own frenzies they calumniated the holy
church, which Christ our God has espoused to himself, and they failed to distinguish the holy
from the profane, asserting that the icons of our Lord and of his saints were no different from
the wooden images of satanic idols.

70
Therefore the Lord God, not bearing that what was subject to him should be destroyed by
such a corruption, has by his good pleasure summoned us together through the divine
diligence and decision of Constantine and Irene, our faithful emperor and empress, we who
are those responsible for the priesthood everywhere, in order that the divinely inspired
tradition of the catholic church should receive confirmation by a public decree. So having
made investigation with all accuracy and having taken counsel, setting for our aim the truth,
we neither diminish nor augment, but simply guard intact all that pertains to the catholic
church.

{Recapitulation and re-affirmation of everything taught by any previous ecumenical council}

Thus, following the six holy universal synods, in the first place that assembled in the famous
metropolis of the Nicaeans {{1}Nicea I}, and then that held after it in the imperial, God-
guarded city: {i.e. {2} Constantinople I} We believe in one God …[the Nicene-
Constantinopolitan creed follows]. We abominate and anathematize – Arius and those who
think like him and share in his mad error; also Macedonius and those with him, properly
called the Pneumatomachi; we also confess our Lady, the holy Mary, to be really and truly
the God-bearer, because she gave birth in the flesh to Christ, one of the Trinity, our God, just
as the first synod at {3}Ephesus decreed; it also expelled from the church Nestorius and those
with him, because they were introducing a duality of persons. Along with these synods, we
also confess the two natures of the one who became incarnate for our sake from the God-
bearer without blemish, Mary the ever-virgin, recognizing that he is perfect God and perfect
man, as the synod at {4}Chalcedon also proclaimed, when it drove from the divine precinct
the foul-mouthed Eutyches and Dioscorus. We reject along with them Severus Peter and their
interconnected band with their many blasphemies, in whose company we anathematize the
mythical speculations of Origen, Evagrius and Didymus, as did the fifth synod, that
assembled at {5}Constantinople. Further we declare that there are two wills and principles of
action, in accordance with what is proper to each of the natures in Christ, in the way that the
sixth synod, that at {6}Constantinople, proclaimed, when it also publicly rejected Sergius,
Honorius, Cyrus, Pyrrhus, Macarius, those uninterested in true holiness, and their likeminded
followers.

To summarize, we declare that we defend free from any innovations all the

written and
unwrittenecclesiastical traditions that have been entrusted to us.{Council formulates for the
first time what the Church has always believed regarding icons}One of these is the
production of representational art; this is quite in harmony with the history of the spread of
the gospel, as it provides confirmation that the becoming man of the Word of God was real
and not just imaginary, and as it brings us a similar benefit. For, things that mutually illustrate
one another undoubtedly possess one another’s message.Given this state of affairs and
stepping out as though on the royal highway, following as we are

71
 the God-spoken teaching of our holy fathers and
the tradition of the catholic church —
for we recognize that this tradition comes from the holy Spirit who dwells in her–
we decree with full precision and care that,
like the figure of the honoured and life-giving cross,
the revered and holy images,
whether painted or
made of mosaic
or of other suitable material,
are to be exposed
in the holy churches of God,
on sacred instruments and vestments,
on walls and panels,
in houses and by public ways,
these are the images of
our Lord, God and saviour, Jesus Christ, and of
our Lady without blemish, the holy God-bearer, and of
the revered angels and of
any of the saintly holy men.
The more frequently they are seen in representational art, the more are those who see them
drawn to remember and long for those who serve as models, and to pay these images the
tribute of salutation and respectful veneration. Certainly this is not the full adoration {latria}
in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature, but it resembles
that given to the figure of the honoured and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of
the gospels and to other sacred cult objects. Further, people are drawn to honour these images
with the offering of incense and lights, as was piously established by ancient custom. Indeed,
the honour paid to an image traverses it, reaching the model, and he who venerates the image,
venerates the person represented in that image.
So it is that the teaching of our holy fathers is strengthened, namely, the tradition of the
catholic church which has received the gospel from one end of the earth to the other.
So it is that we really follow Paul, who spoke in Christ, and the entire divine apostolic
group and the holiness of the fathers, clinging fast to the traditions which we have received.
So it is that we sing out with the prophets the hymns of victory to the church: Rejoice
exceedingly O daughter of Zion, proclaim O daughter of Jerusalem; enjoy your happiness and
gladness with a full heart. The Lord has removed away from you the injustices of your
enemies, you have been redeemed from the hand of your foes. The Lord the king is in your
midst, you will never more see evil, and peace will be upon you for time eternal.Therefore all
those who dare to think or teach anything different, or who follow the accursed heretics in
rejecting ecclesiastical traditions, or who devise innovations, or who spurn anything entrusted
to the church (whether it be the gospel or the figure of the cross or any example of
representational art or any martyr’s holy relic), or who fabricate perverted and evil prejudices
against cherishing any of the lawful traditions of the catholic church, or who secularize the
sacred objects and saintly monasteries, we order that they be suspended if they are bishops or
clerics, and excommunicated if they are monks or lay people.

72
 Anathemas concerning holy images
If anyone does not confess that Christ our God can be represented in his humanity, let
him be anathema.
If anyone does not accept representation in art of evangelical scenes, let him be
anathema.
If anyone does not salute such representations as standing for the Lord and his saints, let
him be anathema.
If anyone rejects any written or unwritten tradition of the church, let him be anathema.

CANONS

For those to whom the priestly dignity is allotted, the guide-lines contained in the
canonical regulations are testimonies and directives. We accept them gladly and sing out to
the Lord God with David, the revealer of God: In the path of your testimonies I have taken
delight, as with all manner of wealth; and, You have enjoined justice, your testimonies are for
ever; instruct me to give me life. And if the prophetic voice orders us for all eternity to
observe the messages of God and to live in them, it is obvious that they remain unshakeable
and immoveable; thus Moses, who looked on God, declares, To these there is no addition,
and from these there is no subtraction. The divine apostle takes pride in them when he cries
out, These things which the angels long to gaze upon, and, If an angel brings you a gospel
contrary to what you have received, let him be accursed.

Since these things really are such and have been testified to us in these ways, we exult in
them as a person would if he were to come across a great mass of booty. We joyfully
embrace the sacred canons and we maintain complete and unshaken their regulation, both
those expounded by those trumpets of the Spirit, the apostles worthy of all praise, and those
from the six holy universal synods and from the synods assembled locally for the
promulgation of such decrees, and from our holy fathers. Indeed all of these, enlightened by
one and the same Spirit, decreed what is expedient. In the case of those whom they sent away
under an anathema, we also anathematize them, those whom they suspended, we also
suspend; those whom they excommunicated, we also excommunicate; those whom they
placed under penalties, we also deal with in the same way. Let your conduct be free from
avariciousness, contenting yourself with what you have, cried out with all explicitness the
divine apostle Paul, who mounted to the third heaven and heard words that cannot be uttered.

Since we make an undertaking before God as we sing, I shall meditate on your judgments,
I shall not neglect your words, it is essential to our salvation that every Christian should

73
observe these things, but more especially those who have been invested with priestly dignity.
Therefore we decree that

everyone who is to be advanced to the grade of bishop should have a thorough knowledge
of the psalter, in order that he may instruct all the clergy subordinate to him, to be initiated in
that book.
He should also be examined without fail by the metropolitan to see if he is willing to
acquire knowledge–a knowledge that should be searching and not superficial–of the sacred
canons, the holy gospel, the book of the divine apostle, and all divine scripture;
also if he is willing to conduct himself and teach the people entrusted to him according to
the divine commandments.
“The substance of our hierarchy are the words handed down from God”, that is to say, the
true knowledge of the divine scriptures, as the great Dionysius made plain. If someone is
doubtful and ill at ease with such conduct and teaching, let him not be ordained. For God said
through the prophet: You rejected knowledge, and I shall reject you, so that you may not
serve me in a priestly function.

Any election of a bishop, priest or deacon brought about by the rulers is to be null and void
in accordance with the canon that says: “If any bishop, through the influence of secular
rulers, acquires responsibility for a church because of them, let him be suspended and let all
those who are in communion with him be excommunicated”.

It is necessary that the person who is to be advanced to a bishopric should be elected by

bishops, as has been decreed by the holy fathers at Nicaea in the canon that says: “It is by all
means desirable that a bishop should be appointed by all [the bishops] in the province. But if
this is difficult because of some pressing necessity or the length of the journey involved, let at
least three come together and perform the ordination, but only after the absent bishops have
taken part in the vote and given their written consent. But in each province the right of
confirming the proceedings belongs to the metropolitan”.

The herald of the truth, Paul, the divine apostle, laying down a sort of rule for the
presbyters of Ephesus, or rather for the whole priestly order, declared firmly: I have not
coveted silver or gold or anybody’s clothing; I have made completely plain to you that it is by
working in this fashion that we should provide for the weak being convinced that it is blessed
to give.

Therefore we also, having been taught by him, decree that a bishop should never have any
sort of design on foul profit, inventing excuses for his sins, nor demand any gold or silver or
anything similar from the bishops, clerics and monks subject to him. For the apostle says:

74
The unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God; and, It is not children who should heap up
treasures for their parents, but parents for their children.

So if it is discovered that somebody, because of a demand for gold or something similar, or

because of some private infatuation of his own, has excluded from the liturgy or
excommunicated one of the clerics under his authority, or has closed off one of the holy
churches, preventing the celebration of God’s liturgies in it, pouring out his own madness
against insensible things, then he is truly senseless himself and he should be subjected to
suffer what he would inflict and the penalty imposed by him will turn upon his own head,
because he has transgressed both the law of God and the rulings of the apostles. For Peter
also, the spokesman of the apostles, urges: Be pastors to the flock of God entrusted to you,
not under compulsion, but willingly as pleasing to God, not for sordid gain but with
enthusiasm, not as men who lord it over those entrusted to you, but as being models for the
flock. Then when the chief shepherd is disclosed, you will carry off the imperishable crown
of glory.

It is a sin leading to death when sinners remain uncorrected, but still worse is it when
people flaunt their sin as they override holiness and truth, both preferring mammon to
obedience to God and neglecting his legally formulated instructions. The Lord God is not
present among such persons unless they humbly turn from their fault. Their duty is to
approach God with a contrite heart and implore his forgiveness for their sin and his pardon,
rather than to take pride in an unholy distribution of gifts: For the Lord is close to the contrite
of heart. Therefore in the case of those who boast that they have been appointed in the church
by distributing gifts of gold, and who pin their hopes on this evil custom, which alienates a
person from God and from all priesthood, and who take this as a reason for deriding quite
shamelessly and openly those who have been chosen by the holy Spirit and appointed for the
virtue of their lives, without any distribution of gifts of gold, when they first do this each
should take the lowest rank in his order, and if they persist they should be corrected with a
penalty.

If someone is found to have done this at any time in connection with an ordination, let
matters proceed in accordance with the apostolic canon which says: “If some bishop or priest
or deacon has obtained his dignity by means of money, let him and the person who performed
the ordination be suspended, and let them be excluded completely from the communion, as
Simon Magus was by me, Peter“.

Similarly, in accordance with canon 2 of our holy fathers at Chalcedon, which says “If any
bishop performs an ordination for money and puts the unsaleable grace on sale, and ordains
for money a bishop, a chorepiscopus, a presbyter or deacons or some others of those
numbered among the clergy; or appoints a manager, a legal officer or a warden for money, or
any other ecclesiastic at all for personal sordid gain; let him who has attempted this and been
convicted stand to lose his personal rank, and let the person ordained profit nothing from the

75
ordination or appointment he has bought; but let him be removed from the dignity or
responsibility which he got for money. And if anyone appears to have acted even as a go-
between in such disgraceful and unlawful dealings, let him too, if he is a cleric, be demoted
from his personal rank, and if he is a lay person or a monk, let him be anathematized”.

Although there is indeed a canon which says, “In each province the canonical
investigations should take place twice yearly by means of a gathering of the bishops“,
because of the trouble and because those attending the meetings lack the resources for such
journeys, the holy fathers of the sixth synod decreed “they should be held in any case and
despite all excuses, once a year, and all that is incorrect should be put right”. We also renew
this canon, and should a ruler be found who prevents its observance, let him be
excommunicated; however if one of the metropolitan bishops neglects its fulfillment, let him
be subject to canonical penalties, unless it is a case of necessity, constraint or some other
reasonable cause.

When such a synod is held to discuss canonical and evangelical matters, the gathered
bishops should pay particular care and attention to the divine and life-giving laws of God:
There is a great reward for their observance; for a law is a lamp, a regulation is a light, and
reproof and discipline are the path of life indeed the law of the Lord gives light to the eyes.
However, the metropolitan bishop does not have the right to demand anything that a bishop
may have brought with him, such as a beast or some other thing; and if he is convicted of
doing so, let him pay back fourfold.

The divine apostle Paul said: The sins of some people are manifest, those of others appear
later. Some sins take the front rank but others follow in their footsteps. Thus in the train of
the impious heresy of the defamers of Christians, many other impieties appeared. Just as
those heretics removed the sight of venerable icons from the church, they also abandoned
other customs, which should now be renewed and which should be in vigour in virtue of both
written and unwritten legislation. Therefore we decree that in venerable churches consecrated
without relics of the holy martyrs, the installation of relics should take place along with the
usual prayers. And if in future any bishop is found out consecrating a church without relics,
let him be deposed as someone who has flouted the ecclesiastical traditions.

Since some of those who come from the religion of the Hebrews mistakenly think to make
a mockery of Christ who is God, pretending to become Christians, but denying Christ in
private by both secretly continuing to observe the sabbath and maintaining other Jewish
practices, we decree that they shall not be received to communion or at prayer or into the
church, but rather let them openly be Hebrews according to their own religion; they should

76
not baptize their children or buy, or enter into possession of, a slave. But if one of them
makes his conversion with a sincere faith and heart, and pronounces his confession
wholeheartedly, disclosing their practices and objects in the hope that others may be refuted
and corrected, such a person should be welcomed and baptized along with his children, and
care should be taken that they abandon Hebrew practices. However if they are not of this sort,
they should certainly not be welcomed.

All those childish baubles and bacchic rantings, the false writings composed against the
venerable icons, should be given in at the episcopal building in Constantinople, so that they
can be put away along with other heretical books. If someone is discovered to be hiding such
books, if he is a bishop, priest or deacon, let him be suspended, and if he is a lay person or a
monk, let him be excommunicated.

10

As some clerics, who despise the canonical ordinance, abandon their own dioceses and run
off into other dioceses–something that happens with special frequency in this imperial, God-
guarded city–and there they lodge with rulers, celebrating the liturgy in their chapels, let it
not be permitted for them to be received in any house or church without the approval of their
own bishop and that of the bishop of Constantinople. If they do so and persist therein, they
are to be suspended.

In the case of those who do this with the approval of the above-mentioned prelates, it is not
permitted for them to assume worldly and secular responsibilities, since they are forbidden to
do so by the sacred canons; and if someone is misled into occupying himself with the
responsibility of the so-called high stewards, he is to desist or be suspended. Rather let him
busy himself with the teaching of the children and servants, lecturing them on the divine
scriptures because it is for such activity that he received the priesthood.

11

Since we are obliged to observe all the sacred canons, we ought also to maintain in all its
integrity the one that says that there should be administrators in each church. Therefore if
each metropolitan bishop installs an administrator in his own church, that is well and good;
but if not, the bishop of Constantinople on his own authority has the right to appoint one over
the other’s church, and similarly with metropolitan bishops, if the bishops under them do not
choose administrators to hold these posts in their own churches. The same rule is also to be
observed with respect to monasteries.

12

77
 If it is discovered that a bishop or a monastic superior is transferring episcopal or monastic
farmland to the control of the ruler, or has been conceding it to another person, the
transaction is null and void in accordance with the canon of the holy apostles which
stipulates: “Let the bishop take care of all ecclesiastical affairs, and let him administer them
as if under God’s inspection. It is not permitted him to appropriate any of these things, nor to
make a present of the things of God to his own relatives. Should the latter be poor, let him
care for them as for other poor people, but let him not use them as an excuse for selling off
the church’s possessions.” However, if he pretends that the land is a loss and brings in no
profit at all, let him make a present of the place to clerics or landworkers, but even in these
circumstances it should not be given to the local rulers. If they use evil cunning and the ruler
buys up the land from the landworker or the cleric in question, this sale shall also be null and
void in such circumstances, and the land should be restored to the bishopric or monastery.
And the bishop or monastic superior who acts thus should be expelled, the bishop from the
episcopal house and the monastic superior from the monastery, because they wickedly waste
what they have not gathered.

13

On account of the disaster which came about in the churches due to our sins certain
venerable houses–episcopal buildings as well as monasteries–were seized by certain men and
became public inns. Now if those who hold them choose to restore them, so that they are
established once more as formerly they were, this is good and excellent. However if such is
not the case, should they be inscribed in the list of priests, we order that they be suspended,
and if they are monks or lay persons, that they be excommunicated, seeing that they are
criminals condemned by the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit, and let them be assigned
there where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched, because they oppose the
voice of the Lord declaring, You shall not make my Father’s house a house of trade.

14

It is perfectly clear to everyone that a certain order has been established in the priesthood,
and that it is God’s good pleasure that the appointment to priestly offices should be observed
with care. However we have noticed that some, without the imposition of hands, are adopting
the clerical tonsure while still youngsters, and without having received the imposition of
hands from the bishop they are undertaking to read publicly from the ambo during the church
service, even though they are acting uncanonically. We urge therefore that this be
discontinued, and that the same regulation be observed among monks.

Each monastic superior has permission for the imposition of hands on a reader for his own
monastery, and only for that monastery, provided that the monastic superior has himself
received from the bishop the imposition of hands to rule there, and obviously provided that he
is himself a priest. Similarly it is an ancient custom that chorepiscopi, with the permission of
the bishop, should appoint readers.

78
 15

From now on, no cleric should be appointed to office in two churches. Such a procedure
savours of commerce and sordid profit-making, and is quite foreign to ecclesiastical custom.
We have learned from the Lord’s own voice: No one can serve two masters, because either he
will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.
Therefore, following the advice of the apostle, Each should stay where he has been called,
and remain in one church. In ecclesiastical matters, whatever is done for the sake of sordid
gain constitutes something alien to God. But as far as the needs of this present life are
concerned, there are various gainful occupations; each may use these, as he prefers, to
procure what is needed for the body. As the apostle said: These hands of mine have provided
for my own needs and for the persons accompanying me. These are the regulations for this
God-protected city; for what concerns places in the country, a concession may be granted
because of the lack of population.

16

All indulgence and adornment bestowed on the body is alien to the priestly order.
Therefore all those bishops and clerics who deck themselves out in brilliant and showy
clothes should be called to order, and if they persist let them be punished. The same holds for
those who use perfumes. However, since the root of bitterness has sprouted, there has
appeared in the catholic church the plague of a heresy which delights in the defamation of
Christians. Those who adopt this heresy not only heap insults on representational art, but also
reject all forms of reverence and make a mockery of those who live pious and holy lives, thus
fulfilling in their own regard that saying of scripture, For the sinner piety is an abomination.
So if persons are found who make fun of those who wear simple and respectful clothing, they
should be corrected with punishment. Indeed, from the earliest times all those ordained to the
priesthood have been accustomed to present themselves in public dressed in modest and
respectful clothing, and anyone who adds to his apparel for the sake of decoration and not out
of necessity deserves, as the great Basil remarked, to be accused of “vainglory”. Neither did
anyone dress in variegated clothes made of silk, nor did they add various coloured ornaments
to the fringes of their garments. They had heard the tongue that spoke God’s words declare,
Those who dress in soft clothes are in the houses of kings.

17

Some monks abandon their own monasteries because they desire to be in authority and
disdain obeying others, and then they attempt to found houses of prayer, although they lack
adequate resources. If somebody undertakes to do this, let him be prevented by the local
bishop. If someone possesses adequate resources, however, his plans should be brought to
completion. The same ruling holds for both laity and clerics.

18

79
 Be irreproachable even for those outside, says the divine apostle. Now for women to live in
the houses of bishops or in monasteries is a cause for every sort of scandal. Therefore if
anybody is discovered to be keeping a woman, whether a slave or free, in the bishop’s house
or in a monastery in order to undertake some service, let him be censured, and if he persists
let him be deposed. Should it happen that women are living in the suburban residence and the
bishop or monastic superior wishes to journey there, no woman should be allowed to
undertake any sort of work during the time that the bishop or monastic superior is present;
she should stay on her own in some other area until the bishop has retired, in order to avoid
all possible criticism.

19

The blight of avarice has spread to such an extent among ecclesiastical authorities that
even some so called pious men and women, forgetting the Lord’s commands, have been
tricked into authorizing, for the sake of cash payments, the entry of those presenting
themselves for the priestly order and the monastic life. Thus it happens, as the great Basil
says, “when people begin wrongly, all they do is to be rejected”, for it is not possible to serve
God through mammon. So, if somebody is found out to be doing this, if he is a bishop or a
male monastic superior or one of the priests, let him stop or be deposed, in accordance with
canon 2 of the holy council of Chalcedon. If the person is a female monastic superior, let her
be expelled from the monastery and put under obedience in another monastery, and similarly
for a male monastic superior who has not received priestly ordination.

With regard to gifts given by parents under the concept of dowries for their children, or
with regard to the personally acquired goods that the latter present provided that those
presenting them declare that these are gifts offered to God, we have decreed that these gifts
are to remain in the monastery, whether the person stays or leaves, in accordance with their
explicit undertaking, unless there is a reprehensible cause on the part of the person in charge.

20

We decree that from now on no more double monasteries are to be started because this
becomes a cause of scandal and a stumbling block for ordinary folk. If there are persons who
wish to renounce the world and follow the monastic life along with their relatives, the men
should go off to a male monastery and their wives enter a female monastery, for God is surely
pleased with this.

The double monasteries that have existed up to now should continue to exist according to
the rule of our holy father Basil, and their constitutions should follow his ordinances. Monks
and nuns should not live in one monastic building, because adultery takes advantage of such
cohabitation. No monk should have the licence to speak in private with a nun, nor any nun
with a monk. A monk should not sleep in a female monastery, nor should he eat alone with a
nun. When the necessary nourishment is being carried from the male area for the nuns, the
female superior, accompanied by one of the older nuns, should receive it outside the door.

80
And if it should happen that a monk wishes to pay a visit to one of his female relatives, let
him speak with her in the presence of the female superior, but briefly and rapidly, and let him
leave her quickly.

21

It is not right for a monk or a nun to leave his or her own monastery and transfer to
another. However should this occur, it is obligatory that hospitality be given but such a
person should not be accepted as a member without the agreement of his or her monastic
superior.

22

It is very important to dedicate everything to God and not to become slaves of our own
desires; for whether you eat or drink, the divine apostle says, do all for the glory of God. Now
Christ our God has instructed us in his gospels to eradicate the beginnings of sins. So not only
adultery is rebuked by him, but also the movement of one’s intention towards the
performance of adultery, when he says: He who looks on a woman lustfully has already
committed adultery with her in his heart.

Thus instructed we should purify our intentions: For if all things are lawful, not all things
are expedient, as we learn from the words of the apostle. Now everybody is certainly obliged
to eat in order to live, and in the case of those whose life includes marriage and children and
the conditions proper to layfolk it is not reprehensible that men and women should eat in one
another’s company; though they should at least say grace to thank the giver of their
nourishment, and they should avoid certain theatrical entertainments, diabolical songs, the
strumming of lyres and the dancing fit for harlots, against all such there is the curse of the
prophet which says, Woe on those who drink their wine to the sound of lyre and harp, those
who pay no attention to the deeds of the Lord and have never a thought for the works of his
hands. If ever such people are found among Christians, they should reform, and if they do
not, let the canonical sanctions established by our predecessors be imposed on them.

Those whose mode of life is contemplative and solitary should sit and be silent, because
they have entered into a contract with the Lord that the yoke they carry will be a solitary one.
Indeed, all those who have chosen the life of priests are certainly not free to eat privately in
the company of women, but at the most in the company of certain God-fearing and pious men
and women, in order that such a meal taken in common may draw them to spiritual
betterment. Let the same be done in the case of relatives.

As for another situation, if a monk or even a man in priestly orders happens to be making a
journey and is not carrying with him his indispensable provisions, and then wishes to satisfy
his needs in a public inn or in someone’s house, he is allowed to do so when it is a case of
pressing necessity.

81
Fourth Council of Constantinople :
869-870
Council Fathers - 869-870 A.D.

INTRODUCTION

This council, designated as the eighth ecumenical council by western canonists, is not
found in any canonical collections of the Byzantines; its acts and canons are completely
ignored by them. Modern scholars have shown that it was included in the list of ecumenical
councils only later, that is, after the eleventh century. We have decided to include the council,
for the sake of historical completeness.

Emperor Basil I and the patriarch Ignatius, after being restored to his see of
Constantinople, asked Pope Nicholas I to call a council to decide about the bishops and
priests who had been ordained by Photius. It was held at Constantinople after the arrival of
legates from Pope Hadrian II, who had meanwhile succeeded Nicholas. These legates were
Donatus, Stephen and Marinus and they presided at the council. It began in the cathedral of
Hagia Sophia on 5 October 869. The tenth and last session was held on 28 February 870,
when 27 canons were read out and approved by the council. All who were willing to sign the
Liber satisfactionis, which had been sent by Pope Hadrian II, were admitted to the council.
The account made by Anastasius contains the authentic list of those who signed the acts of
the council. Emperor Basil I and his sons, Constantine and Leo, signed the acts after the
patriarchs and in the same year they promulgated the council’s decisions, after drawing up a
decree for this purpose.

As regards the canonical authority of these deliberations, various facts regarding the
council held in the cathedral of Hagia Sophia in November 879, so that Photius might be
restored to the see of Constantinople, should be remembered. Peter, a Roman cardinal,
presided at this council. It took account of a letter of Pope John VIII, which had been sent to
the emperor and translated into Greek. This reads (chapter 4): “We declare that the synod
held at Rome against the most holy patriarch Photius in the time of the most blessed pope
Hadrian, as well as the holy synod of Constantinople attacking the same most holy Photius
(i.e., in 869-870), are totally condemned and abrogated and must in no way be invoked or
named as synods. Let this not happen”. Some people have thought that this text had been
altered by Photius; but in the so-called “unaltered” text of the letter this passage is replaced
by dots (. . .), and the following passage reads: “For the see of blessed Peter, the key-bearer
of the heavenly kingdom, has the power to dissolve, after suitable appraisal, any bonds
imposed by bishops. This is so because it is agreed that already many patriarchs, for example
Athanasius .. .. after having been condemned by a synod, have been, after formal acquittal by
the apostolic see, promptly reinstated”. Ivo of Chartres explicitly affirms: “The synod of
Constantinople which was held against Photius must not be recognised. John VIII wrote to

82
the patriarch Photius (in 879): We make void that synod which was held against Photius at
Constantinople and we have completely blotted it out for various reasons as well as for the
fact that Pope Hadrian did not sign its acts”. Ivo adds from the instructions that John VIII
gave to his legates for the council in 879: “You will say that, as regards the synods which
were held against Photius under Pope Hadrian at Rome or Constantinople, we annul them and
wholly exclude them from the number of the holy synods”. For these reasons there is no
ground for thinking that the text was altered by Photius.

An authentic copy of the acts of the council of 869-870 was sent to Rome, as of right.
Anastasius, the librarian, ordered a complete copy to be made for himself. Then, when the
legates’ copy was stolen, he translated his own copy into Latin, on Pope Hadrian’s orders,
making a word for word translation. Anastasius also makes it plain that the Greeks adopted
every means to distort the acts, “by abbreviating here and by expanding or changing there”.
He adds: “Whatever is found in the Latin copy of the acts of the eighth synod is completely
free from the alloy of falsehood; however, whatever more is found in the Greek text is
thoroughly infected with poisonous lies”.

The Greek text has been partly preserved from total destruction in the summary of an
anonymous writer who copied out anti-Photian texts. This summary has 14 canons, as
opposed to the 27 of Anastasius, and only contains excerpts, dealing with the most important
points, of these canons. Where comparison is possible, the Latin version of Anastasius hardly
departs from the Greek text. Indeed it is so literal that at times it can only be understood by
comparison with the Greek text, and when the latter is missing we must sometimes rely on
conjecture.

The documents printed below are taken from the following: the “Definition” from the
Roman edition, (Concilia generalia Ecclesiae catholicae [Editio Romana], Rome 4 vols,
1608-1612) 3, 284-287; the canons from Les canons des conciles oecumeniques, ed. P-P.
Jouannou (Pontificia commissione per la redazione del codice di diritto canonico orientale.
Fonti. Fasc. IX: Discipline generale antique [IIe-IXe s.] tome 1 part 1), Grottaferata 1962
289-342.

The English translation is from the Latin text, for the reasons mentioned above. The
material in curly brackets { } has been added by the hypertext editor, as also has some of the
formatting

[Definition of the holy and universal eighth synod]

The holy, great and universal synod, which was assembled by God’s will and the favour of
our divinely approved emperors Basil and Constantine, the holy friends of Christ, in this
royal and divinely protected city and in the most famous church bearing the name of holy and
great Wisdom, declared the following.

83
 The Word, of one nature with the almighty God and Father, is he who established heaven
like a vault and fixed the ends of the earth and the place of all other things. He made it to be
contingent and he rules, preserves and saves it. He says through the voice of the prophet,
Isaiah: Lift up your eyes to heaven, because heaven has been fashioned like smoke, but the
earth shall wear out like a garment; its inhabitants shall perish like them; but my salvation
shall last for ever and my justice shall not fail. He was made like us for our sake and has
established on earth heavenly justice and said, Heaven and earth shall pass away but my
words shall not pass away. He said to all who believed in him: If you continue in my word,
you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the truth and the truth will make you free.

It was our God and Lord of infinite power alone who, just like a farmer of supreme
wisdom and power, uprooted and scattered and rightfully obliterated many others from an
earlier time and from long ago who, given over to lies and in opposition to the truth, were
sowing — to use the gospel image — evil tares in his field, that is, in the church, and were
trying to overwhelm the pure grain of divine justice. He always prepared his manner of
deliverance so as to give warning, he established his justice and revealed it with greater
clarity. But nevertheless, in our time too, the sower of tares is trying to make the field of the
church useless through some utterly depraved and impious people. With that one and the
same providence, he has shown that this field is worthy of compassion and snatched it from
the filth of iniquity and called it back to its ancient purity. For, to destroy injustice and
reinforce divine justice, he has raised up, as an unwavering follower of his commandments, a
person proved to be incorrupt in both his knowledge and his maintenance of the truth, our
most devout and serene emperor, who is a friend of divine justice and an enemy of injustice.
He, by means of the divine help and the overall favour of the church, has gathered together
architects from the ends of the earth into this royal city, which must be built up by God, and
has assembled a universal synod which, while guarding the strong defences of
the gospel sanctions,
the laws of Moses and the prophets together with
the commands of the apostles
and fathers as well as of
the councils,

has revived the established forms of right conduct and proclaimed truth and justice in the
courts of the church.

{Now the customary recapitulation and reassertion of all previous ecumenical councils}

Consequently, all of us bishops who have come to take part in the synod and to strengthen
the true and undefiled faith of Christians and the teaching of orthodox religion, we declare
our belief in one God, in three persons consubstantial, divine and autonomous, as, for
example, we may look at the one nature of light in three suns not unlike each other or in the
same number of dazzling objects. We confess, indeed, God to be one, unique in respect of
substance, but threefold or three if we are speaking of him in respect of persons, and we
declare he has not received from himself that he has been made, nor in any way whatsoever

84
from anyone else; but that he is alone, ever existing without beginning, and eternal, ever the
same and like to himself, and suffering no change or alteration, that he exists as the maker
and source of all beings endowed with intelligence and feeling. For the holy and great synod
of { 1 } Nicaea spoke thus when expounding the creed: Light from light, true God, clearly
declaring the Son to be from the Father who is true God, and the rest as the catholic church
received it. We too, accepting this in the identical meaning, anathematize as of unsound mind
and an enemy of the truth, Arius and all who, with him and following him, speculate with
faulty perceptions on the term “hetero-substantial”, that is otherness of substance and
unlikeness, with reference to the divinely-ruling and blessed Trinity. But no less do we accept
the second, holy and universal synod {2 Constantinople I}, and we anathematize that
adversary of the Spirit or rather adversary of God, Macedonius; for we admit in the
distinction of persons no difference of substance between the Father, the Son and the divine
and autonomous Spirit, as the aforementioned heresiarchs did, nor do we confuse, like the
lunatic Sabellius, the persons in one and the same substance. Moreover, we also confess that
the unique Word of God became incarnate and was made like us for our sake, for it was not
an angel or an envoy but the Lord himself who came and saved us and was made Emmanuel
with us; and he was true God, God of Israel and saviour of all, in accordance with the divine
and prophetic utterances. For this reason we confess that Mary, most holy and without
experience of marriage, who bore him, is properly and truly mother of God, just as the third
universal synod, which first assembled at { 3 } Ephesus, proclaimed. In union with that
council we too anathematize Nestorius, that worshipper of the man and most self-opinionated
individual who possessed a Jewish mentality. We teach that the one and same Christ and
Lord is twofold, that is, perfect God and perfect man, possessing in one person the
differences of each nature but keeping their properties always unchangeable and unconfused,
just as the fourth, holy and universal synod {4 Chalcedon } solemnly taught. In accepting this
synod together with the three councils previously enumerated, just like the quadruplicity of
the holy gospels, we anathematize the insane Eutyches and the mad Dioscorus. In addition,
proclaiming the two natures in the one Christ, according to the still clearer teaching of the
fifth, holy and universal synod { 5 Constantinople II}, we anathematize Severus , Peter and
Zoharas the Syrian, as well as Origen with his useless knowledge, Theodore of Mopsuestia
and Didymus along with Evagrius, who also, although of the same or different opinions, were
ensnared in the same pit of damnation.

Further, we accept the sixth, holy and universal synod {6 Constantinople III}, which shares
the same beliefs and is in harmony with the previously mentioned synods in that it wisely laid
down that in the two natures of the one Christ there are, as a consequence, two principles of
action and the same number of wills. So, we anathematize Theodore who was bishop of
Pharan, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter, the unholy prelates of the church of Constantinople,
and with these, Honorius of Rome, Cyrus of Alexandria as well as Macarius of Antioch and
his disciple Stephen, who followed the false teachings of the unholy heresiarchs Apollinarius,
Eutyches and Severus and proclaimed that the flesh of God, while being animated by a
rational and intellectual soul, was without a principle of action and without a will, they
themselves being impaired in their senses and truly without reason. For if the one and same
Christ and God exists as perfect God and perfect man, it is most certain that none of the

85
natures which belong to him can exist partially without a will or without a principle of action,
but that he carried out the mystery of his stewardship when willing and acting in accordance
with each substance; this is how the chorus of all God’s spokesmen, having knowledge of it
from the apostles down to our own time, have constructed a colourful representation of that
human form, assigning to each part of the one Christ natural properties distinct from each
other, by which the meanings and conceptions of his divine nature and of his human nature
are believed beyond all doubt to remain without confusion.

We also know that the seventh, holy and universal synod, held for the second time at { 7 }
Nicaea, taught correctly when it professed the one and same Christ as both invisible and
visible lord, incomprehensible and comprehensible, unlimited and limited, incapable and
capable of suffering, inexpressible and expressible in writing. In agreement with that synod,
this holy and universal synod publicly anathematizes Anastasius , Constantine and Nicetas ,
that irrational prelature whose name stinks, or, to put it better, that plain corruption; so too
Theodosius of Ephesus, Sisinnius Pastilas and Basil Tricacabus, not forgetting Theodoret,
Antony and John, once prelates of new Rome, the royal city of Christians, but better called
defamers of Christ. They declared by word and deed that, despite what the list of prophets
proclaimed about Christ, he had been incapable of destroying the statues of the idols.
Furthermore, we also anathematize Theodore, who was called Krithinos, whom this great and
holy synod summoned and condemned and loudly dinned an anathema into his ears.
Similarly we anathematize all those who agreed with or supported those who said that the
Word of the divine incarnation came about and existed by fantasy and supposition, indeed
that through the removal of the image of our Christ and saviour there came the simultaneous
removal of the accepted form of the true body which bore God within it. Everything which
cannot be grasped by the imagination is surely to be understood in two ways, either as not
existing or as in fact existing but minimally understandable, inasmuch as being invisible and
hidden.

Therefore, if anyone happens to have taught any of these things about Christ the God and
saviour of us all, he will be clearly proclaimed an enemy of true religion, since the first of
these declares that Emmanuel was not truly made man and the second declares that he was
indeed man but lacked human qualities, laid aside the flesh he assumed and had recourse in
everything to his divine [nature] and to his incomprehensibility; this is alien to all the
divinely inspired scriptures, which also clearly state that he will come once more as judge of
all, and he is to be seen in the same way as he was seen by his disciples and apostles when he
was taken up into heaven.

That theory is full of Manichaean ideas and ungodliness inasmuch as it foolishly declares
that a saying of the divinely inspired David was spoken about Christ, in which it says, He has
set his tabernacle in the sun, since this impiety supposes that the casting off and laying aside
of the Lord’s deified body is meant. But the word of truth confidently says, both concerning
the well-named Manes and all those who share his thought and are authors of the heresy
about the destruction of icons and all other heresiarchs and enemies of religion: They have
not known nor understood, but they walked in darkness. 0 you who abandon the right way

86
and walk in the way of darkness, who rejoice in wrongdoing and exult in evil conversion; O
you whose paths are evil and steps crooked so that they take you far from the right way and
make you foreign to right thinking! Again, those who sowed what was corrupted by the wind
have received destruction as their reward; and again, He that trusts in lies feeds the winds:
and the same person runs after birds that fly away. For he has abandoned the rows of his
vines, he wanders in the furrows of his field; for he wanders through a waterless desert and a
great parched plain, yet gathers no fruit in his hands.

For this reasons [the church] brands all these with an anathema and, besides recognizing
the seven, holy and universal synods already enumerated by us, has gathered together this
eighth universal synod through the grace of our all powerful Christ and God and the piety and
zeal of our most serene and divinely strengthened emperor, to cut down and destroy the
shoots of injustice that have sprung up against those synods, together with the evil stirrings
and influences, in order to bring about peaceful order in the church and stability in the world.
For it is not only the removal of true teaching which knows how to destroy those of evil mind
and to agitate and disturb the church, but also quibbling over the meaning of the divine
commandments equally brings the same destruction on those who are not vigilant, and the
world is filled with storms and disturbances by those who are reckoned as Christians.

{Now the council strikes out on its own}

This is what happened in recent times through the folly, cunning and evil machinations of
the wretched Photius. He entered the sheepfold not through the door but through a window,
and, like a thief or a robber, a destroyer of souls, as the Lord’s words indicate, has tried, on
every occasion and by every means, to steal, slaughter and destroy the right-thinking sheep of
Christ and, by engineering all manner of persecution, he has not ceased from contriving
numerous arrests and imprisonments, confiscations of property, protracted periods of exile
and, in addition to these, accusations, charges, false testimonies and forgeries against all who
worked for true religion and fought for the truth. For he, like another Severus or Dioscorus,
engineered the expulsion of the most just, lawful and canonically appointed high priest of the
church of Constantinople, namely the most holy patriarch Ignatius, and like an adulterous
robber, breaking into his see and repeatedly submitting him to a thousand charges involving
dethronement and as many anathemas, he roused continuous turmoil and storms for all the
churches of Christ our saviour, in a multiplicity of ways.

However, the salt of the earth has not lost its savour, nor has the eye of the church become
completely darkened, nor has the light of true religion been extinguished by the spirits of
wickedness; nor has the fire of divine charity lost its destroying and burning power over
sinful and worthless material, nor has the word of the Lord, which is sharper than a two-
edged sword and a discerner of thoughts, been found ineffectual, nor did the foundation of
solid stone collapse when submerged by swollen waters and floods of rivers and storms, but
the precious cornerstone, which was laid down in Sion, that is, in the church, upon which the
foundation stone of the apostles and prophets was laid for the building up of the church, in
our time has sent out from every one of the church’s established ranks, even into the ruling

87
city, the new Rome, many other stones rolling over the land, as the prophet says, to destroy
and lay waste the intrigues of those who desired and attempted to destroy truth and divine
justice.

But with greater force and particular significance, Nicholas, the most blessed and aptly-
named pope of old Rome, was sent from above as another cornerstone for the church,
preserving as far as possible the figurative likeness, as from an exalted and pre-eminent place,
to confront the carefully organised opposition of Photius. By the missiles of his letters and
speeches, he struck down the powerful leading supporters of Photius and, reflecting a story of
the old Testament, after the manner of the zealot Phinehas, he pierced Photius with the lance
of truth as if he were another Midianite defiling the assembly of Israel; and he completely
destroyed him on his not [added in Hrd [1]] agreeing to accept the remedies of a healing
discipline aimed at treating the scars and healing the adulterous wound, and just as another
Peter dealt with Ananias and Sapphira, who stole what belonged to God, by an anathema
included as it were in his priestly dignity, he committed him to death.

Following these directives and decrees, the most religious friend of Christ, our emperor,
whom the heavenly Emperor and Lord of majesty has raised up for the salvation of the world,
has consigned Photius to a suitable place and recalled the most holy patriarch Ignatius to his
rightful seat. Furthermore, for the perfect discernment and definition of what is agreed to be
good and is beneficial, he has gathered together vicars from all the patriarchal seats and the
whole college of bishops which is under his authority. Those of us who came together have
celebrated this great and universal synod and, with much examination, testing and discussion,
with due care and consistency, we have cut out with the sword of the spirit the roots of
scandals and weeds along with their shoots, as we establish the truly innocent and most holy
patriarch Ignatius in the controlling seat, while we condemn Photius, the interloper and illegal
occupier with all his supporters and promoters of evil. For almighty God says somewhere by
the mouth of a prophet: Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of my
house. I will do no more to love them. Ephraim is stricken, their root is dried up, they shall
bear no fruit; and again: Canaan, there is a deceitful balance in his hand, he has loved
oppression. And Ephraim said: But yet I am become rich, I have found for myself a place of
repose: all his labours shall not find me, despite the iniquities that I have committed; and
again: And the house of Jacob shall possess their own possessions. The house of Jacob shall
be afire and the house of Joseph aflame, and the house of Esau stubble; they shall burn them
and consume them, and there shall be no survivor to the house of Esau, for the Lord has
spoken.

For the wretched Photius was truly like the person who did not make God his refuge; but
trusted in the abundance of his cunning and sought refuge in the vanity of his iniquities,
following the example of Ephraim of old, in turning his back on the divine mercy; the word
of the prophet mocks and derides him, saying: Ephraim is become as bread baked under
ashes, that is not turned. Strangers have devoured his strength and he knew it not, grey hairs
also are spread upon him, and he is ignorant of it. He shall be humbled by the insult of Israel
before his face; and in all this he has not returned to the Lord, his God. Ephraim is become as

88
a dove, that called upon the table of Egypt and went to the Assyrians. When they shall go, I
will spread my net upon them as upon the birds of the air; I will bring them down, I will
strike them to make their tribulation heard. For Photius was lifted up to the heights of
arrogance in attacking the most blessed pope of old Rome, Nicholas, and he vomited out the
poison of his evil. He gathered together false vicars from three supposedly eastern sees, set
up what was thought to be a synodical council, and, making lists of the names of accusers and
witnesses, fashioning profiles and speeches which seemed to be suited to each person who
plays a part in a synodical investigation, and making up, writing down and organizing forged
records as accounts of those proceedings, he had the audacity to anathematize the
aforementioned most blessed pope Nicholas and all those in communion with him. Photius
did this in such a way that as a result all the existing bishops and priests, that is, the other
patriarchal sees and all the clerics within them, were included in the same anathema, for all
were most certainly in communion with the leading bishop, and amongst them himself and
his followers. The word of the prophet condemns and refutes him when it says: They have
multiplied their transgressions, they have enacted extraneous laws and invoked their
confession; and again: They conceived in their heart lying words and turned justice back, and
righteousness has stood afar off from them; for truth has been destroyed in their streets and
they have been unable to follow the right path. Truth has disappeared and changed their mind
so that it cannot understand. And: He who turns from evil is attacked, and the Lord saw and it
displeased him because there was no judgment, and again: Thus says the Lord: For three
transgressions of Judah and for four, I will grant them no reprieve; because they have rejected
the law of the Lord and have not kept his statutes. Therefore, as regards the man who has
acted in this way and has disturbed and shaken the whole holy, catholic and apostolic church
with so many brazen attacks of this kind, has utterly refused to be converted and repent, and
has refused to submit to the decrees and judgment of the holy patriarchal sees, just as long
ago the most blessed pope Nicholas and then his successor, the most holy pope Hadrian,
anathematized him, so too this holy and universal synod has reproved him and put him
under an ever severer anathema while addressing to him, in the person of all God’s people,
the words of the prophet Isaiah: Just as a garment soiled in blood will not be clean, so you
will not be clean, for you have defiled the church of Christ and have been a source of scandal
and destruction to the people of God on many counts and in many ways. We command that
those who do not share this view, but give Photius their willing support, if they are bishops or
clerics, must be deposed for ever; we anathematize monks or lay people, until such time as
they are converted from their false ways and wickedness.

CANONS

If we wish to proceed without offence along the true and royal road of divine justice, we must
keep the declarations and teachings of the holy fathers as if they were so many lamps which
are always alight and illuminating our steps which are directed towards God. Therefore,
considering and esteeming these as a second word of God, in accordance with the great and

89
most wise Denis, let us sing most willingly along with the divinely inspired David, The
commandment of the Lord is bright, enlightening the eyes, and, Your word is a lamp to my
feet and a light to my paths; and with the author of Proverbs we say, Your commandment is a
lamp and your law a light, and like Isaiah we cry to the lord God with loud voice, because
your commands are a light for the earth. For the exhortations and warnings of the divine
canons are rightly likened to light inasmuch as the better is distinguished from the worse and
what is advantageous and useful is distinguished from what is not helpful but harmful.

Therefore we declare that we are preserving and maintaining the canons which have been
entrusted to the holy, catholic and apostolic church by the holy and renowned apostles, and
by universal as well as local councils of orthodox [bishops], and even by any inspired father
or teacher of the church. Consequently, we rule our own life and conduct by these canons and
we decree that all those who have the rank of priests and all those who are described by the
name of Christian are, by ecclesiastical law, included under the penalties and condemnations
as well as, on the other hand, the absolutions and acquittals which have been imposed and
defined by them. For Paul, the great apostle, openly urges us to preserve the traditions which
we have received, either by word or by letter, of the saints who were famous in times past.

Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as persons
who will have to give account, commands Paul, the great apostle. So, having both the most
blessed pope Nicholas as the instrument of the holy Spirit and his successor, the most holy
pope Hadrian, we declare and order that everything which has been expounded and
promulgated by them in a synod at various times, both for the defence and well-being of the
church of Constantinople and of its chief priest, namely Ignatius, its most holy patriarch, as
well as for the expulsion and condemnation of Photius, the upstart and usurper, should be
maintained and observed together with the canons there set forth, unchanged and unaltered,
and no bishop, priest or deacon or anyone from the ranks of the clergy should dare to
overturn or reject any of these things.

Whoever, then, shall be found, after these directives of ours, despising any of the articles or
decrees which have been promulgated by these popes, must be stripped of his dignity and
rank, if he is a priest or cleric; a monk or lay person, of whatever dignity, must be
excommunicated until he repents and promises to observe all the decrees in question.

We decree that the sacred image of our lord Jesus Christ, the redeemer and saviour of all
people, should be venerated with honour equal to that given to the book of the holy gospels.
For, just as through the written words which are contained in the book, we all shall obtain
salvation, so through the influence that colours in painting exercise on the imagination, all,
both wise and simple, obtain benefit from what is before them; for as speech teaches and
portrays through syllables, so too does painting by means of colours. It is only right then, in

90
accordance with true reason and very ancient tradition, that icons should be honoured and
venerated in a derivative way because of the honour which is given to their archetypes, and it
should be equal to that given to the sacred book of the holy gospels and the representation of
the precious cross.

If anyone then does not venerate the icon of Christ, the saviour, let him not see his face when
he comes in his father’s glory to be glorified and to glorify his saints’, but let him be cut off
from his communion and splendour; similarly the image of Mary, his immaculate mother and
mother of God, we also paint the icons of the holy angels just as divine scripture depicts them
in words; we also honour and venerate those of the highly renowned apostles, prophets,
martyrs and holy men as well as those of all the saints. Let those who are not so disposed be
anathema from the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit.

In tearing up by the roots the love of power, as being an evil root nourishing the scandals
which have arisen in the church, we condemn, with a just decree, him who boldly, cunningly
and unlawfully, like a dangerous wolf, leapt into the sheepfold of Christ; we are speaking
about Photius, who has filled the whole world with a thousand upheavals and disturbances.
We declare that he never was nor is now a bishop, nor must those, who were consecrated or
given advancement by him to any grade of the priesthood, remain in that state to which they
were promoted. Moreover, we debar from this kind of preferment those who received from
Photius the customary rescripts for promotion to special office.

As for the churches which Photius and those who were ordained by him are thought to have
consecrated and the altars which they are thought to have renovated after they had been torn
down, we decree that they are to be consecrated, anointed and renovated again. In sum,
everything that was done in his person and by him, for the establishing or penalizing of the
sacerdotal state, has been abrogated. For the God of the whole universe says through his
prophet: Because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me and,
You have forgotten the laws of your God, I also will forget your children. The more they
increased, the more they sinned against me; I will change their glory into shame. They feed
on the sin of my people; they bloat their souls with their iniquities. And again he says:
Because Ephraim has multiplied altars for sinning, they have become to him altars for sins; 1
will write copiously about them.

Since we desire to ensure, in Christ, that the stability of the canons should always remain firm
in the churches, we renew and confirm the limits and conditions which were formerly
decreed by the holy apostles and our holy fathers and which made it a law in the church that
nobody, who is a neophyte in the faith or priestly office, should be made a bishop, lest he be
puffed up and fall into the judgment and snare of the devil, as the Apostle says. Therefore, in
accordance with the previous canons, we declare that nobody of senatorial rank or a secular

91
way of life, who has recently been admitted to the tonsure with the intention or expectation of
the honour of becoming a bishop or patriarch, and who has been made a cleric or monk,
should rise to such a level, even if he is shown to have completed a considerable time in each
stage of the divine priesthood. For it is clear that the tonsure was not received for religious
reasons, love of God or hope of progressing along the path of the virtues, but for love of glory
and honour. We exclude such people still more rigorously if they are pushed forward by
imperial backing.

However, if someone gives no suspicion of seeking the worldly benefits just mentioned, but,
prompted by the actual good of a humility which is centered on Christ, renounces the world
and becomes a cleric or monk and, while passing through every ecclesiastical grade, is found
without reproach and of good character during the periods of time currently established, so
that he completes one year in the order of lector, two in that of subdeacon, three as deacon
and four as priest, this holy and universal synod has decreed that such a one may be chosen
and admitted. As for those who have remained religiously in the order of cleric or monk and
have been judged worthy of the dignity and honour of the episcopacy, we reduce the
aforesaid period of time to that which the superiors of these bishops approved at the time. If,
however, anyone has been advanced to this supreme honour contrary to this directive of ours,
he must be condemned and completely excluded from all priestly functions, because he has
been elevated contrary to the sacred canons.

It appears that Photius, after the sentences and condemnations most justly pronounced against
him by the most holy pope Nicholas for his criminal usurpation of the church of
Constantinople, in addition to his other evil deeds, found some men of wicked and
sycophantic character from the squares and streets of the city and proposed and designated
them as vicars of the three most holy patriarchal sees in the east. He formed with these a
church of evil-doers and a fraudulent council and set in motion accusations and charges
entailing deposition against the most blessed pope Nicholas and repeatedly, impudently and
boldly issued anathemas against him and all those in communion with him. The records of all
these things have been seen by us, records which were cobbled together by him with evil
intent and lying words, and all of which have been burnt during this very synod.

Therefore, to safeguard church order, we anathematize first and foremost the above-
mentioned Photius for the reason given; next everyone who henceforth acts deceitfully and
fraudulently and falsifies the word of truth and goes through the motions of having false
vicars or composes books full of deceptions and explains them in favour of his own designs.
With equal vigour Martin, the most holy pope of Rome, a valiant contender for the true faith,
rejected behaviour of this kind by a synodal decree.

92
Moses, the divine spokesman, clearly declares in his law that what is right should also be
rightly executed, since a good act is not good unless it is carried out in accordance with
reason. So it is indeed good and very advantageous to paint holy and venerable images as
also to teach others the disciplines of divine and human wisdom. But it is not good nor at all
profitable for any of these things to be done by those who are unworthy.

For this reason we declare and proclaim that those declared anathema by this holy and
universal synod may not, on any account, work on sacred images in holy places of worship
nor teach anywhere at all, until they are converted from their error and wickedness. Whoever,
therefore, after this directive of ours, admits them in any way to paint sacred images in
churches, or to teach, must be removed from office if he is a cleric; if he is a lay person, he
must be excommunicated and debarred from taking part in the divine mysteries.

The great apostle Paul says somewhere: All things are lawful for me, but not all things are
helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial. Therefore, we ought to
do everything for the advantage and perfection of the holy church of God and nothing at all to
promote controversy and vainglory. Since a report has come to our ears that not only heretics
and those who have wrongly obtained the patriarchate of Constantinople, but also the
orthodox and legitimate patriarchs, demand and extract from the order of priests guarantees,
written in their own hands, which are designed for the security, benefit and, as it were,
permanence of the above persons, it has therefore seemed good to this holy and universal
synod that nobody at all should do this from now on, with the exception of what is demanded
at the time of episcopal consecrations, according to rule and custom, in order to witness to the
purity of our faith; every other way of doing it is completely inappropriate and has no part in
the building up of the church. So whoever dares to nullify this directive of ours, either by
asking for such a document or by providing it to those who ask, shall lose his own office.

From the very beginning the wretched Photius brought about in the church of Constantinople
an abundance of all kinds of wickedness. We have learnt that even before his tyrannical
period in office he used to give documents, signed by his own hand, to his followers who
were learning the wisdom that has been made foolish by God, even though this system was
clearly a new invention and thoroughly alien to our holy fathers and doctors of the church.

Since therefore they direct us to loose every bond of wickedness and to make void enforced
contracts, the holy and universal synod has declared that nobody, from now on, should hold
or keep such a contract, but all, without hindrance, hesitation or fear, may both teach and
study if they are competent for either task, with the exception of those who are found to be
enslaved to error or heretical beliefs since we strictly forbid such persons to teach or to
pursue studies. If anyone shall be found rejecting and transgressing against this directive, he
shall lose his rank if he is a cleric; if a lay person, he shall be excommunicated as one who

93
does not believe the Lord’s word which says, Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in
heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven .

10

As divine scripture clearly proclaims, Do not find fault before you investigate, and
understand first and then find fault, and does our law judge a person without first giving him
a hearing and learning what he does?. Consequently this holy and universal synod justly and
fittingly declares and lays down that no lay person or monk or cleric should separate himself
from communion with his own patriarch before a careful enquiry and judgment in synod,
even if he alleges that he knows of some crime perpetrated by his patriarch, and he must not
refuse to include his patriarch’s name during the divine mysteries or offices.

In the same way we command that bishops and priests who are in distant dioceses and
regions should behave similarly towards their own metropolitans, and metropolitans should
do the same with regard to their own patriarchs. If anyone shall be found defying this holy
synod, he is to be debarred from all priestly functions and status if he is a bishop or cleric; if a
monk or lay person, he must be excluded from all communion and meetings of the church
until he is converted by repentance and reconciled.

11

Though the old and new Testament teach that a man or woman has one rational and
intellectual soul, and all the fathers and doctors of the church, who are spokesmen of God,
express the same opinion, some have descended to such a depth of irreligion, through paying
attention to the speculations of evil people, that they shamelessly teach as a dogma that a
human being has two souls, and keep trying to prove their heresy by irrational means using a
wisdom that has been made foolishness.

Therefore this holy and universal synod is hastening to uproot this wicked theory now
growing like some loathsome form of weed. Carrying in its hand the winnowing fork of truth,
with the intention of consigning all the chaff to inextinguishable fire, and making clean the
threshing floor of Christ, in ringing tones it declares anathema the inventors and perpetrators
of such impiety and all those holding similar views; it also declares and promulgates that
nobody at all should hold or preserve in any way the written teaching of the authors of this
impiety. If however anyone presumes to act in a way contrary to this holy and great synod, let
him be anathema and an outcast from the faith and way of life of Christians.

12

The apostolic and conciliar canons clearly forbid the nomination and consecration of bishops
which have come about as a result of the power and intrigues of the civil authorities.
Therefore we declare and proclaim, in full agreement with them, that if any bishop has
received his consecration through the manipulation and constraint of such persons, he should

94
be deposed absolutely as one who has desired and consented to have the gift of God not from
the will of God and ecclesiastical law and decree, but from human beings and through their
machinations as a result of the prompting of carnal desire.

13

The divine word says, The worker is worthy of his pay For this reason we too decree and
proclaim that the clerics of the great church [of Constantinople], who have served in the
lower orders, may rise to the higher grades and, if they have shown themselves worthy, may
deservedly enjoy higher dignities, since some of those who now enjoy them either will be
called through promotion to more important duties or will vacate them by dying. But those
who do not belong to this particular clergy and yet insinuate themselves into it, must not
receive the dignities and honours due to those who have laboured in it a long time, for in that
case the clerics of the church [of Constantinople] would be found to have no promotion.

Those who manage the houses or estates of leading persons must by no means have the
possibility of being admitted or inducted into the clergy of the great church [of
Constantinople]: No soldier on service for God gets entangled in civilian pursuits. If indeed
anyone, contrary to the directive we have now issued, is promoted to any dignity whatsoever
in this great church, he must be excluded from all ecclesiastical dignity as one who has been
promoted contrary to the decision of the great synod.

14

We declare that those who are called by divine grace to the office of bishop, since they bear
the image and likeness of the holy hierarchies in heaven, that is of the angels, in accordance
with what is clearly an hierarchical dignity and function, should be held as worthy of all
honour on the part of everyone, rulers and ruled alike.

We also declare that they must not go to meet a general or any other high official a long way
from their churches, nor should they dismount from their horses or mules a long way off or
bow down in fear and trembling and prostrate themselves; nor should they go to table for
dinner with secular dignitaries and show the same honours as they do to generals, but
according to what is in keeping with their own spiritual dignity and honour, they should
render to everyone his due: Tribute to whom tribute is due, honour to whom honour is due.
They must show that the confessors of the emperors, who are friends of Christ, and those who
have the same dignity, deserve great respect from the leading persons of those emperors.
Thus the bishop will have the courage to reprimand generals and other leading officials and
all other secular authorities as often as he finds them doing something unjust or unreasonable,
and in this way to correct them and make them better.

But if some bishop, after the holy directive of this council, shall ignore the honour duly and
canonically bestowed on him, and permits something to happen according to the old, debased
and disordered custom which is contrary to what has now been declared, he must be

95
suspended for a year and the official involved is to be considered unworthy to take part in the
mysteries or the means of grace for two years.

15

This holy and universal synod, in renewing the canons of the apostles and fathers, has
decreed that no bishop may sell or in any way dispose of precious objects or consecrated
vessels except for the reason laid down long ago by the ancient canons, that is to say, objects
received for the redemption of captives. They must not hand over endowments of churches
by emphyteutic leases nor put on sale other agricultural properties, thereby damaging
ecclesiastical revenues. We decree that such revenues are for church purposes, the feeding of
the poor and the assistance of pilgrims. However, bishops have full powers to improve and
enlarge, as opportunity offers, the ecclesiastical properties which produce these revenues.
Moreover, they have the right to apportion or bestow their own property on whomsoever they
wish and choose, in accordance with their own powers and rights of ownership.

Now that this decree has been made, whoever appears to have acted in a way contrary to this
holy and universal synod, must be deposed on the grounds of violating divine law and
precepts. Any sale which was made by the bishop, either in writing or otherwise, must be
made entirely void, as well as any emphyteutic lease or any other act disposing of precious
objects or endowments. Whoever buys or acquires any of the aforementioned precious
objects or endowments and does not restore to the church what belongs to it and does not
hand over for burning the bills of sale or leases, is anathemauntil he does what has been
determined by this holy and universal synod.

If a bishop is found guilty of having built a monastery with the revenues of a church, he must
hand over the monastery to the same church. But if he built it from his own money or other
sources, he may have it for his whole life under his own jurisdiction and direction; he may
also bequeath it after his death to whomsoever he wishes, but it may not be used as a secular
dwelling.

16

A matter which merits great sorrow, even many tears, has come to our ears from many of the
faithful. They say that under the previous emperor some laymen of the senatorial order were
seen to plait their hair and arrange it on their heads, and to adopt a kind of priestly dignity in
accordance with their different ranks at the emperor’s court. They did this by wearing various
ornaments and articles of clothing which are proper to priests and, as it was thought, made
themselves out to be bishops by wearing a pallium over their shoulders and every other piece
of episcopal dress. They also adopted as their patriarch the one who took the leading role in
these buffooneries. They insulted and made a mockery of a variety of holy things, such as
elections, promotions and consecrations of bishops, or by bringing up subtle but false
accusations against bishops, and condemning and deposing them, switching in turn from
distress to collusion as prosecutors and defendants.

96
Such a way of behaving has never been heard of since time began, even among the pagans. It
shows that those we have now brought to light are in a worse and more wretched state than
the pagan nations. The sacred and universal synod, therefore, has declared and promulgated
that these attempts to do evil must be condemned as crimes, and no member of the faithful
who bears the name of Christian should henceforth attempt to do or tolerate such a thing, or
to protect by silence anyone who has committed such an impious act. If any emperor or any
powerful or influential person should attempt to mock holy things in such a way, or with evil
intent to carry out or permit such a great wrong to be done against the divine priesthood, he
must first be condemned by the patriarch of the time, acting with his fellow bishops, and be
excommunicated and declared unworthy to share in the divine mysteries, and then he must
accept certain other corrective practices and penances which are judged appropriate. Unless
he repents quickly, he must be declared anathema by this holy and universal synod as one
who has dishonoured the mystery of the pure and spotless faith.

However, if the patriarch of Constantinople and his suffragan bishops come to know of any
others who have committed crimes of this kind and neglect to act against them with the
necessary zeal, they must be deposed and debarred from the dignity of their priesthood.
Those who in any way have shown, or shall show in future, such impious conduct and have
not confessed it in any way and received the appropriate penance, are declared
excommunicate by this synod for three years; during the first year they must remain outside
the church as public penitents, during the second year they may stand inside the church
among the. ranks of the catechumens, during the third year they may join the faithful and thus
become worthy of the sanctifying effects of the holy mysteries.

17

The first, holy and universal synod of Nicaea orders that the ancient custom should be
preserved throughout Egypt and the provinces subject to her, so that the bishop of Alexandria
has them all under his authority; it declares, “Because such a custom has prevailed in the city
of Rome”. Therefore this great and holy synod decrees that in old and new Rome and the sees
of Antioch and Jerusalem the ancient custom must be preserved in all things, so that their
prelates should have authority over all the metropolitans whom they promote or confirm in
the episcopal dignity, either through the imposition of hands or the bestowal of the pallium;
that is to say, the authority to summon them, in case of necessity, to a meeting in synod or
even to reprimand and correct them, when a report about some wrongdoing leads to an
accusation.

But since some metropolitans give as an excuse for not responding to the summons of their
apostolic prelate that they are detained by their temporal rulers, it has been decided that such
an excuse will be utterly invalid. For since a ruler frequently holds meetings for his own
purposes, it is intolerable that he should prevent leading prelates from going to synods for
ecclesiastical business or hold some back from their meetings. We have learnt, however, that

97
such an obstacle and alleged refusal of permission can come about in various ways at the
suggestion of the metropolitan.

Metropolitans have had the custom of holding synods twice a year and therefore, they say,
they cannot possibly come to the chief one, that of the patriarch. But this holy and universal
synod, without forbidding the meetings held by the metropolitans, is conscious that the
synods summoned by the patriarchal see are more necessary and profitable than the
metropolitan ones, and so demands that they take place. A metropolitan synod affects the
good order of only one province, a patriarchal synod often affects the good order of a whole
civil diocese, and in this way the common good is provided for. So it is fitting that the
common good take priority over a particular one, especially when the summons to meet has
been issued by those of greater authority. The fact is that certain metropolitans seem to regard
with contempt the ancient custom and canonical tradition, by their not meeting together for
the common good. Therefore the laws of the church demand, with severe penalties and
leaving no loop-hole, that they comply with the summons of their patriarchs whether they are
summoned as a body or individually.

We refuse to listen to the offensive claim made by some ignorant people that a synod cannot
be held in the absence of the civil authorities. The reason for this is that the sacred canons
have never prescribed the presence of secular rulers at synods but only the presence of
bishops. Hence we find that they have not been present at synods but only at universal
councils. Furthermore, it is not right that secular rulers should be observers of matters that
sometimes come before the priests of God.

Therefore, if any metropolitan ignores his patriarch and disobeys his summons, whether
addressed to him alone or to several or to all, unless prevented by a genuine illness or a pagan
invasion, and for two whole months after notice of the summons makes no attempt to visit his
patriarch, or if he hides in some way or pretends he has no knowledge of the patriarch’s
summons, he must be excommunicated. If he shows the same stubbornness and disobedience
for a year, he must be unconditionally deposed and suspended from all sacerdotal functions
and excluded from the dignity and honour that belong to metropolitans. If any metropolitan
disobeys even this directive, let him be anathema.

18

This holy and great synod has decided that the goods or privileges which belong to the
churches of God as a result of long enduring custom and have been granted, whether in
writing or not, by emperors of revered memory or by other religious people and possessed by
the churches for thirty years, must in no way be removed by force on the part of any secular
person, or taken away by him on any pretext whatsoever, from the jurisdiction of the prelate
who has them. Whatever is known to have been possessed by the churches for thirty years
must remain subject to the control and use of the prelate of the church. Any secular person
who acts in a way contrary to this present decree shall be ad judged as one who commits

98
sacrilege and, until he reforms himself and restores or gives back the privileges and goods
belonging to the church, let him be anathema.

19

Paul, the great apostle, condemns greed as another form of idolatry and wants all who unite
under the name of Christian to abstain from every form of shameful love of gain. It is all the
more wrong, therefore, for those who have the ministry of the priesthood to burden their
fellow-bishops and suffragans in any way whatsoever.

For this reason this holy and universal synod has decreed that no archbishop or metropolitan
should leave his own church and visit other churches under the pretext of an official
visitation, nor abuse his authority over other churches and consume the revenues which they
have at their disposal and for feeding the poor, and thus, by a form of greed, be a burden to
the consciences of our brothers and fellow ministers. An exception is made in the case of
hospitality, which may sometimes arise on account of necessary travel. But even then he must
accept, with reverence and fear of God, nothing else than what is found prepared from that
which is currently at hand. He should quickly continue the journey he has undertaken without
asking or demanding any at all of the things which belong to that church or the suffragan
bishop. For if the sacred canons decree that every bishop should be sparing in his use of what
belongs to his own church, and should no way spend or consume the ecclesiastical revenues
in an unfitting or unreasonable way for his own advantage, what kind of impiety do you think
he will be found guilty of if he has no scruples about going around and burdening the
churches entrusted to other bishops and thereby incurring the charge of sacrilege ?

Whoever attempts to do such a thing, after this directive of ours, shall incur from the
patriarch of the time the punishment commensurate with his unjust and greedy behaviour, and
shall be deposed and excommunicated as the sacrilegious person he is or, to put it otherwise,
as an idolater, according to the teaching of the great Apostle.

20

It has come to the ears of this holy synod that in certain places some, on their own authority
and without the agreement of those who are entrusted with such decisions, callously and
mercilessly expel people who have received some of their lands by emphyteusis, on the
pretext that the contract about the agreed rent has been broken.

This must not be allowed to happen unless the person who made the emphyteutic contract
first listens to the objections through the mediation of some suitable and trustworthy persons.
Then, if the leaseholder has not paid for three years the rent due, he may be expelled from his
lands. But it is necessary, after the rent has been unpaid for three years, to go to the
authorities of the city or region and bring before them a charge against the person who
obtained the emphyteutic lease, and to show how he has defaulted. Only then, after the
decision and judgment of the officials, may the church take back its property. Nobody may

99
effect the confiscation of the aforesaid lands on his own initiative and authority, since this
would be a sign of the worst form of profiteering and greed.

So, if any bishop or metropolitan, contrary to this directive of ours, confiscates any property
from anyone, thinking he is protecting his own church, let him be suspended by his patriarch
for a time, having first restored what he took away. If he persists in his disobedience to the
decision of this holy universal synod, he must be completely removed from office.

21

We believe that the saying of the Lord that Christ addressed to his holy apostles and
disciples, Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever despises you despises me, was
also addressed to all who were likewise made supreme pontiffs and chief pastors in
succession to them in the catholic church. Therefore we declare that no secular powers should
treat with disrespect any of those who hold the office of patriarch or seek to move them from
their high positions, but rather they should esteem them as worthy of all honour and
reverence. This applies in the first place to the most holy pope of old Rome, secondly to the
patriarch of Constantinople, and then to the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem.
Furthermore, nobody else should compose or edit writings or tracts against the most holy
pope of old Rome, on the pretext of making incriminating charges, as Photius did recently
and Dioscorus a long time ago. Whoever shows such great arrogance and audacity, after the
manner of Photius and Dioscorus, and makes false accusations in writing or speech against
the see of Peter, the chief of the apostles, let him receive a punishment equal to theirs.

If, then, any ruler or secular authority tries to expel the aforesaid pope of the apostolic see, or
any of the other patriarchs, let him be anathema. Furthermore, if a universal synod is held and
any question or controversy arises about the holy church of Rome, it should make inquiries
with proper reverence and respect about the question raised and should find a profitable
solution; it must on no account pronounce sentence rashly against the supreme pontiffs of old
Rome.

22

This holy and universal synod declares and decrees, in agreement with earlier councils, that
the promotion and consecration of bishops should be done by means of an election and
decision of the college of bishops. So it promulgates as law that no lay authority or ruler may
intervene in the election or promotion of a patriarch, a metropolitan or any bishop, lest there
be any irregularity leading to improper confusion or quarrelling, especially since it is wrong
for any ruler or other lay person to have any influence in such matters. Rather he should be
silent and mind his own business until the election of the future bishop has been completed
with due process by the ecclesiastical assembly. But if any lay person is invited by the church
to join in the discussion and to help with the election, he is permitted to accept the invitation
with respect, if he so wishes. For in this way he may be able to promote a worthy pastor in a
regular manner, to the benefit of his church.

100
If any secular authority or ruler, or a lay person of any other status, attempts to act against the
common, agreed and canonical method of election in the church, let him be anathema– this is
to last until he obeys and agrees to what the church shows it wants concerning the election
and appointment of its leader.

23

We have also learnt that some bishops, at the request of certain people, have unreasonably
made a gift of properties belonging to other churches. Thus they usurp the authority of other
bishops, so far as they can. This conduct will clearly bring on them the curse of the prophet
who says, Woe to those who add house to house and field to field in order to defraud their
neighbour, and it has made them guilty of sacrilege. For this reason, this great and universal
synod has decided that no brother of ours in the episcopate or anyone else may transact such
a wicked property deal, nor, if asked by someone, dispose of any property belonging to other
churches, nor install priests or any other clerics in churches that are not under his jurisdiction,
without the permission of the bishop responsible for the church in question. Furthermore, no
priests or deacons, who are consecrated for holy functions, should perform, of their own
accord and decision, any sacred functions in churches to which they have not been appointed
from the beginning. This behaviour is unlawful and utterly alien to the canonical regulations.

Whoever, after this declaration of ours, shall be seen to do any of these things which have
now been forbidden, must be excommunicated for a period of time, and the contractual
arrangements, whether written or not, must be completely dissolved and abrogated because
they were made in contravention of the canons. Likewise, the priest or deacon is to be
suspended until he withdraws from the church to which he does not belong. But if he ignores
the suspension, he must be got rid of completely and dispossessed of every sacred office.

24

Divine scripture says, Cursed is everyone who does the work of the Lord with slackness Yet
some metropolitans have fallen into the depths of negligence and sloth. They summon the
bishops subject to their jurisdiction and commit to them the divine offices of their own
church as well as litanies and all the sacred ministries which are personal to themselves. The
consequence is that they celebrate through the agency of these bishops everything they
should readily do themselves. In this way they make those who have merited the dignity of
bishop seem like clerics in their service.

These metropolitans, contrary to church law, give themselves to secular business and
administration, failing to persevere in prayers and petitions for their own sins and the
ignorance of their people. Some excuse this behaviour even though it is utterly and
completely contrary to canonical regulations. What is still more serious, it is said that the
bishops are told to complete the above ministries at allotted times each month at their own
expense. This is totally alien to all apostolic sanction. All this makes such people worthy of

101
the most severe condemnation possible, for they are shown by their actions to be infected by
a form of satanic pride and arrogance.

Any metropolitan who, after this directive of the holy and universal synod, is consumed by a
similar pride, arrogance or contempt and does not carry out with fear, promptitude and a good
conscience the necessary ministries in his own city, but seeks to carry them out through his
suffragan bishops, must be punished by his patriarch and be either reformed or deposed.

25

The holy synod has duly decided that the bishops, priests, deacons and subdeacons of the
great church [of Constantinople], who received their consecration from Methodius and
Ignatius, the most holy patriarchs, and became hard of heart like the arrogant and unfeeling
heart of Pharaoh, and even now are in complete disagreement with this holy and universal
synod and, while rejecting harmony with us in the word of truth, have wholeheartedly
supported the cause of the usurper Photius, must be deposed and suspended from all
sacerdotal functions, just as the most blessed pope Nicholas decreed not long ago. On no
account are such men to be readmitted into the ranks of the clergy, even if they wish in future
to change their ways. An exception will be made in regard to receiving the means of holiness,
and it is only our mercy which makes us think that they are worthy of this. They do not
deserve to have the opportunity of being restored by their repentance to their former status, as
is illustrated by the case of the odious Esau, though he begged in tears for that favour.

26

This holy synod has also decided that any priest or deacon who has been deposed by his
bishop for some crime, or who alleges he has suffered some kind of injustice and is not
satisfied with the judgment of his bishop, saying that he does not trust him and that he has
been wronged, either because of the enmity which the bishop has for him or because of
favours the bishop wants to bestow on certain others, such a person has the right to have
recourse to the metropolitan of his province and to denounce his deposition from office,
which he thinks is unjust, or any other injury. The metropolitan should be willing to take up
such cases and to summon the bishop who has deposed the cleric or injured him in any way.
He should examine the case himself, with the help of other bishops, so as either to confirm
the deposition of the cleric beyond all doubt, or to quash it by means of a general synod and
the judgment of many persons.

In the same way we decree that bishops may have recourse to the patriarch, their head, if they
complain that they have suffered similar things from their metropolitan, so that the business
in question may receive a just and right decision from their patriarch and the metropolitans
under him. No metropolitan bishop may be judged by his neighbouring metropolitan bishops,
even though it is alleged that he has committed serious crimes, but he may only be judged by
his own patriarch; we decree that this judgment will be just and beyond suspicion because a
number of esteemed people will be gathered around the patriarch, and for this reason his

102
judgment will be fully ratified and confirmed. If anyone does not, agree with what we have
promulgated, let him be excommunicated.

27

We decree that, in ecclesiastical promotions and consecrations, the marks which signify the
rank to which each person belongs, should be kept, in accordance with the traditional usages
of each province, region and city. Thus bishops who have been permitted to wear the pallium
at certain times, may wear it at those times and places but should not abuse so great and
honourable a garment through pride, vainglory, human conceit and self-love, by wearing it
unnecessarily throughout the divine sacrifice and every other ecclesiastical ceremony. We
decree that those who have devoutly embraced the monastic life and merited the dignity of a
bishop, should keep the appearance and garments of the monastic habit and that holy way of
life. None of them has the right to lay aside that type of dress out of pride and wilful
arrogance, lest he is found thereby to violate his personal vows. Just as the continual wearing
of the pallium shows the bishop as given to ostentation and vainglory, so the laying aside of
the monastic habit exposes him to the same charges.

Therefore, any bishop who wears the pallium outside the occasions stipulated in writing, or
lays aside the monastic dress, must either be corrected or be deposed by his patriarch.

103
First Lateran Council 1123 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1123 A.D.

INTRODUCTION
In 1123, during the pontificate of Pope Callistus II, a general Roman council was held “for
various important matters of the church”, as Callistus himself says in the letter of convocation
which he sent on 25 June 1122 to bishop Baldric of Doll. A great number of bishops, abbots
and religious, numbering at least 300, gathered in Rome from the western churches, although
none that we know of came from the eastern churches {1 } . There is no evidence that legates
of the emperor Henry V took part. The council began on 18 March 1123, with the pope
presiding. There were at least two sessions. The council ended before 6 April, probably on 27
March.This council is often called “general” in the letters and decrees of Pope Callistus II. It
is reasonable, however, to doubt its ecumenicity. Indeed the manner in which the council was
called and conducted by the pope and the fathers differed from that of the older councils.
Moreover several other councils, similar to Lateran I, were convened in the 11th and 12th
centuries but were not termed ecumenical. The ecumenicity of this council seems, as far as
we can tell, to have been confirmed later by the tradition of the Roman church.There had long
been conflict between church and state, though some sort of a solution had been reached a
short time before at the Concordat of Worms (September 1122). Thus, questions concerning
the investiture of prelates and the freedom of the church were a major concern of the council.
The said concordat was approved and confirmed by the council’s authority, though not
without opposition on the part of many, as Gerhoh of Reichersberg {2 } testifies; canons 3-4,
8 and 12 make mention of this debate. Thereby a measure of peace and discipline was
restored to the church.

The fathers devoted themselves principally to the reform of the church, to the abolition of
simony and to the correction of ecclesiastical abuses. There were a few other matters of lesser
importance. Also, the struggle for the Corsican episcopacy between the churches of Genoa
and Pisa was a considerable problem, and a commission of twenty-four fathers had to be
created by the pope in order to resolve the matter; for this see canons 1, 7, and also canons 2,
5-6, 9, 11, 16. Thus pope Callistus, following as closely as he could the examples of Gregory
VII and Urban II {3 } , and supported by the approval of the council, brought to a successful
conclusion matters which had engrossed the whole church’s effort and zeal for almost fifty
years.

A number of canons were ratified by the council fathers, perhaps at the session on 27
March. Many of these were included in Gratian’s Decrees (c. 1140), namely canons 1, 3-4, 6,
9, 12, 14, 16B, 19-22B, and part of 8, 18B. As far as we know, Baronius was the first to print
others which Gratian did not accept (Br {4 } 12, 1607, 149-150; ed. Theiner 18, 1869, 343-
344). Twelve more follow in the Roman edition (Rm {5 } 4, 1612, 16- 17), where a complete
text of the canons may be found. We have examined all the canons in the following: Bn {6 }
3/2 (1618) 464-465; ER {7 } 27 (1644) 37-43; S. Baluze, in P. de Marca, Dissertationum de

104
concordia sacerdotii et imperii …libri II Paris l663, 363 (=BdM); LC10 {8 } (l67l) 896-900;
Hrd {9 } 6/2 (1714) 1111-1114; Cl {10 } 12 (1730) 1333-1337; E. Martene and U. Durand,
in Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum … collectio, VII Paris 1733, 68-69, four canons
only (= MD); Msi {11 } 2 (1748) 355-358; Msi 21 (1776) 281-286; G.H. Pertz, in MGH {12
} , Leges in f.ø, II/2 Hanover 1837, 182-183 (= Pertz); PL 163 (1854) 1361-1365; L.
Weiland, in MGH, Const., I Hanover 1893, 574-576 (= MGH).

The text of the canons presents some difficulties. Bn 2, ER, LC, Hrd, Cl and Msi must
have printed the same text as that used by Rm (though with some differences). This
commonly accepted version, which we call B, consists of 22 canons and seems to derive from
two manuscript codices (not from Rm, since this has the different readings). In addition,
seven canons (2, 5, 10-11, 13, 15, 17) printed by Br seem to relate to B, even though they
often do not agree with 13 in their readings. A second version of the canons, “from an ancient
manuscript codex of the monastery of Aniane”, which is now in the Bibliotheque Nationale
in Paris, was published by BdM. The order of the canons in it, and often the readings, are
different from B; moreover six canons (11 and the last five, 18-22B) are missing and two (15-
16) are completely different from B. Regarding this other version, which we call alpha, MD
published four canons (6, 12, 15- 16) “from a manuscript of the marquis of Laubes”, and
Pertz published sixteen canons (15 and 18-22B are missing, in place of which are what
appear to be two rubrics) from Vienna MS. Codex of Canon Law 91 (now 2178). Migne
transcribed the text of Pertz. LC took several readings of (alpha and included them in B[eta]
as variant readings. Finally, the text printed by Msi “from a Pistoia codex of canons”, as well
as the order of canons in it, appear similar to alpha; although canons 15-16 are preserved
according to the B text and 18-19 are added to B. If alpha is earlier than B, then the text of
Msi seems to date from an earlier time and to have been corrected occasionally from B;
therefore we conclude that this text belongs to alpha.

We believe the (alpha version is older than B[eta].For, the canons from alpha(except ll-12,
15-17) are mentioned in Simeon of Durham’s “Historia Regum” {13 } (= S), which is
contemporaneous. This point has not been noticed by scholars. In addition, Gratian’s Decrees
ascribe the last 5 canons to the earlier pontificate of Urban II (1088-99) and not to the time of
Lateran I, as Br noted; therefore alpha seems right to omit these five canons. The document
on which Br and possibly Rm depend is a Vatican codex “which contains the Collection of
Anselm [of Lucca], in which the canons of this council are included as an appendix after
chapter 55”. Maybe, therefore, our B should be attributed to this peculiar version in Anselm
of Lucca’s text. Certainly all the known manuscript codices are related to alpa, so far as we
are aware {14 } , including the 12th century Vatican Reginensis lat. 987 (= R), which was the
first to be examined by us. We think that little confidence can be placed in MGH, which is
the only critical edition so far made. Its editor, Weiland, divided the sources into three
groups: the “Parisian”, more correctly called the “Roman”- the Pistoian codex; and the
codices used by BdM and Pertz. But he completely ignored the similarities between the three
groups, and in the end collated only the two sources of the third group, omitting for no reason
canon 17. We have collated together R and all the other editions, and have prepared our text
with the alpha version as the basis. We think that R and BdM are the most reliable sources.

105
We have relegated the alternative version of canons 15-16 to a footnote, and the last five
canons to an appendix. We have not used the MGH text except in a few instances. There is a
preface to the canons in R, S, BdM and Msi vol 1, but we do not reproduce it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY H-L 5/1 (1912) 630-634; DThC 8/2 (1925) 2628-2637; DDrC 6 (1957)
344-346; LThK 6 (vol 2 1961) 815-816; NCE 8 (1967) 406; HC 3 (1980) 401-402; U.
Robert, Histoire du pape Calixte II, Paris-Besancon 1891, 162-177, A. Hauck, Die Rezeption
und Umbildung der allgemeinen Synode im Mittelalter, Historische Vierteljahrschrifl 10
(1907) 468 ff.; G. Meyer von Knonau, Jahrbucher des deutschen Reiches . . ., VII Leipzig
1909, 228-239; G Tangl, Die Teilnehmer an den allgemeinen Konzilien des Mittelalters,
Weimar 1922, 196-205; H. J. Schroeder, Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils, St.
Louis, Mo. –London 1937, 177-194; A. Eliche, La reforme gregorienne et la reconquete
chretienne (Histoire de l’Eglise 8), Paris 1950, 390-393; G. Eranzen, L’ecclesiologie des
conciles medievaux, in Le concile, 125-141; R Eoreville, Latran I, II, III et Latran IV
(Histoire des Conciles 6), Paris 1965; M. Mollat and P. Tombeur, Les conciles Latran I a
Latran IV: Concordance, index, listes de frequence, tables comparatives (Conciles
oecumeniques medievaux 1), Louvain 1974.

CANONS

1. Following the examples of the holy fathers and renewing them as we are bound by our
office, by the authority of the apostolic see we altogether forbid anyone to be ordained or
promoted in the church of God for money. If anyone indeed should have been ordained or
promoted in the church in such a fashion, let him be utterly deprived of the office acquired.
{15 }

2. {16 } We absolutely forbid those excommunicated by their own bishops to be received

into communion by other bishops, abbots and clergy {17 }

3. {18 } No one may consecrate as a bishop someone who is not canonically elected. If
anyone should presume to do this, let both consecrator and consecrated be deposed {19 }
beyond hope of restoration.

4 {20 } Absolutely no archdeacon, archpriest {21 } , provost or dean {22 } may grant to
anyone the care of souls or prebends in a church without the decision or consent of the
bishop. Rather, as it is constituted by the holy canons, let the care of souls and the dispensing
of ecclesiastical affairs remain in the decision and power of the bishop. Indeed, if anyone
presumes to do something against this, or to claim for himself the power which pertains to the
bishop, let him be banished from the bounds of the church

5. {23 } The ordinations made by the heresiarch Burdinus {24 }, after he was condemned
by the Roman church, and whatever was afterwards done by pseudo-bishops ordained by
him, we judge to be null and void.

106
 6. {25 } No one except a priest {26 } may be ordained to the office of provost, archpriest
or dean; no one except a deacon may be ordained to the office of archdeacon. {27 } {28 }

7. {29 } We absolutely forbid priests, deacons or subdeacons to live with concubines and
wives, and to cohabit with other women, except those whom the council of Nicaea permitted
to dwell with them solely on account of necessity, namely a mother, sister, paternal or
maternal aunt, or other such persons, about whom no suspicion could justly arise

8. {30 } We further resolve, in accordance with the statute of the most blessed pope
Stephen, that lay persons, however religious they may be, have no power to dispose of any
ecclesiastical business; but following the apostolic canons, let the bishop have the care of all
ecclesiastical matters, and let him manage them as in the sight of God. Therefore {31 } if any
prince or other lay person should arrogate to himself the disposition or donation {32 } of
ecclesiastical things or possessions, let him be regarded as sacrilegious.

9. {33 } We prohibit unions between blood relatives, because both the divine and secular
laws prohibit them. For, the divine laws not only cast out those doing this and their progeny
but also call them accursed; the secular laws call such people disreputable and deprive them
of inheritance. We, therefore, following our fathers, mark them with infamy and judge them
to be infamous.

[crusades]

10. {34 } To those who set out for Jerusalem and offer effective help towards the defence
of the christian people and overcoming the tyranny of the infidels, we grant the remission of
their sins, and we place their houses and families and all their goods under the protection of
blessed Peter and the Roman church, just as has been decreed by our lord pope Urban.
Whoever dares to distrain or carry off their houses, families and goods, while they are on
their way, shall be punished with excommunication. {35 } Those who have put crosses on
their clothes, with a view to journeying to Jerusalem or to Spain, and have later taken them
off, we command by our apostolic authority to wear the crosses again and to complete the
journey between this Easter and the following Easter. Otherwise, from that moment we cut
them off from entry into church and forbid divine services in all their lands, apart from the
baptism of infants and confessions for the dying.

11. {36 } With the advice of our brothers and of the whole curia, and also with the wish
and consent of the prefect, we order the abolition of that immoral practice hitherto obtaining
with respect to the dead Porticani, so that the goods of Porticani dwellers dying without heirs
are not to be dispersed against the wishes of those dying. This, however, is to the extent that
the Porticani remain obedient and faithful to the Roman church and to us and our successors.
{37 }

107
 12. {38 } In accordance with the canons of the holy fathers, we absolutely forbid and
prohibit the laity, under the penalty of anathema, to remove the offerings from the most
sacred and revered altars of blessed Peter and of the Saviour and of St Mary Rotunda and of
St Nicholas of Bari, of St Giles {39 } , or from the altars or crosses of all the other churches.
By {40 } apostolic authority we forbid the fortification or taking hold of churches by {41 }
lay persons {42 } . {43 }

13. {44 } Whoever knowingly makes or intentionally spends counterfeit money shall be
separated from the communion of the faithful as one accursed, an oppressor of the poor and a
disturber of the state.

14. {45 } If anyone tries to attack pilgrims to Rome and foreigners {46 } visiting the
shrines of the apostles and the oratories of other saints, or to rob them of the things they
bring, or to trouble merchants {47 } with new exactions of tolls and fees, let him be deprived
of christian communion until he makes reparation.

15. {48 } We confirm, with the authority of the holy Spirit, whatever has been determined
by the Roman pontiffs our predecessors concerning the peace and truce of God or arson or
the public highways.

Msi (as canon 14) and B (as canon 13) have a different text namely

If anyone should violate a truce, he is to be admonished up to three times by the bishop to

make reparation. If he acts in contempt of the third admonition to make reparation, the
bishop, either with the counsel of the metropolitan {49 } or with two or one of the
neighbouring bishops, shall declare the sentence of anathema on the rebel, and denounce him
in writing to the bishops all around

16. {50 } Following in the footsteps of the holy fathers, we order by general decree, that
monks be subject to their own bishops {51 } with all humility, and show due obedience and
devoted submission to them in all things, as if to masters and shepherds of the church of God.
They may not celebrate masses in public anywhere. Moreover, let them completely abstain
from public visitations of the sick, from anointings and even from hearing confessions, for
these things in no way pertain to their calling. Indeed, in the churches where their ministry is
recognized, they may only have priests who were ordained by their own bishop, to whom
they will answer for the care of souls which they have assumed.

In Pertz there is only “We absolutely forbid anointings and visits to the sick and public
masses by monks” and then : “The examples of Leo to Dioscorus, that on the day of the
resurrection there may be a levitical and a sacerdotal ordination, ch 19. That on Sunday
mnorning, continuing the fast of Saturday, there can be an ordination, ch 20”.

Msi (as canon 18) and B (as canon 17) have a different text, namely :

108
 We forbid abbots and monks to give public penances, to visit the sick, to perform
anointings and to chant public masses. They shall receive chrism, holy oil, consecrations of
altars and ordinations of clerics from the bishops in whose dioceses they reside.

17. {52 } In our desire to preserve in peace, by the grace of God, the possessions of the
holy Roman church, we strictly forbid, under pain of anathema, any military {53 } person to
presume to seize or hold by force Benevento, the city of blessed Peter. If anyone should dare
otherwise, he shall be bound by the chain of anathema.

The remaining canons are missing in alpha, and Msi has canons 18-19 together with canon
16. The first part of this canon (Priests … pertain to the bishop) may belong to canon 16 (B).

18. Priests are to be appointed to parish churches by the bishops, to whom they shall
answer for the care of souls and for those matters which pertain to the bishop. They may not
receive tithes or churches from lay persons without the consent and wish of the bishops; and
if they presume to do otherwise, they shall be subject to the canonical penalty. {54 }

19. We allow the service which monasteries and their churches have paid from the time of
{55 } pope Gregory VII until now. We altogether forbid abbots and monks to have the
possessions of churches and bishops by a thirty {56 } years provision. {57 }

20. Having in mind the examples in the traditions of the fathers, and discharging the duty
of our pastoral office, we decree that churches and what belongs to them, both persons and
possessions, namely clerics, monks and their lay brothers, as well as those who come to pray
and what they bring with them, are to be under protection and not be harmed. If anyone dares
to act contrary to this and after recognizing his villainy, has not properly made amends within
the space of thirty days, let him be banished from the bounds of the church and be smitten
with the sword of anathema.

21. We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons and monks to have concubines or to
contract marriages. We adjudge, as the sacred canons have laid down, that marriage contracts
between such persons should be made void and the persons ought to undergo penance.

22. We condemn the alienations which have been made everywhere, especially by Otto
{58 } , Jeremias, and perhaps Philip {59 } , of the property of the exarchate of Ravenna.
Moreover, we declare in general to be invalid the alienations made in whatever fashion by all
persons, whether they were intruded or were canonically elected in the name of a bishop or
an abbot, who should be consecrated in accordance with the usage of his own church, and the
ordinations conferred by them without the consent of the clergy of the church or through
simony. We also forbid absolutely that any cleric should presume to alienate in any way his
prebend or any ecclesiastical benefice. Any such action in the past or the future shall be
invalid and subject to canonical penalty.”

109
Second Lateran Council – 1139 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1139 A.D.
Introduction

In Lent of 1139 a general council was summoned by Pope Innocent II and held in the Lateran
basilica {1} . As we know, the synod had been convoked the previous year; for the papal
legates in England and Spain pressed the bishops and abbots to go to the council. Thus, a
good number of fathers, at least five hundred, met in Rome. One of these came from the East,
the patriarch of Antioch, but he was a Latin. With the pope presiding the council began on 2
April and it seems to have ended before 17 April, as far as we can judge from the sources.

This council is called “general” in the records and more frequently “plenary” by Innocent
himself. However, there is a doubt as to its ecumenicity for the same reasons that affect
Lateran I.

The Roman church, which for a long time had been divided in its obedience between
Innocent II (1130-1143) and Anacletus II (1130-1138), seems to have overcome schism and
factionalism, and indeed to have recovered its peace. This was due to the death of Anacletus
in 1138 and the efforts of Bernard of Clairvaux, who had fought with the utmost zeal on
behalf of Innocent for the restoration of unity. But Innocent, perhaps upset by the agreements
which Anacletus had arrived at, vigorously cited and condemned Anacletus’s part in the evil
affair {2} , an action which seems to have provoked a complaint from Bernard.

Some heretics were also condemned by the fathers, namely those who followed the monk
Henry, and canons were enacted concerning the reform of the church. The pope and the
council fathers, following the example and mind of Pope Gregory VII, took up a good many
canons which had been established by previous councils, with a view to restoring
ecclesiastical discipline to an unblemished state. They furnish a sort of body of precepts for
the whole church, taken from councils in the times of Gregory VII (canon 10), Urban II
(canons 3, 21-22), Callistus II (canons 3, 7, 23-25) and especially Innocent II (canons 1, 4-7,
9-12, 14-20). Gratian included many of them shortly afterwards in his Decrees (canons 2, 4-6,
8, 19-21, 26-28 and parts of 7, 10, 12, 15-16, 18, 22). Orderic Vitalis, however, was sceptical
about their effectiveness in practice.

Baronius was the first to print the thirty canons (Annales ecclesiastici 12,1607, 277-280),
having taken them from two manuscript codices (“a register of the Vatican library and a
Vatican codex of decrees”). The Roman editors shortly after produced a more accurate
version (Rm {3} 4, 1612, 21 -23), from “manuscript codices of the Vatican library and of
Anthony Augustine of Tarragona”; this was copied by all later editions, as we have verified,
though with some errors. These later editions are as follows: Bn2 {4} 3/2 (1618) 487-489;
ER {5} 17 (1644) 123-133; LC {6} 10 (1671) 1002-1009; Hrd {7} 6/2 (1714) 1207-1214; Cl

110
{8} 12 (1730) 1497-1507;Msi {9} 21 (1776) 526-533.The canon which E.Martene and
U.Durand published (Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, IV, Paris 1717, 139-140) as being
“omitted in the editions, from a manuscript of St Vincent of Bisignano”, is in fact the same as
canons 15 and 30. Having collated together all these editions, we have followed the text of
the Roman edition.

CANONS

1. We decree that if anyone has been ordained simoniacally, he is to forfeit entirely the office
which he illicitly usurped.

2. If anyone has acquired, through payment, a prebend, priory, deanery or any ecclesiastical
honour or preferment, or a holy thing of the church of any kind, such as chrism or holy oil, or
the consecrations of altars or churches, where the execrable passion of avarice has been the
motive, let him be deprived of the honour which he wrongly acquired, and let the buyer and
seller and intermediary be stigmatised with the mark of infamy. And let nothing be demanded
for sustenance or under the pretext of any custom from anyone before or afterwards, nor
should the person himself presume to give anything, since this is simony; but let him enjoy
freely and without any diminution the dignity and benefice which has been conferred on him

3. We utterly prohibit those who have been excommunicated by their bishops to be received
by others. Indeed, whoever knowingly presumes to communicate someone who has been
excommunicated, before he is absolved by the one who excommunicated him, is to be held
liable to the same sentence.

4. We also enjoin that bishops as well as clergy take pains to be pleasing to God and to
humans in both their interior and exterior comportment. Let them give no offence in the sight
of those for whom they ought to be a model and example, by the excess, cut or colour of their
clothes, nor with regard to the tonsure, but rather, as is fitting for them, let them exhibit
holiness. If after a warning from the bishops they are unwilling to change their ways, let them
be deprived of their ecclesiastical benefices.

5. We enjoin that what was laid down in the sacred council of Chalcedon be rigidly adhered
to, namely, that the goods of deceased bishops are not to be seized by anyone at all, but are to
remain freely at the disposal of the treasurer and the clergy for the needs of the church and
the succeeding incumbent. Therefore, from now on, let that detestable and wicked rapacity
cease. Furthermore, if anyone dares to attempt this behaviour henceforth, he is to be
excommunicated. And those who despoil the goods of dying priests or clerics are to be
subject to the same sentence.

6. We also decree that those in the orders of subdeacon and above who have taken wives or
concubines are to be deprived of their position and ecclesiastical benefice. For since they

111
ought to be in fact and in name temples of God, vessels of the Lord and sanctuaries of the
holy Spirit, it is unbecoming that they give themselves up to marriage and impurity.

7. Adhering to the path trod by our predecessors, the Roman pontiffs Gregory VII, Urban and
Paschal, we prescribe that nobody is to hear the masses of those whom he knows to have
wives or concubines. Indeed, that the law of continence and the purity pleasing to God might
be propagated among ecclesiastical persons and those in holy orders, we decree that where
bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, canons regular, monks and professed lay brothers have
presumed to take wives and so transgress this holy precept, they are to be separated from
their partners. For we do not deem there to be a marriage which, it is agreed, has been
contracted against ecclesiastical law. Furthermore, when they have separated from each other,
let them do a penance commensurate with such outrageous behaviour.

8. We decree that the selfsame thing is to apply also to women religious if, God forbid, they
attempt to marry.

9. Moreover, the evil and detestable practice has grown, so we understand, whereby monks
and canons regular, after receiving the habit and making their profession, are learning civil
law and medicine with a view to temporal gain, in scornful disregard of the rules of their
blessed teachers Benedict and Augustine. In fact, burning with the fire of avarice, they make
themselves the advocates of suits; and since they have to neglect the psalmody and hymns,
placing their trust in the power of fine rhetoric instead, they confuse what is right and what is
wrong, justice and iniquity, by reason of the variety of their arguments. But the imperial
constitutions testify that it is truly absurd and reprehensible for clerics to want to be experts in
the disputes of law courts. We decree by apostolic authority that lawbreakers of this kind are
to be severely punished. There are also those who, neglecting the care of souls, completely
ignore their state in life, promise health in return for hateful money and make themselves
healers of human bodies. And since an immodest eye manifests an immodest heart, religion
ought to have nothing to do with those things of which virtue is ashamed to speak. Therefore,
we forbid by apostolic authority this practice to continue, so that the monastic order and the
order of canons may be preserved without stain in a state of life pleasing to God, in accord
with their holy purpose. Furthermore, bishops, abbots and priors who consent to and fail to
correct such an outrageous practice are to be deprived of their own honours and kept from the
thresholds of the church.

10. We prohibit, by apostolic authority, that the tithes of churches be possessed by lay people
where canonical authority shows these were assigned for religious purposes. For whether
they accept them from bishops or kings, or any person whatsoever, let them know that they
are committing the crime of sacrilege and incurring the threat of eternal damnation, unless
they hand them back to the church. We also direct that lay people who are in possession of
churches must either restore them to the bishops or become subject to excommunication. We
reiterate our decision that nobody is to hold the office of archdeacon or dean unless he is
ordained deacon or priest; and archdeacons, deans or provosts who are without these orders
are to be deprived of the honour they have received, if through disobedience they refuse to be

112
ordained. Moreover, we forbid the aforesaid honours to be conferred on youths or those not
yet in sacred orders; let them be conferred rather on those who are outstanding in prudence
and integrity of life. We also enjoin that churches are not to be entrusted to hired priests and
that each and every church with sufficient means is to have its own priest

11. We also prescribe that priests, clerics, monks, pilgrims, merchants and peasants, in their
coming and going and their work on the land, and the animals with which they plough and
carry seeds to the fields, and their sheep {10} , be left in peace at all times.

12. We decree that the truce {11} is to be inviolably observed by all from sunset on
Wednesday until sunrise on Monday, and from Advent until the octave of the Epiphany, and
from Quinquagesima until the octave of Easter. If anyone tries to break the truce, and he does
not comply after the third warning, let his bishop pronounce sentence of excommunication on
him, and communicate his decision in writing to the neighbouring bishops. Moreover let none
of the bishops receive into communion the excommunicated person, but rather let each
confirm the sentence received in writing. If anyone presumes to infringe this, he will do so at
the risk of his position. Since a threefold cord is not quickly broken, we enjoin bishops,
having regard for God alone and the salvation of the people, and laying aside all timidity, to
furnish each other with mutual counsel and help towards firmly maintaining peace, and not to
omit this duty by reason of any affection or aversion. For if anyone is found to be lukewarm
in this work of God, let him incur the loss of his dignity

13. Furthermore, we condemn that practice accounted despicable and blameworthy by divine
and human laws, denounced by Scripture in the old and new Testaments, namely, the
ferocious greed of usurers; and we sever them from every comfort of the church, forbidding
any archbishop or bishop, or an abbot of any order whatever or anyone in clerical orders, to
dare to receive usurers, unless they do so with extreme caution; but let them be held infamous
throughout their whole lives and, unless they repent, be deprived of a christian burial.

14. We entirely forbid, moreover, those abominable jousts and tournaments in which knights
come together by agreement and rashly engage in showing off their physical prowess and
daring, and which often result in human deaths and danger to souls. If any of them dies on
these occasions, although penance and viaticum are not to be denied him when he requests
them, he is to be deprived of a church burial.

15. In the same way we have decided to legislate that if anyone, at the instigation of the devil,
incurs the guilt of the following sacrilege, that is, to lay violent hands on a cleric or a monk,
he is to be subject to the bond of anathema; and let no bishop presume to absolve such a
person unless he is in immediate danger of death, until he has been presented before the
apostolic See and submits to its decision. We also prescribe that nobody dare to lay hands on
those who flee to a church or cemetery. If anyone does this, let him be excommunicated.

16. It is undoubtedly the case that since ecclesiastical honours depend not on blood-
relationships but on merit, and since the church of God awaits successors not on the basis of

113
any right of inheritance, nor according to the flesh, it requires virtuous, wise and devout
persons for its administration and the distribution of its offices. Therefore we prohibit, by
apostolic authority, anyone to exercise a claim over or to demand, by hereditary right,
churches, prebends, provostships, chaplaincies or any ecclesiastical offices. If anyone,
unjustly and guilty of ambition, dares to attempt this, he will be duly punished and deprived
of the object of his suit.

17. With good reason we entirely prohibit unions within the bounds of consanguinity; for the
teachings of holy fathers and the holy church of God detest incestuous behaviour of this kind,
which (under the influence of the enemy of the human race) is engaged in nowadays. Even
the secular laws pronounce those born of such a union infamous, and refuse them the right of
inheritance

18. We completely detest and forbid, by the authority of God and the blessed apostles Peter
and Paul, that most dreadful, devastating and malicious crime of incendiarism For this
pernicious and inimical calamity surpasses all other kinds of destruction. Nobody is unaware
of the extent to which it is injurious to the people of God and the damage it brings to souls
and bodies. It is necessary, therefore, to oppose it and to labour with all one’s might, that so
great a harm and danger be eradicated and suppressed for the sake of the people. If anyone,
then, after the publication of this prohibition of ours, from some wicked design born of hate
or vengeance, starts a fire or causes it to be started, or knowingly provides counsel or help to
those starting one, let him be excommunicated. And when an arsonist dies, he is to be
deprived of a christian burial. Nor is he to be absolved unless, having first made reparation
for the loss according to his means, he swears that he will never raise a fire again. Moreover,
let him be given the penance of remaining a whole year in Jerusalem or Spain in the service
of God.

19. If any archbishop or bishop relaxes this decree, he is to make restitution for the loss and
abstain from his episcopal office for a year.

20. As is right, we do not deny to kings and princes the power to dispense justice, in
consultation with the archbishops and bishops.

21. We decree that sons of priests are to be removed from the ministries of the sacred altar
unless they are living religiously in monasteries or canonries.

22. Because there is one thing that conspicuously causes great disturbance to holy church,
namely, false penance, we warn our brothers in the episcopate and priests not to allow the
souls of the laity to be deceived or dragged off to hell by false penances. It is agreed that a
penance is false when many sins are disregarded and a penance is performed for one only, or
when it is done for one sin in such a way that the penitent does not renounce another. Thus it
is written: Whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point, has become guilty of all of it;
this evidently pertains to eternal life. Therefore, just as a person who is entangled in all sins
will not enter the gate of eternal life, so also if a person remains in one sin {12} . False

114
penance also occurs when the penitent does not resign a position at a court or in business
which cannot be carried on without sin, or if hate is harboured in his heart, or if the person
does not make amends to whomever he offended, or if an injured party does not pardon the
offender, or if anyone unjustly carries arms.

23. Those who, simulating a kind of religiosity, condemn

1. the sacrament of the Lord’s body and blood,

2. the baptism of children,
3. the priesthood and other ecclesiastical orders, and
4. legitimate marriages,

we expel from the church of God and condemn as heretics, and prescribe that they be
constrained by the secular powers. We also bind up their defenders in the fetter of the same
condemnation. {13}

24. We also prescribe that no sale-price is to be demanded for chrism, holy oil and burials.

25. If anyone receives provostships, prebends or other ecclesiastical benefices from the hand
of a lay person, let him be deprived of the benefice unworthily received. For the decrees of
the holy fathers state that lay people, no matter how devout they may be, have no power of
disposal over ecclesiastical property.

26. We decree that the pernicious and detestable custom which has spread among some
women who although they live neither according to the rule of blessed Benedict, nor Basil
nor Augustine, yet wish to be thought of by everyone as nuns, is to be abolished. For when,
living according to the rule in monasteries, they ought to be in church or in the refectory or
dormitory in common, they build for themselves their own retreats and private dwelling-
places where, under the guise of hospitality, indiscriminately and without any shame they
receive guests and secular persons contrary to the sacred canons and good morals. Because
everyone who does evil hates the light, these women think that, hidden in the tabernacle of
the just {14} , they can conceal themselves from the eyes of the Judge who sees everything;
so we prohibit in every way this unrighteous, hateful and disgraceful conduct and forbid it to
continue under pain of anathema.

27. In the same way, we prohibit nuns to come together with canons or monks in choir for the
singing of the office.

28. Since the decrees of the fathers prohibit churches to be left vacant for more than three
months, we forbid under anathema the canons of the episcopal see to exclude religious men
from the election following on the death of the bishop; but let a virtuous and suitable person
be elected as bishop with their advice. Because if an election is held with these religious
persons excluded, where this is done without their knowledge and consent, it is null and void.

115
29. We prohibit under anathema that murderous art of crossbowmen and archers, which is
hateful to God, to be employed against Christians and Catholics from now on.

30. We render void the ordinances enacted by Peter Leoni and other schismatics and heretics,
and deem them null.

116
Third Lateran Council – 1179 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1179 A.D.
Introduction

By an agreement reached at Venice in 1177, the bitter conflict which had arisen about twenty
years earlier between Pope Alexander III (1159-1181) and Emperor Frederick I (1152-1190)
was brought to an end. For when Pope Hadrian IV had died in 1159, the cardinals elected two
popes together, namely Roland of Siena, who took the name of Alexander III, and Octavian
of Rome who though he was nominated by fewer cardinals, nevertheless with the support of
the emperor Frederick usurped the name of Pope Victor IV. The emperor, wishing to remove
everything which stood in the way of his authority in Italy, declared war upon the Italian
states and especially the Roman church which after its struggle for ecclesiastical liberty for so
many years, was enjoying great authority. The emperor carried on the war for a long time. A
serious schism had arisen out of this conflict, and after Victor IV two antipopes were
nominated in opposition to Alexander III, namely Paschal III (1164-1168) and Callistus III
(1168-1178). At last, when Alexander had gained the victory, he promised the emperor at
Venice that he would summon a general council.

The particular object of this council was to put an end to the schism within the church and the
quarrel between the emperor and the papacy. It was summoned by Pope Alexander in 1178,
“so that according to the custom of the ancient fathers, the good should be sought and
confirmed by many, and that with the cooperation of the grace of the holy Spirit, by the
efforts of all, there should be carried out what was required for the correction of abuses and
the establishment of what was pleasing to God”. The council was held at Rome in March
1179. About three hundred fathers assembled from the provinces of Europe and some from
the Latin east, and a single legate from the Greek church. It began on 5 March, according to
Archbishop William of Tyre, our chief authority. The bishops first heard Rufinus, bishop of
Assisi, who in a highly polished address praised the Roman pontiff and the Roman church,
“that church to which alone belongs the decision and power to summon a general council, to
lay down new canons and cancel the old; indeed, though the fathers had summoned a solemn
council many times in the past, yet the obligation and reason to do this was never more
expedient than at the present”.

We do not have the same reasons for doubting the ecumenical nature of this council as we
have for Lateran I and II. For, the way in which the council was summoned and conducted by
the pope, and the number of fathers who gathered from the whole Latin world and devoted
their efforts to strengthening the unity of the church and condemning heretics, resemble
rather the ancient councils than Lateran I and II and exemplify the typical council of the
Middle Ages presided over by the Roman pontiff. For this reason it is not surprising that
chronicles of the period frequently refer to this council as Lateran I.

117
Although we do not possess the acts of the council, we have evidence from chronicles and
annals and especially from the canons which the fathers laid down in the final session on 19
March. Accordingly, to avoid future schisms it was first laid down that nobody was to be
regarded as Roman pontiff unless he had been elected by two thirds of the cardinals (canon 1)
; all appointments by antipopes were deemed invalid (canon 2), heretics called Cathars were
excommunicated and likewise were the bands of mercenaries, or rather criminals, which were
causing utter destruction in some parts of Europe; it was declared, and this seems an
innovation, that arms should be taken up against them (canon 27) ; it was also decided not to
pass judgment about the preaching of the Waldensians. All this seems to have been directed
to strengthening the unity of the church. In addition, Alexander III and the fathers, renewing
the precedent of Lateran I and II, laid down several canons for the reform of the church and
some concerning morals and civil affairs.

The canons of this council played a notable part in the future government of the church. They
were frequently included in the collections of decretals compiled in the late 12th and early
13th century, and afterwards all were inserted into Pope Gregory IX’s Decretals. Walter
Holtzmann and other scholars considered that these decretal collections in fact arose from
this Lateran council and its canons. Certainly the canons, unlike those of Lateran I and II and
many preceding councils, appear to have been worked out by an excellent legal mind so that
it is probable they were composed under the authority of Alexander III himself, who was an
expert lawyer. The canons, except for those which refer to Lateran II or the council of
Rheims in 1148 (see canons 2, 11, 20-22) or to Gratian’s Decrees (see canons 1-4, 7, 11, 13-
14, 17-18), are new and original.

The tradition of the canons has not yet been adequately examined and remains very uncertain.
Many manuscript codices survive for this council (in contrast to Lateran I and II). However,
they do not seem to give us the version of the canons which was confirmed by ecclesiastical
authority and which Archbishop William of Tyre, with the authority of the fathers, had
himself drawn up. Frequently the canons are to be found in chronicles and decretal
collections. They are included in four contemporary English chronicles: those of Abbot
Benedict of Peterborough, Gervase of Canterbury, William of Newburgh, and Roger of
Hoveden. And in the following collections of decretals: the collection called the Appendix of
the Lateran council, the collections of Bamberg, Berlin I, Canterbury I-II, Kassel,
Cheltenham, Claudian, Cotton, Dertosa, Douai, Durham, Eberbach, Erlangen, Florian,
Klosterneuberg, Leipzig, Oriel II, Paris I, Peterhouse, Rochester, Sangerman, and Tanner;
and there are a considerable number of collections still to be examined. The canons are also
contained in the book called “Rommersdorfer Briefbuch”, the Cartulary of Rievaulx, and the
codices Florence Ricc. 288 (Day-book), Innsbruck Univ. 90 (Gratian’s Decrees), and (which
seem to have been unnoticed hitherto) Vatican Regin. lat. 596, 12th century (fos. 6V-8v), and
984, 12th century (fos. 2r-7v). We can say for certain that the canons of the council were
spread abroad through the whole Latin church, and were of great weight in its concerns and
transactions.

118
The first printed edition was made by Cr2 (2, 1551, 836-843). He edited, from a manuscript
now lost or unknown, the whole collection known as the Appendix of the Lateran council,
which is divided into fifty parts; all 27 canons of Lateran III are in the first part. This text was
copied by Su (3, 1567, 626-633) and Bn (3, 1606, 1345-1350), though Su introduced some
errors. Bn who was the first to give the name “Appendix of the Lateran council” to the
collection, added some variant readings and rubrics which he had found in the chronicle of
Roger of Hoveden. The Roman editors (Rm 4, 1612, 27-33), using also the manuscript codex
of Antonio Augustine of Tarragona, produced a more accurate text and more variant
readings. Later editions, all of which we have exarnined, followed the Roman text,
narnely:ER27 (1644) 439-463;LC10 (1671) 1507-1523;Hrd 6 (1714) 1673-1684; Cl 13
(1730) 416-432; Msi 22 (1778) 217-233. Boehmer, who published his edition in 1747, before
Msi, is an exception. He took the canons from the Kassel collection of decretals, where the
order and some readings are different. Finally Herold, in his unpublished Bonn dissertation of
1952, examined thoroughly the whole tradition and established the order of the canons; using
36 sources, he concluded there were 34 different traditions!

As things now stand, it is impossible to use all the known sources for our edition. For, these
sources reveal only a limited part of the whole tradition and, what is even more important, we
do not yet understand the relations between the individual traditions. Even Herold has not
examined these relations sufficiently. We have therefore preferred to publish the text of a
single tradition, namely that of the Appendix of the Lateran council, using Cr2 and Rm as the
best text of this tradition and including the variant readings listed in Rrn. This “Appendix” is
a good text, as even Herold’s text (= H) shows. We have given Herold’s variant readings in
the critical apparatus, and we have noted in footnotes the order in which he places the 23
canons that he includes.

CANONS

1. Although clear enough decrees have been handed down by our predecessors to avoid
dissension in the choice of a sovereign pontiff, nevertheless in spite of these, because through
wicked and reckless ambition the church has often suffered serious division, we too, in order
to avoid this evil, on the advice of our brethren and with the approval of the sacred council,
have decided that some addition must be made. Therefore we decree that if by chance,
through some enemy sowing tares, there cannot be full agreement among the cardinals on a
successor to the papacy, and though two thirds are in agreement a third party is unwilling to
agree with them or presumes to appoint someone else for itself, that person shall be held as
Roman pontiff who has been chosen and received by the two thirds. But if anyone trusting to
his nomination by the third party assumes the name of bishop, since he cannot take the
reality, both he and those who receive him are to incur excommunication and be deprived of
all sacred order, so that viaticum be denied them, except at the hour of death, and unless they
repent, let them receive the lot of Dathan and Abiron, who were swallowed up alive by the
earth. Further, if anyone is chosen to the apostolic office by less than two thirds, unless in the

119
meantime he receives a larger support, let him in no way assume it, and let him be subject to
the foresaid penalty if he is unwilling humbly to refrain. However, as a result of this decree,
let no prejudice arise to the canons and other ecclesiastical constitutions according to which
the decision of the greater and senior {1 } part should prevail, because any doubt that can
arise in them can be settled by a higher authority; whereas in the Roman church there is a
special constitution, since no recourse can be had to a superior.

2. Renewing the decision taken by our predecessor of happy memory, Innocent, we decree
that the ordinances made by the heresiarchs Octavian {2 } and Guido {3 }, and also by John
of Struma {4 } who followed them, and by those ordained by them, are void; and furthermore
that if any have received ecclesiastical dignities or benefices through the foresaid schismatics,
they are to be deprived of them. Moreover alienations or seizures of ecclesiastical property,
which have been made by these schismatics or by lay persons, are to lack all validity and are
to return to the church without any burden to it. If anyone presumes to act against this, let him
know that he is excommunicated. We decree that those who of their own accord have taken
an oath to remain in schism are suspended from sacred orders and dignities.

3. Since in holy orders and ecclesiastical ministries both maturity of age, a serious character
and knowledge of letters should be required, much more should these qualities be required in
a bishop, who is appointed for the care of others and ought to show in himself how others
should live in the house of the Lord. Therefore, lest what has been done with regard to certain
persons through the needs of the time should be taken as a precedent for the future, we
declare by the present decree that no one should be chosen bishop unless he has already
reached the age of thirty, been born in lawful wedlock and also is shown to be worthy by his
life and learning. When he has been elected and his election has been confirmed, and he has
the administration of ecclesiastical property, after the time has passed for the consecration of
bishops as laid down by the canons let the person to whom the benefices which he held
belong, have the free disposition of them. Further, with regard to the inferior ministries, for
instance that of dean or archdeacon, and others which have the care of souls annexed, let no
one at all receive them, or even the rule of parish churches, unless he has already reached his
twenty-fifth year of age, and can be approved for his learning and character. When he has
been nominated, if the archdeacon is not ordained deacon, and the deans (and the rest after
due warning) are not ordained priests within the time fixed by the canons, let them be
removed from that office and let it be conferred on another who is both able and willing to
fulfill it properly; and let them not be allowed the evasion of recourse to an appeal, should
they wish by an appeal to protect themselves against a transgression of the constitution. We
order that this should be observed with regard to both past and future appointments, unless it
is contrary to the canons. Certainly if clerics appoint someone contrary to this rule, let them
know that they are deprived of the power of election and are suspended from ecclesiastical
benefices for three years. For it is right that at least the strictness of ecclesiastical discipline
should restrain those who are not recalled from evil by the fear of God. But if any bishop has
acted in anyone’s interest contrary to this decree, or has consented to such actions, let him
lose the power of conferring the foresaid offices, and let these appointments be made by the
chapter, or by the metropolitan if the chapter cannot agree.

120
4. Since the apostle decided that he ought to support himself and those accompanying him by
his own hands, so that he might remove the opportunity of preaching from false apostles and
might not be burdensome to those to whom he was preaching, it is recognized that it is a very
serious matter and calls for correction that some of our brethren and fellow bishops are so
burdensome to their subjects in the procurations demanded that sometimes, for this reason,
subjects are forced to sell church ornaments and a short hour consumes the food of many
days. Therefore we decree that archbishops on their visitations of their dioceses are not to
bring with them more than forty or fifty horses or other mounts, according to the differences
of dioceses and ecclesiastical resources; cardinals should not exceed twenty or twenty-five,
bishops are never to exceed twenty or thirty, archdeacons five or seven, and deans, as their
delegates, should be satisfied with two horses. Nor should they set out with hunting dogs and
birds, but they should proceed in such a way that they are seen to be seeking not their own
but the things of Jesus Christ. Let them not seek rich banquets but let them receive with
thanksgiving what is duly and suitably provided {5 }. We also forbid bishops to burden their
subjects with taxes and impositions. But we allow them, for the many needs which sometimes
come upon them, if the cause be clear and reasonable, to ask for assistance moderated by
charity. For since the apostle says children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents
for their children, it seems to be far removed from paternal affection if superiors are
burdensome to their subjects, when like a shepherd they ought to cherish them in all their
needs. Archdeacons or deans should not presume to impose charges or taxes on priests or
clerics. Indeed, what has been said above by way of permission about the number of horses
may be observed in those places where there are greater resources or revenues, but in poorer
places we wish measure so to be observed that the visit of greater personages should not be a
burden to the humbler, lest by such a grant those who were accustomed to use fewer horses
should think that the widest powers have been granted to them.

5. If a bishop ordains someone as deacon or priest without a definite title from which he may
draw the necessities of life, let the bishop provide him with what he needs until he shall
assign him the suitable wages of clerical service in some church, unless it happens that the
person ordained is in such a position that he can find the support of life from his own or
family inheritance.

6. A most reprehensible custom has become established in certain places whereby our
brethren and fellow bishops and even archdeacons have passed sentence of excommunication
or suspension, without any previous admonition on those who they think will lodge an
appeal. Others too, while they fear the sentence and canonical discipline of a superior, lodge
an appeal without any real grounds and thus make use of a means ordained for the help of the
innocent as a defence of their own wrongdoing. Therefore to prevent prelates burdening their
own subjects without reason, or subjects at their will being able to escape the correction of
prelates under cover of an appeal, we lay down by this present decree that prelates should not
pass sentence of suspension or excommunication without a previous canonical warning,
unless the fault is such that by its nature it incurs the penalty of excommunication {6 } , and
that subjects should not recklessly have recourse to an appeal, contrary to ecclesiastical

121
discipline, before the introduction of their case. But if anyone believes that because of his
own need he should make an appeal, let a proper limit be fixed for his making it, and if it
happens that he fails to do so within this limit, let the bishop freely use his own authority. If
in any business someone makes an appeal, but fails to appear when the defendant has arrived,
let him make a proper repayment of the defendant’s expenses, if he is in a position to do so;
in this way, at least by fear, a person may be deterred from lightly making an appeal to the
injury of another. But we wish that in religious houses especially this should be observed,
namely that monks or other religious, when they are to be corrected for any fault, should not
presume to appeal against the regular discipline of their superior or chapter, but they should
humbly and devoutly submit to what is usefully enjoined them for their salvation.

7. Since in the body of the church everything should be treated with a spirit of charity, and
what has been freely received should be freely given, it is utterly disgraceful that in certain
churches trafficking is said to have a place, so that a charge is made for the enthroning of
bishops, abbots or ecclesiastical persons, for the installation of priests in a church, for burials
and funerals, for the blessing of weddings or for other sacraments, and that he who needs
them cannot gain them unless he first makes an offering to the person who bestows them.
Some think that this is permitted in the belief that long standing custom has given it the force
of law. Such people, blinded by avarice, are not aware that the longer an unhappy soul is
bound by crimes the graver they are. Therefore, so that this may not be done in the future, we
severely forbid that anything be demanded for the enthronement of ecclesiastical persons or
the institution of priests, for burying the dead as well as for blessing marriages or for any
other sacrament. But if anyone presumes to act against this, let him know that he will have
his lot with Giezi {7 }, whose action he imitates by his demand of a disgraceful present.
Moreover we forbid bishops, abbots or other prelates to impose upon churches new dues,
increase the old or presume to appropriate to their own use part of the revenues, but let them
readily preserve for their subjects those liberties which superiors wish to be preserved for
themselves. If anyone acts otherwise, his action is to be held invalid.

8. Let no ecclesiastical ministries or even benefices or churches be assigned or promised to

anyone before they are vacant, so that nobody may seem to wish for the death of his
neighbour to whose position or benefice he believes himself to be the successor. For since we
find this forbidden even in the laws of the pagans themselves, it is utterly disgraceful and
calls for the punishment of God’s judgment if the hope of future succession should have any
place in God’s church when even pagans have taken care to condemn it. But whenever
ecclesiastical prebends or any offices happen to become vacant in a church, or are even now
vacant, let them no longer remain unassigned and let them be conferred within six months on
persons who are able to administer them worthily. If the bishop, when it concerns him, delays
to make the appointment, let it be done by the chapter; but if the election belongs to the
chapter and it does not make the appointment within the prescribed time, let the bishop
proceed according to God’s will, with the advice of religious men; or if by chance all fail to
do so, let the metropolitan dispose of these matters without opposition from them and in
accordance with God’s will.

122
9. Since we ought both to plant holy religion and in every way to cherish it when planted, we
shall never fulfil this better than if we take care to nourish what is right and to correct what
stands in the way of the progress of truth by means of the authority entrusted to us {8 }. Now
we have learnt from the strongly worded complaints of our brethren and fellow bishops that
the Templars and Hospitallers, and other professed religious, exceeding the privileges granted
them by the apostolic see have often disregarded episcopal authority, causing scandal to the
people of God and grave danger to souls. We are told that they receive churches from the
hands of lay persons; that they admit those under excommunication and interdict to the
sacraments of the church and to burial; that in their churches they appoint and remove priests
without the knowledge of the bishop; that when the brothers go to seek alms, and it is granted
that the churches should be open on their arrival once a year and the divine services should be
celebrated in them, several of them from one or more houses often go to a place under
interdict and abuse the privileges granted {9 } to them by holding divine service, and then
presume to bury the dead in the said churches. On the occasion also of the brotherhoods
which they establish in many places, they weaken the bishops’ authority, for contrary to their
decision and under cover of some privileges they seek to defend all who wish to approach
and join their brotherhood. In these matters, because the faults arise not so much with the
knowledge or advice of the superiors as from the indiscretion of some of the subjects, we
have decreed that abuses should be removed and doubtful points settled. We absolutely forbid
that these orders and all other religious should receive churches and tithes from the hands of
lay persons, and we even order them to put away what they have recently received contrary to
this decree. We declare that those who are excommunicated, or interdicted by name, must be
avoided by them and all others according to the sentence of the bishop. In churches which do
not belong to them by full right, let them present to the bishops the priests to be instituted, so
that while they are answerable to the bishops for the care of the people, they may give to their
own members a proper account of temporal matters. Let them not presume to remove those
priests who have been appointed without first consulting the bishops. If the Templars or
Hospitallers come to a church which is under an interdict, let them be allowed to hold the
services of the church only once a year and let them not bury there the bodies of the dead.
With regard to the brotherhoods we declare as follows: if any do not give themselves entirely
to the said brothers but decide to keep their possessions, they are in no way on this account
exempt from the sentence of the bishops, but the bishops may exercise their power over them
as over other parishioners whenever they are to be corrected for their faults. What has been
said about the said brothers, we declare shall be observed with regard to other religious who
presume to claim for themselves the rights of bishops and dare to violate their canonical
decisions and the tenor of our privileges. If they do not observe this decree, let the churches
in which they dare so to act be placed under an interdict, and let what they do be considered
void.

10. Monks are not to be received in a monastery for money nor are they allowed money of
their own. They are not to be stationed individually in towns or cities or parish churches, but
they are to remain in larger communities or with some of their brethren, nor are they to await
alone among people of the world the attack of their spiritual foes, since Solomon says, Woe
to him who is alone when he falls and has not another to lift him up. If anyone when

123
demanded gives something for his reception, let him not proceed to sacred orders and let the
one who has received him be punished by loss of his office. If he has money in his
possession, unless it has been granted him by the abbot for a specific purpose, let him be
removed from the communion of the altar, and any one who is found at his death with money
in his possession {10 } is not to receive burial among his brethren and mass is not to be
offered for him. We order that this is also to be observed with regard to other religious. Let
the abbot who does not exercise care in such matters know that he will incur the loss of his
office. Neither priories nor obediences are to be handed over to anyone for a sum of money;
otherwise both giver and receiver are to be deprived of ministry in the church. Priors, when
they have been appointed to conventual churches, are not to be changed except for a clear and
reasonable cause, for instance if they are wastrels or live immoral lives or have committed an
offence for which they clearly should be removed, or if on account of the demands of higher
office they should be transferred on the advice of their brethren.

11. Clerics in holy orders, who in open concubinage keep their mistresses in their houses,
should either cast them out and live continently or be deprived of ecclesiastical office and
benefice. Let all who are found guilty of that unnatural vice for which the wrath of God came
down upon the sons of disobedience and destroyed the five cities with fire, if they are clerics
be expelled from the clergy or confined in monasteries to do penance; if they are laymen they
are to incur excommunication and be completely separated from the society of the faithful. If
any cleric without clear and necessary cause presumes to frequent convents of nuns, let the
bishop keep him away; and if he does not stop, let him be ineligible for an ecclesiastical
benefice.

12. Clerics in the subdiaconate and above and also those in minor orders, if they are
supported by ecclesiastical revenues, should not presume to become advocates in legal
matters before a secular judge, unless they happen to be defending their own case or that of
their church, or acting on behalf of the helpless who cannot conduct their own cases. Let
clerics not presume to take upon themselves the management of towns or even secular
jurisdiction under princes or seculars so as to become their ministers of justice. If anyone
dares to act contrary to this decree, and so contrary to the teaching of the Apostle who says,
No soldier of God gets entangled in secular affairs, and acts as a man of this world, let him be
deprived of ecclesiastical ministry, on the grounds that neglecting his duty as a cleric he
plunges into the waves of this world to please its princes. We decree in the strictest terms that
any religious who presumes to attempt any of the above-mentioned things should be
punished.

13. Because some, setting no limit to their avarice, strive to obtain several ecclesiastical
dignities and several parish churches contrary to the decrees of the holy canons, so that
though they are scarcely able to fulfil one office sufficiently they claim the revenues of very
many, we strictly forbid this for the future. Therefore when it is necessary to entrust a church
or ecclesiastical ministry to anyone, the person sought for this office should be of such a kind
that he is able to reside in the place and exercise his care for it himself. If the contrary is done

124
both he who receives it is to be deprived of it, because he has received it contrary to the
sacred canons, and he who gave it is to lose his power of bestowing it.

14. Because the ambition of some has now gone to such lengths that they are said to hold not
two or three but six or more churches, and since they cannot devote the proper care to two,
we order, through our brethren and most dear fellow bishops, that this be corrected, and with
regard to this pluralism, so contrary to the canons, and which gives rise to loose conduct and
instability, and causes definite danger to the souls of those who are able to serve the churches
worthily, it is our wish to relieve their want by ecclesiastical benefices. Further, since some of
the laity have become so bold that disregarding the authority of bishops they appoint clerics
to churches and even remove them when they wish, and distribute the property and other
goods of the church for the most part according to their own wishes, and even dare to burden
the churches themselves and their people with taxes and impositions, we decree that those
who from now on are guilty of such conduct are to be punished by anathema. Priests or
clerics who receive the charge of a church from the hands of lay persons {11 }, without the
authority of their own bishop, are to be deprived of communion, and if they persist, they are
to be deposed from the ecclesiastical ministry and order. We firmly decree that because some
of the laity force ecclesiastics and even bishops to come before their courts, those who
presume to do so in the future are to be separated from the communion of the faithful. Further
we forbid lay persons, who hold tithes to the danger of their souls, to transfer them in any
way {12 } to other lay persons. If anyone receives them and does not hand them over to the
church, let him be deprived of christian burial.

15. Although in duties of charity we are especially under obligation to those from whom we
know we have received a gift, on the contrary certain clerics, after receiving many goods
from their churches, have presumed to transfer these goods to other uses. We forbid this,
knowing that it is also forbidden by ancient canons. Therefore, as we wish to prevent damage
to the churches, we order that such goods should remain under the control of the churches,
whether the clerics die intestate or wish to bestow them upon others. Besides, since in certain
places certain persons called deans are appointed for a fee and exercise episcopal jurisdiction
for a sum of money, by the present decree we declare that those who in future presume to do
this should be deprived of their office and the bishop shall lose the power of conferring this
office.

16. Since in every church what is approved by the greater and senior {13 } part of the
brethren should unhesitatingly be observed, it is a very serious and blameworthy matter that
in certain churches a few persons, sometimes not so much for a good reason as for their own
will, frequently prevent an election and do not allow the ecclesiastical appointment to go
forward. Therefore we declare by the present decree that unless some reasonable objection is
shown by the smaller and junior party, apart from an appeal, whatever is determined by the
greater and senior {14 } part of the chapter should always prevail and should be put into
effect. Nor let it stand in the way of our decree if someone perchance says that he is under
oath to preserve the custom of his church. For this is not to be called an oath but rather
perjury, which is opposed to the advantage of the church and the decrees of the holy fathers.

125
If anyone presumes to maintain under oath such customs, which are neither supported by
reason nor in accord with the sacred decrees, let him be denied the reception of the body of
the Lord until he performs fit penance.

17. Since in certain places the founders of churches or their heirs abuse the power in which
the church has supported them until now, and though there ought to be one superior in the
church of God they nevertheless contrive to choose several without regard to subordination,
and though there ought to be one rector in each church they nevertheless put forward several
in order to protect their own interests; for these reasons we declare by the present decree that
if the founders support several candidates, that one should be in charge of the church who is
supported by greater merits and is chosen and approved by the consent of the greater number.
If this cannot be done without scandal, let the bishop arrange in the manner that he sees best
according to the will of God. He should also do this if the question of the right of patronage
arises among several persons, and it has not been settled to whom it belongs within three {15
} months.

18. Since the church of God is bound to provide like a mother for those in want, with regard
to both the things which concern the support of the body and those which lead to the progress
of the soul, therefore, in order that the opportunity of learning to read and progress in study is
not withdrawn from poor children who cannot be helped by the support of their parents, in
every cathedral church a master is to be assigned some proper benefice so that he may teach
the clerics of that church and the poor scholars. Thus the needs of the teacher are to be
supplied and the way to knowledge opened for learners. In other churches and monasteries
too, if anything in times past has been assigned in them for this purpose, it should be restored.
Let no one demand any money for a licence to teach, or under cover of some custom seek
anything from teachers, or forbid anyone to teach who is suitable and has sought a licence.
Whoever presumes to act against this decree is to be deprived of ecclesiastical benefice.
Indeed, it seems only right that in the church of God a person should not have the fruit of his
labour if through self-seeking he strives to prevent the progress of the churches by selling the
licence to teach.

19. It is recognized as a very serious matter, as regards the sin of those who do it no less than
the loss of those who suffer it, that in several parts of the world the governors and officials of
cities, and others too who are seen to have power, often impose on churches so many burdens
and oppress them with such heavy and frequent impositions, that under them the priesthood
seems to be in a worse condition than it was under Pharaoh, who had no knowledge of the
divine law. He indeed, though he reduced all others to slavery, left his priests and their
possessions in their ancient freedom, and provided them with support from public funds. But
these others impose burdens of nearly every kind upon the churches and afflict them with so
many exactions that the lamentation of Jeremiah seems to apply to them, The prince of
provinces has become a tributary. For whenever they think that entrenchments or expeditions
or anything else should be made, they wish that almost everything should be seized from the
goods assigned to the use of churches, clerics and Christ’s poor. They even so reduce the
jurisdiction and authority of bishops and other prelates that these seem to retain no power

126
over their own subjects. But though we must in this matter grieve for the churches, we must
grieve none the less for those who seem to have utterly cast aside the fear of God and respect
for the ecclesiastical order. Therefore we strictly forbid them under pain of anathema to
attempt such acts in future, unless the bishop and clergy see the need or advantage to be so
great that they believe that where the means of the laity are insufficient, aid should be given
voluntarily by the churches to relieve common needs. But if in future officials or others
presume to continue such practices and after warning refuse to stop, let both them and their
supporters know that they are excommunicated, and let them not be restored to the
communion of the faithful unless they make due satisfaction.

20. Following the footsteps of our predecessors of happy memory, popes Innocent and
Eugenius, we forbid those abominable jousts and fairs, which are commonly called
tournaments, in which knights come together by agreement and rashly engage in showing off
their physical prowess and daring, and which often result in human deaths and danger to
souls. If any of them dies on these occasions, although forgiveness {16 } is not to be denied
him when he requests it, he is to be deprived of a church burial.

21. We decree that truces are to be inviolably observed by all from after sunset on
Wednesday until sunrise on Monday, and from Advent until the octave of the Epiphany, and
from Septuagesima until the octave of Easter. If anyone tries to break the truce, and he does
not comply after the third warning, let his bishop pronounce sentence of excommunication
and communicate his decision in writing to the neighbouring bishops. Moreover, let no
bishop receive into communion the excommunicated person, but rather let him confirm the
sentence received in writing. If anyone presumes to infringe this, he will do so at the risk of
his position. Since a threefold cord is not quickly broken, we enjoin bishops, having regard
only for God and the salvation of the people, and laying aside all timidity, to furnish each
other with mutual counsel and help towards firmly maintaining peace, and not to omit this
duty by reason of any affection or aversion. For if anyone is found to be lukewarm in the
work of God, let him incur the loss of his dignity.

22. We renew our decree that priests, monks, clerics, lay brothers, merchants and peasants, in
their coming and going and their work on the land, and the animals which carry seeds to the
field, should enjoy proper security, and that nobody should impose on anyone new demands
for tolls, without the approval of kings and princes, or renew those already imposed or in any
way increase the old. If anyone presumes to act against this decree and does not stop after
warning, let him be deprived of christian society until he makes satisfaction.

23. Although the Apostles says that we should pay greater honour to our weaker members,
certain ecclesiastics, seeking what is their own and not the things of Jesus Christ, do not
allow lepers, who cannot dwell with the healthy or come to church with others, to have their
own churches and cemeteries or to be helped by the ministry of their own priests. Since it is
recognized that this is far from christian piety, we decree, in accordance with apostolic
charity, that wherever so many are gathered together under a common way of life that they
are able to establish a church for themselves with a cemetery and rejoice in their own priest,

127
they should be allowed to have them without contradiction. Let them take care, however, not
to harm in any way the parochial rights of established churches. For we do not wish that what
is granted them on the score of piety should result in harm to others. We also declare that
they should not be compelled to pay tithes for their gardens or the pasture of animals.

24. Cruel avarice has so seized the hearts of some that though they glory in the name of
Christians they provide the Saracens with arms and wood for helmets, and become their
equals or even their superiors in wickedness and supply them with arms and necessaries to
attack Christians. There are even some who for gain act as captains or pilots in galleys or
Saracen pirate vessels. Therefore we declare that such persons should be cut off from the
communion of the church and be excommunicated for their wickedness, that catholic princes
and civil magistrates should confiscate their possessions, and that if they are captured they
should become the slaves of their captors. We order that throughout the churches of maritime
cities frequent and solemn excommunication should be pronounced against them. Let those
also be under excommunication who dare to rob Romans or other Christians who sail for
trade or other honourable purposes. Let those also who in the vilest avarice presume to rob
shipwrecked Christians, whom by the rule of faith they are bound to help, know that they are
excommunicated unless they return the stolen property.

25. Nearly everywhere the crime of usury has become so firmly rooted that many, omitting
other business, practise usury as if it were permitted, and in no way observe how it is
forbidden in both the Old and New Testament. We therefore declare that notorious usurers
should not be admitted to communion of the altar or receive christian burial if they die in this
sin. Whoever receives them or gives them christian burial should be compelled to give back
what he has received, and let him remain suspended from the performance of his office until
he has made satisfaction according to the judgment of his own bishop.

26. Jews and Saracens are not to be allowed to have christian servants in their houses, either
under pretence of nourishing their children or for service or any other reason. Let those be
excommunicated who presume to live with them. We declare that the evidence of Christians
is to be accepted against Jews in every case, since Jews employ their own witnesses against
Christians, and that those who prefer Jews to Christians in this matter are to lie under
anathema, since Jews ought to be subject to Christians and to be supported by them on
grounds of humanity alone. If any by the inspiration of God are converted to the christian
faith, they are in no way to be excluded from their possessions, since the condition of
converts ought to be better than before their conversion. If this is not done, we enjoin on the
princes and rulers of these places, under penalty of excommunication, the duty to restore fully
to these converts the share of their inheritance and goods.

27. As St. Leo says, though the discipline of the church should be satisfied with the judgment
of the priest and should not cause the shedding of blood, yet it is helped by the laws of
catholic princes so that people often seek a salutary remedy when they fear that a corporal
punishment will overtake them. For this reason, since in Gascony and the regions of Albi and
Toulouse and in other places the loathsome heresy of those whom some call the Cathars,

128
others the Patarenes, others the Publicani, and others by different names, has grown so strong
that they no longer practise their wickedness in secret, as others do, but proclaim their error
publicly and draw the simple and weak to join them, we declare that they and their defenders
and those who receive them are under anathema, and we forbid under pain of anathema that
anyone should keep or support them in their houses or lands or should trade with them. If
anyone dies in this sin, then neither under cover of our privileges granted to anyone, nor for
any other reason, is mass to be offered for them or are they to receive burial among
Christians. With regard to the Brabanters, Aragonese, Navarrese, Basques, Coterelli and
Triaverdini {17 }, who practise such cruelty upon Christians that they respect neither
churches nor monasteries, and spare neither widows, orphans, old or young nor any age or
sex, but like pagans destroy and lay everything waste, we likewise decree that those who hire,
keep or support them, in the districts where they rage around, should be denounced publicly
on Sundays and other solemn days in the churches, that they should be subject in every way
to the same sentence and penalty as the above-mentioned heretics and that they should not be
received into the communion of the church, unless they abjure their pernicious society and
heresy. As long as such people persist in their wickedness, let all who are bound to them by
any pact know that they are free from all obligations of loyalty, homage or any obedience. On
these {18 } and on all the faithful we enjoin, for the remission of sins, that they oppose this
scourge with all their might and by arms protect the christian people against them. Their
goods are to be confiscated and princes free to subject them to slavery. Those who in true
sorrow for their sins die in such a conflict should not doubt that they will receive forgiveness
for their sins and the fruit of an eternal reward. We too trusting in the mercy of God and the
authority of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, grant to faithful Christians who take up arms
against them, and who on the advice of bishops or other prelates seek to drive them out, a
remission for two years of penance imposed on them, or, if their service shall be longer, we
entrust it to the discretion of the bishops, to whom this task has been committed, to grant
greater indulgence, according to their judgment, in proportion to the degree of their toil. We
command that those who refuse to obey the exhortation of the bishops in this matter should
not be allowed to receive the body and blood of the Lord. Meanwhile we receive under the
protection of the church, as we do those who visit the Lord’s sepulchre, those who fired by
their faith have taken upon themselves the task of driving out these heretics, and we decree
that they should remain undisturbed from all disquiet both in their property and persons. If
any of you presumes to molest them, he shall incur the sentence of excommunication from
the bishop of the place, and let the sentence be observed by all until what has been taken
away has been restored and suitable satisfaction has been made for the loss inflicted. Bishops
and priests who do not resist such wrongs are to be punished by loss of their office until they
gain the pardon of the apostolic see.

129
Fourth Lateran Council : 1215
Council Fathers - 1215 A.D.

Constitutions:
Confession of Faith
On the error of abbot Joachim
On Heretics
On the pride of the Greeks towards the Latins
The dignity of the patriarchal sees
On yearly provincial councils
The correction of offences and the reform of morals
On inquests
On different rites within the same faith
On appointing preachers
On schoolmasters for the poor
On general chapters of monks
A prohibition against new religious orders
Clerical incontinence
Clerical gluttony and drunkeness
Decorum in the dress and behaviour of clerics
Dissolute prelates
Clerics to dissociate from shedding-blood
That profane objects may not be stored in churches
Chrism and the Eucharist to be kept under lock and key
On yearly confession to one’s own priest, yearly communion, the confessional seal
Physicians of the body to advise patients to call physicians of the soul
Churches are to be without a prelate for no more than 3 months
Democratic election of pastors
Invalid elections
Nominees for prelatures to be carefully screened
Candidates for the priesthood to be carefully trained and scrutinized
Who asks to resign must resign
Multiple benefices require papal dispensation
Penalties for bestowing ecclesiatical benefices on the unworthy
Canons’ sons cannot be canons where their fathers are
Parish priests to have adequate incomes
Renumeration for visitations to be reasonable
Prelates forbidden to procure ecclesiastical services at a profit
On appeal procedures
On interlocutory sentences
On Summons by Apostolic Letter

130
 Written records of trials to be kept
On knowingly receiving stolen goods
True owner is the true possessor even if not possessing the object for a year
No one is to knowingly prescribe an object to the wrong party
Clerics and laity are not to usurp each others rights
Clerics cannot be forced to take oaths of fealty to those from whom they hold no
temporalities
Only clerics may dispose of church property
Penalties for patrons who steal church goods or physically harm their clerics
Taxes cannot be levied on the Church, but the Church can volunteer contributions for the
common good
On unjust excommunication
Challenging an ecclesiastical judge
Penalties for excommunication out of avarice
Prohibition of marriage is now perpetually restricted to the fourth degree
Clandestine marriages forbidden
On rejecting evidence from hearsay at a matrimonial suit
On those who give their fields to others to be cultivated so as to avoid tithes
Tithes should be paid before taxes
Tithes are to be paid on lands acquired, notwithstanding privileges
A parish priest shall not lose a tithe on account of some people making a pact
Interpreting the words of privileges
On the same in favour of bishops
Religious cannot give surety without permission of his abbot and convent
Abbots not to encroach on episcopal office
Religious may not receive tithes from lay hands
Regarding saint’s relics
On simony
Simony with regards to monks and nuns
Simony and extortion
Simony and avarice in clerics
Jews and excessive Usury
Jews appearing in public
Jews not to hold public offices
Jewish converts may not retain their old rite
Crusade to recover the holy Land

Introduction

During the pontificate of Innocent III (1198-1216) there appears to have occurred much
growth in the reform of the church and in its freedom from subservience to the empire as well
as in the primacy of the bishop of Rome and in the summoning of ecclesiastical business to
the Roman curia. Innocent himself, turning his whole mind to the things of God, strove to
build up the christian community. Spiritual things, and therefore the church, were to have

131
first place in this endeavour; so that human affairs were to be dependent upon, and to draw
their justification from, such considerations.

The council may therefore be regarded as a great summary of the pontiff’s work and also as
his greatest initiative. He was not able, however, to bring it to completion since he died
shortly afterwards (1216) . Christian disasters in the holy Land probably provided the
occasion for Innocent to call the council. Thus the pontiff ordered a new crusade to be
proclaimed. But he also used the crusade as an instrument of ecclesiastical administration,
combined with reform of the church, namely in a fierce war against heretics which he thought
would restore ecclesiastical society.

The council was summoned on 19 April 1213 to meet in November 1215. All the bishops and
abbots of the church as well as priors and even (which was new) chapters of churches and of
religious orders — namely Cistercians, Premonstratensians, Hospitallers and Templars —
and the kings and civil authorities throughout Europe were invited. The bishops were
explicitly asked to propose topics for discussion at the council, something which does not
seem to have happened at the preceding Lateran councils. This was done by the legates who
had been dispatched throughout Europe to preach the crusade. In each province only one or
two bishops were allowed to remain at home; all the rest were ordered to be present. The
purposes of the council were clearly set forth by Innocent himself : “to eradicate vices and to
plant virtues, to correct faults and to reform morals, to remove heresies and to strengthen
faith, to settle discords and to establish peace, to get rid of oppression and to foster liberty, to
induce princes and christian people to come to the aid and succour of the holy Land… “. It
seems that when Innocent summoned the council he wished to observe the customs of the
early ecumenical councils, and indeed this fourth Lateran council was regarded as an
ecumenical council by all learned and religious men of the age.

When the council began in the Lateran basilica in November 1215 there were present 404
bishops from throughout the western church, and from the Latin eastern church a large
number of abbots, canons and representatives of the secular power. No Greeks were present,
even those invited, except the patriarch of the Maronites and a legate of the patriarch of
Alexandria. The bond with the Greek church was indeed neglected, and matters became more
serious through the actions of Latin bishops living in the east or through the decrees of the
council.

The council began on 11 November with the pontiff’s sermon. He was especially looking for
a religious outcome to the council. Soon, however secular matters and power politics came to
the fore. At the second session (on 20 November) the struggle for the empire between
Frederick II and Otto IV was brought before the council and gave rise to a bitter and
contentious debate. This affected the nature of the council in a way that had not been foreseen
and revealed a certain ineffectiveness in Innocent’s plans for governing the church. Finally,
the third session (on 30 November) was devoted to reading and approving the constitutions,
which were proposed by the pontiff himself. The last decree dealt with preparations for a

132
crusade — “Jesus Christ’s business” — and fixed 1 June 1217 for its start, though this was
prevented by the pontiff’s death.

The seventy constitutions would seem to give proof of the council’s excellent results. The
work of Innocent appears clearly in them even though they were probably not directly
composed by him. He regarded them as universal laws and as a summary of the jurisdiction
of his pontificate. Few links with earlier councils survive, those with the third Lateran council
being the only relevant ones of which we know.

Thus,

the first constitution is regarded as a new profession of faith.

The second and third constitutions, which deal with heretics and contain dogmatic statements,
are new.
The remainder, which deal with the reform of the church, appear for the most part to be new
either in form or in content. They deal with
the church’s discipline (6-13) ,
the reform of clerical morals (14-22) ,
episcopal elections and the administration of benefices (23-32) ,
exaction of taxes (33-34) ,
canonical suits (35-49) ,
matrimony (50-52) ,
tithes (53-61) ,
simony (63-66) , and
Jews (67-70) .

The constitutions were first edited by Cr 2 (1538) CLXv-CLXXIIv, the text of which was
used in Cr 2 (1551) 946-967, Su 3 (1567) 735-756, and Bn 3/2 (1606) 1450-1465. Roman
editors produced a more accurate edition (Rm 4 [1612] 43-63) , collating the common text
“with manuscript codices from the Vatican”. Rm was followed by Bn 3/2 (1618) 682-696 and
ER 28 (1644) 154-225. LC 11/1 (1671) 142-233 provided a text “in Greek and Latin….. from
a Mazarin codex” (=M) with various readings from a d’Achery codex (=A) . The Greek
translation, however, which LC had thought to be contemporary, does not provide a complete
text and was taken from a later codex. LC was followed by Hrd 7 (1714) 15-78, Cl 13 (1730)
927-1018, and Msi 22 (1778) 981-1068. There are many surviving manuscripts of the
constitutions, as has been shown by Garcia, who is preparing a critical edition. That is to say,
twenty manuscripts containing the constitutions and twelve others containing the
constitutions together with commentaries; and probably there are others which are not yet
known. The constitutions were taken into Compilatio IV, except 42 and [71], and into
Decretalia of Gregory IX, except 42, 49 and [71]. The present edition follows the Roman
edition, but all the variant readings that have so far been brought to light by scholars have
been cited with {n} referring to the endnotes.

133
CONSTITUTIONS

1. Confession of Faith

We firmly believe and simply confess that there is only one true God, eternal and
immeasurable, almighty, unchangeable, incomprehensible and ineffable, Father, Son and holy
Spirit, three persons but one absolutely simple essence, substance or nature {1} . The Father
is from none, the Son from the Father alone, and the holy Spirit from both equally, eternally
without beginning or end; the Father generating, the Son being born, and the holy Spirit
proceeding; consubstantial and coequal, co-omnipotent and coeternal; one principle of all
things, creator of all things invisible and visible, spiritual and corporeal; who by his almighty
power at the beginning of time created from nothing both spiritual and corporeal creatures,
that is to say angelic and earthly, and then created human beings composed as it were of both
spirit and body in common. The devil and other demons were created by God naturally good,
but they became evil by their own doing. Man, however, sinned at the prompting of the devil.

This holy Trinity, which is undivided according to its common essence but distinct according
to the properties of its persons, gave the teaching of salvation to the human race through
Moses and the holy prophets and his other servants, according to the most appropriate
disposition of the times. Finally the only-begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, who became
incarnate by the action of the whole Trinity in common and was conceived from the ever
virgin Mary through the cooperation of the holy Spirit, having become true man, composed
of a rational soul and human flesh, one person in two natures, showed more clearly the way
of life. Although he is immortal and unable to suffer according to his divinity, he was made
capable of suffering and dying according to his humanity. Indeed, having suffered and died
on the wood of the cross for the salvation of the human race, he descended to the underworld,
rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. He descended in the soul, rose in the flesh, and
ascended in both. He will come at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, to render
to every person according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect. All of them will
rise with their own bodies, which they now wear, so as to receive according to their deserts,
whether these be good or bad; for the latter perpetual punishment with the devil, for the
former eternal glory with Christ.

There is indeed one universal church of the faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved,
in which Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice. His body and blood are truly contained in
the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been
changed in substance, by God’s power, into his body and blood, so that in order to achieve
this mystery of unity we receive from God what he received from us. Nobody can effect this
sacrament except a priest who has been properly ordained according to the church’s keys,
which Jesus Christ himself gave to the apostles and their successors. But the sacrament of
baptism is consecrated in water at the invocation of the undivided Trinity — namely Father,
Son and holy Spirit — and brings salvation to both children and adults when it is correctly

134
carried out by anyone in the form laid down by the church. If someone falls into sin after
having received baptism, he or she can always be restored through true penitence. For not
only virgins and the continent but also married persons find favour with God by right faith
and good actions and deserve to attain to eternal blessedness.

2. On the error of abbot Joachim

We therefore condemn and reprove that small book or treatise which abbot Joachim
published against master Peter Lombard concerning the unity or essence of the Trinity, in
which he calls Peter Lombard a heretic and a madman because he said in his Sentences, “For
there is a certain supreme reality which is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, and it
neither begets nor is begotten nor does it proceed”. He asserts from this that Peter Lombard
ascribes to God not so much a Trinity as a quaternity, that is to say three persons and a
common essence as if this were a fourth person. Abbot Joachim clearly protests that there
does not exist any reality which is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit-neither an
essence nor a substance nor a nature — although he concedes that the Father and the Son and
the holy Spirit are one essence, one substance and one nature. He professes, however, that
such a unity is not true and proper but rather collective and analogous, in the way that many
persons are said to be one people and many faithful one church, according to that saying : Of
the multitude of believers there was one heart and one mind, and Whoever adheres to God is
one spirit with him; again He who plants and he who waters are one, and all of us are one
body in Christ; and again in the book of Kings, My people and your people are one. In
support of this opinion he especially uses the saying which Christ uttered in the gospel
concerning the faithful : I wish, Father, that they may be one in us, just as we are one, so that
they may be made perfect in one. For, he says, Christ’s faithful are not one in the sense of a
single reality which is common to all. They are one only in this sense, that they form one
church through the unity of the catholic faith, and finally one kingdom through a union of
indissoluble charity. Thus we read in the canonical letter of John : For there are three that
bear witness in heaven, the Father and the Word and the holy Spirit, and these three are one;
and he immediately adds, And the three that bear witness on earth are the spirit, water and
blood, and the three are one, according to some manuscripts.

We, however, with the approval of this sacred and universal council, believe and confess with
Peter Lombard that there exists a certain supreme reality, incomprehensible and ineffable,
which truly is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, the three persons together and each
one of them separately. Therefore in God there is only a Trinity, not a quaternity, since each
of the three persons is that reality — that is to say substance, essence or divine nature-which
alone is the principle of all things, besides which no other principle can be found. This reality
neither begets nor is begotten nor proceeds; the Father begets, the Son is begotten and the
holy Spirit proceeds. Thus there is a distinction of persons but a unity of nature. Although
therefore the Father is one person, the Son another person and the holy Spirit another person,
they are not different realities, but rather that which is the Father is the Son and the holy
Spirit, altogether the same; thus according to the orthodox and catholic faith they are believed

135
to be consubstantial. For the Father, in begetting the Son from eternity, gave him his
substance, as he himself testifies : What the Father gave me is greater than all. It cannot be
said that the Father gave him part of his substance and kept part for himself since the Father’s
substance is indivisible, inasmuch as it is altogether simple. Nor can it be said that the Father
transferred his substance to the Son, in the act of begetting, as if he gave it to the Son in such
a way that he did not retain it for himself; for otherwise he would have ceased to be
substance. It is therefore clear that in being begotten the Son received the Father’s substance
without it being diminished in any way, and thus the Father and the Son have the same
substance. Thus the Father and the Son and also the holy Spirit proceeding from both are the
same reality.

When, therefore, the Truth prays to the Father for those faithful to him, saying I wish that
they may be one in us just as we are one, this word one means for the faithful a union of love
in grace, and for the divine persons a unity of identity in nature, as the Truth says elsewhere,
You must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect {2} , as if he were to say more
plainly, You must be perfect in the perfection of grace, just as your Father is perfect in the
perfection that is his by nature, each in his own way. For between creator and creature there
can be noted no similarity so great that a greater dissimilarity cannot be seen between them.
If anyone therefore ventures to defend or approve the opinion or doctrine of the aforesaid
Joachim on this matter, let him be refuted by all as a heretic. By this, however, we do not
intend anything to the detriment of the monastery of Fiore, which Joachim founded, because
there both the instruction is according to rule and the observance is healthy; especially since
Joachim ordered all his writings to be handed over to us, to be approved or corrected
according to the judgment of the apostolic see. He dictated a letter, which he signed with his
own hand, in which he firmly confesses that he holds the faith held by the Roman church,
which is by God’s plan the mother and mistress of all the faithful.

We also reject and condemn that most perverse doctrine of the impious Amalric, whose mind
the father of lies blinded to such an extent that his teaching is to be regarded as mad more
than as heretical.

3. On Heretics

We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy raising itself up against this holy,
orthodox and catholic faith which we have expounded above. We condemn all heretics,
whatever names they may go under. They have different faces indeed but their tails are tied
together inasmuch as they are alike in their pride. Let those condemned be handed over to the
secular authorities present, or to their bailiffs, for due punishment. Clerics are first to be
degraded from their orders. The goods of the condemned are to be confiscated, if they are lay
persons, and if clerics they are to be applied to the churches from which they received their
stipends. Those who are only found suspect of heresy are to be struck with the sword of
anathema, unless they prove their innocence by an appropriate purgation, having regard to the
reasons for suspicion and the character of the person. Let such persons be avoided by all until

136
they have made adequate satisfaction. If they persist in the excommunication for a year, they
are to be condemned as heretics. Let secular authorities, whatever offices they may be
discharging, be advised and urged and if necessary be compelled by ecclesiastical censure, if
they wish to be reputed and held to be faithful, to take publicly an oath for the defence of the
faith to the effect that they will seek, in so far as they can, to expel from the lands subject to
their jurisdiction all heretics designated by the church in good faith. Thus whenever anyone is
promoted to spiritual or temporal authority, he shall be obliged to confirm this article with an
oath. If however a temporal lord, required and instructed by the church, neglects to cleanse
his territory of this heretical filth, he shall be bound with the bond of excommunication by the
metropolitan and other bishops of the province. If he refuses to give satisfaction within a
year, this shall be reported to the supreme pontiff so that he may then declare his vassals
absolved from their fealty to him and make the land available for occupation by Catholics so
that these may, after they have expelled the heretics, possess it unopposed and preserve it in
the purity of the faith — saving the right of the suzerain provided that he makes no difficulty
in the matter and puts no impediment in the way. The same law is to be observed no less as
regards those who do not have a suzerain.

Catholics who take the cross and gird themselves up for the expulsion of heretics shall enjoy
the same indulgence, and be strengthened by the same holy privilege, as is granted to those
who go to the aid of the holy Land. Moreover, we determine to subject to excommunication
believers who receive, defend or support heretics. We strictly ordain that if any such person,
after he has been designated as excommunicated, refuses to render satisfaction within a year,
then by the law itself he shall be branded as infamous and not be admitted to public offices or
councils or to elect others to the same or to give testimony. He shall be intestable, that is he
shall not have the freedom to make a will nor shall succeed to an inheritance. Moreover
nobody shall be compelled to answer to him on any business whatever, but he may be
compelled to answer to them. If he is a judge sentences pronounced by him shall have no
force and cases may not be brought before him; if an advocate, he may not be allowed to
defend anyone; if a notary, documents drawn up by him shall be worthless and condemned
along with their condemned author; and in similar matters we order the same to be observed.
If however he is a cleric, let him be deposed from every office and benefice, so that the
greater the fault the greater be the punishment. If any refuse to avoid such persons after they
have been pointed out by the church, let them be punished with the sentence of
excommunication until they make suitable satisfaction. Clerics should not, of course, give the
sacraments of the church to such pestilent people nor give them a christian burial nor accept
alms or offerings from them; if they do, let them be deprived of their office and not restored
to it without a special indult of the apostolic see. Similarly with regulars, let them be
punished with losing their privileges in the diocese in which they presume to commit such
excesses.

“There are some who holding to the form of religion but denying its power (as the Apostle
says) , claim for themselves the authority to preach, whereas the same Apostle says, How
shall they preach unless they are sent? Let therefore all those who have been forbidden or not
sent to preach, and yet dare publicly or privately to usurp the office of preaching without

137
having received the authority of the apostolic see or the catholic bishop of the place”, be
bound with the bond of excommunication and, unless they repent very quickly, be punished
by another suitable penalty. We add further that each archbishop or bishop, either in person
or through his archdeacon or through suitable honest persons, should visit twice or at least
once in the year any parish of his in which heretics are said to live. There he should compel
three or more men of good repute, or even if it seems expedient the whole neighbourhood, to
swear that if anyone knows of heretics there or of any persons who hold secret conventicles
or who differ in their life and habits from the normal way of living of the faithful, then he will
take care to point them out to the bishop. The bishop himself should summon the accused to
his presence, and they should be punished canonically if they are unable to clear themselves
of the charge or if after compurgation they relapse into their former errors of faith. If however
any of them with damnable obstinacy refuse to honour an oath and so will not take it, let
them by this very fact be regarded as heretics. We therefore will and command and, in virtue
of obedience, strictly command that bishops see carefully to the effective execution of these
things throughout their dioceses, if they wish to avoid canonical penalties. If any bishop is
negligent or remiss in cleansing his diocese of the ferment of heresy, then when this shows
itself by unmistakeable signs he shall be deposed from his office as bishop and there shall be
put in his place a suitable person who both wishes and is able to overthrow the evil of heresy.

4. On the pride of the Greeks towards the Latins

Although we would wish to cherish and honour the Greeks who in our days are returning to
the obedience of the apostolic see, by preserving their customs and rites as much as we can in
the Lord, nevertheless we neither want nor ought to defer to them in matters which bring
danger to souls and detract from the church’s honour. For, after the Greek church together
with certain associates and supporters withdrew from the obedience of the apostolic see, the
Greeks began to detest the Latins so much that, among other wicked things which they
committed out of contempt for them, when Latin priests celebrated on their altars they would
not offer sacrifice on them until they had washed them, as if the altars had been defiled
thereby. The Greeks even had the temerity to rebaptize those baptized by the Latins; and
some, as we are told, still do not fear to do this. Wishing therefore to remove such a great
scandal from God’s church, we strictly order, on the advice of this sacred council, that
henceforth they do not presume to do such things but rather conform themselves like obedient
sons to the holy Roman church, their mother, so that there may be one flock and one
shepherd. If anyone however does dare to do such a thing, let him be struck with the sword of
excommunication and be deprived of every ecclesiastical office and benefice.

5. The dignity of the patriarchal sees

Renewing the ancient privileges of the patriarchal sees, we decree, with the approval of this
sacred universal synod, that after the Roman church, which through the Lord’s disposition
has a primacy of ordinary power over all other churches inasmuch as it is the mother and

138
mistress of all Christ’s faithful, the church of Constantinople shall have the first place, the
church of Alexandria the second place, the church of Antioch the third place, and the church
of Jerusalem the fourth place, each maintaining its own rank. Thus after their pontiffs have
received from the Roman pontiff the pallium, which is the sign of the fullness of the
pontifical office, and have taken an oath of fidelity and obedience to him they may lawfully
confer the pallium on their own suffragans, receiving from them for themselves canonical
profession and for the Roman church the promise of obedience. They may have a standard of
the Lord’s cross carried before them anywhere except in the city of Rome or wherever there
is present the supreme pontiff or his legate wearing the insignia of the apostolic dignity. In all
the provinces subject to their jurisdiction let appeal be made to them, when it is necessary,
except for appeals made to the apostolic see, to which all must humbly defer.

6. On yearly provincial councils

As is known to have been ordained of old by the holy fathers, metropolitans should not fail to
hold provincial councils each year with their suffragans in which they consider diligently and
in the fear of God the correction of excesses and the reform of morals, especially among the
clergy. Let them recite the canonical rules, especially those which have been laid down by
this general council, so as to secure their observance, inflicting on transgressors the
punishment due. In order that this may be done more effectively, let them appoint for each
diocese suitable persons, that is to say prudent and honest persons, who will simply and
summarily, without any jurisdiction, throughout the whole year, carefully investigate what
needs correction or reform and will then faithfully report these matters to the metropolitan
and suffragans and others at the next council, so that they may proceed with careful
deliberation against these and other matters according to what is profitable and decent. Let
them see to the observance of the things that they decree, publishing them in episcopal
synods which are to be held annually in each diocese. Whoever neglects to carry out this
salutary statute is to be suspended from his benefices and from the execution of his office,
until his superior decides to release him.

7. The correction of offences and the reform of morals

By this inviolable constitution we decree that prelates of churches should prudently and
diligently attend to the correction of their subjects’ offences especially of clerics, and to the
reform of morals. Otherwise the blood of such persons will be required at their hands. In
order that they may be able to exercise freely this office of correction and reform, we decree
that no custom or appeal can impede the execution of their decisions, unless they go beyond
the form which is to be observed in such matters. The offences of canons of a cathedral
church, however, which have customarily been corrected by the chapter, are to be corrected
by the chapter in those churches which until now have had this custom, at the instance and on
the orders of the bishop and within a suitable time-limit which the bishop will decide. If this
is not done, then the bishop, mindful of God and putting an end to all opposition, is to go

139
ahead with correcting the persons by ecclesiastical censure according as the care of souls
requires, and he shall not omit to correct their other faults according as the good of souls
requires, with due order however being observed in all things {3} . For the rest, if the canons
stop celebrating divine services without manifest and reasonable cause, especially if this is in
contempt of the bishop, then the bishop himself may celebrate in the cathedral church if he
wishes, and on complaint from him, the metropolitan, as our delegate in the matter, may,
when he has learned the truth, punish the persons concerned in such fashion that for fear of
punishment they shall not venture such action in the future. Let prelates of churches therefore
carefully see that they do not turn this salutary statute into a form of financial gain or other
exaction, but rather let them carry it out assiduously and faithfully, if they wish to avoid
canonical punishment, since in these matters the apostolic see, directed by the Lord, will be
very vigilant.

8. On inquests

“How and in what way a prelate ought to proceed to inquire into and punish the offences of
his subjects may be clearly ascertained from the authorities of the new and old Testament,
from which subsequent sanctions in canon law derive”, as we said distinctly some time ago
and now confirm with the approval of this holy council.

“For we read in the gospel that the steward who was denounced to his lord for wasting his
goods heard him say : What is this that I hear about you? Give an account of your
stewardship, for you can no longer be my steward. And in Genesis the Lord says : I will go
down and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry which has come to
me. From these authorities it is clearly shown that not only when a subject has committed
some excess but also when a prelate has done so, and the matter reaches the ears of the
superior through an outcry or rumour which has come not from the malevolent and
slanderous but from prudent and honest persons, and has come not only once but frequently
(as the outcry suggests and the rumour proves) , then the superior ought diligently to seek out
the truth before senior persons of the church. If the seriousness of the matter demands, then
the fault of the offender should be subjected to canonical punishment. However, the superior
should carry out the duty of his office not as if he were the accuser and the judge but rather
with the rumour providing the accusation and the outcry making the denunciation. While this
should be observed in the case of subjects, all the more carefully should it be observed in the
case of prelates, who are set as a mark for the arrow. Prelates cannot please everyone since
they are bound by their office not only to convince but also to rebuke and sometimes even to
suspend and to bind. Thus they frequently incur the hatred of many people and risk
ambushes. Therefore the holy fathers have wisely decreed that accusations against prelates
should not be admitted readily, without careful provision being taken to shut the door not
only to false but also to malicious accusations, lest with the columns being shaken the
building itself collapses. They thus wished to ensure that prelates are not accused unjustly,
and yet that at the same time they take care not to sin in an arrogant manner, finding a
suitable medicine for each disease : namely, a criminal accusation which entails loss of status,

140
that is to say degradation, shall in no wise be allowed unless it is preceded by a charge in
lawful form. But when someone is so notorious for his offences that an outcry goes up which
can no longer be ignored without scandal or be tolerated without danger, then without the
slightest hesitation let action be taken to inquire into and punish his offences, not out of hate
but rather out of charity. If the offence is grave, even though not involving his degradation,
let him be removed from all administration, in accordance with the saying of the gospel that
the steward is to be removed from his stewardship if he cannot give a proper account of it”.

The person about whom the inquiry is being made ought to be present, unless he absents
himself out of contumacy. The articles of the inquiry should be shown to him so that he may
be able to defend himself. The names of witnesses as well as their depositions are to be made
known to him so that both what has been said and by whom will be apparent; and legitimate
exceptions and responses are to be admitted, lest the suppression of names leads to the bold
bringing false charges and the exclusion of exceptions leads to false depositions being made.
A prelate should therefore act the more diligently in correcting the offences of his subjects in
proportion as he would be worthy of condemnation were he to leave them uncorrected.
Notorious cases aside, he may proceed against them in three ways : namely, by accusation,
denunciation and inquest. Let careful precaution nevertheless be taken in all cases lest serious
loss is incurred for the sake of a small gain. Thus, just as a charge in lawful form ought to
precede the accusation, so a charitable warning ought to precede the denunciation, and the
publication of the charge ought to precede the inquest, with the principle always being
observed that the form of the sentence shall accord with the rules of legal procedure. We do
not think, however, that this order needs to be observed in all respects as regards regulars,
who can be more easily and freely removed from their offices by their own superiors, when
the case requires it.

9. On different rites within the same faith

Since in many places peoples of different languages live within the same city or diocese,
having one faith but different rites and customs, we therefore strictly order bishops of such
cities and dioceses to provide suitable men who will do the following in the various rites and
languages : celebrate the divine services for them, administer the church’s sacraments, and
instruct them by word and example. We altogether forbid one and the same city or diocese to
have more than one bishop, as if it were a body with several heads like a monster. But if for
the aforesaid reasons urgent necessity demands it, the bishop of the place may appoint, after
careful deliberation, a catholic bishop who is appropriate for the nations in question and who
will be his vicar in the aforesaid matters and will be obedient and subject to him in all things.
If any such person behaves otherwise, let him know that he has been struck by the sword of
excommunication and if he does not return to his senses let him be deposed from every
ministry in the church, with the secular arm being called in if necessary to quell such great
insolence.

141
10. On appointing preachers

Among the various things that are conducive to the salvation of the christian people, the
nourishment of God’s word is recognized to be especially necessary, since just as the body is
fed with material food so the soul is fed with spiritual food, according to the words, man lives
not by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. It often happens
that bishops by themselves are not sufficient to minister the word of God to the people,
especially in large and scattered dioceses, whether this is because of their many occupations
or bodily infirmities or because of incursions of the enemy or for other reasons-let us not say
for lack of knowledge, which in bishops is to be altogether condemned and is not to be
tolerated in the future. We therefore decree by this general constitution that bishops are to
appoint suitable men to carry out with profit this duty of sacred preaching, men who are
powerful in word and deed and who will visit with care the peoples entrusted to them in place
of the bishops, since these by themselves are unable to do it, and will build them up by word
and example. The bishops shall suitably furnish them with what is necessary, when they are
in need of it, lest for want of necessities they are forced to abandon what they have begun.
We therefore order that there be appointed in both cathedral and other conventual churches
suitable men whom the bishops can have as coadjutors and cooperators not only in the office
of preaching but also in hearing confessions and enjoining penances and in other matters
which are conducive to the salvation of souls. If anyone neglects to do this, let him be subject
to severe punishment.

11. On schoolmasters for the poor

Zeal for learning and the opportunity to make progress is denied to some through lack of
means. The Lateran council therefore dutifully decreed that “in each cathedral church there
should be provided a suitable benefice for a master who shall instruct without charge the
clerics of the cathedral church and other poor scholars, thus at once satisfying the teacher’s
needs and opening up the way of knowledge to learners”. This decree, however, is very little
observed in many churches. We therefore confirm it and add that not only in every cathedral
church but also in other churches with sufficient resources, a suitable master elected by the
chapter or by the greater and sounder part of it, shall be appointed by the prelate to teach
grammar and other branches of study, as far as is possible, to the clerics of those and other
churches. The metropolitan church shall have a theologian to teach scripture to priests and
others and especially to instruct them in matters which are recognized as pertaining to the
cure of souls. The income of one prebend shall be assigned by the chapter to each master, and
as much shall be assigned by the metropolitan to the theologian. The incumbent does not by
this become a canon but he receives the income of one as long as he continues to teach. If the
metropolitan church finds providing for two masters a burden, let it provide for the
theologian in an aforesaid way but get adequate provision made for the grammarian in
another church of the city or diocese.

142
12. On general chapters of monks

In every kingdom or province let there be held every three years, saving the right of diocesan
bishops, a general chapter of those abbots, and priors who do not have abbots over them, who
have not been accustomed to hold one. All should attend, unless they have a canonical
impediment, at one of the monasteries which is suitable for the purpose; with this limitation,
that none of them brings with him more than six mounts and eight persons. Let them invite in
charity, at the start of this innovation, two neighbouring Cistercian abbots to give them
appropriate advice and help, since from long practice the Cistercians are well informed about
holding such chapters. The two abbots shall then coopt without opposition two suitable
persons from among them. The four of them shall then preside over the whole chapter, in
such a way however that none of them assumes the leadership; so that they can if necessary
be changed after careful deliberation. This kind of chapter shall be held continuously over a
certain number of days, according to Cistercian custom. They shall treat carefully of the
reform of the order and the observance of the rule. What has been decided, with the approval
of the four presiding, is to be observed inviolably by all without any excuse or contradiction
or appeal. They shall also decide where the next chapter is to be held. Those attending shall
lead a common life and divide out proportionately all the common expenses. If they cannot
all live in the same house, let them at least live in groups in various houses.

Let religious and circumspect persons be appointed at the chapter who will make it their
business to visit on our behalf all the abbeys of the kingdom or province, of both monks and
nuns, according to the manner prescribed for them. Let them correct and reform what seems
to need correction and reform. Thus if they know of the superior of a place who should
certainly be removed from office, let them denounce the person to the bishop concerned so
that he may see to his or her removal. If the bishop will not do this, let the visitors themselves
refer the matter to the apostolic see for examination. We wish and command canons regular
to observe this according to their order. If there emerges out of this innovation any difficulty
that cannot be resolved by the aforesaid persons, let it be referred, without offence being
given, to the judgment of the apostolic see; but let the other matters, about which after careful
deliberation they were in agreement, be observed without breach. Diocesan bishops,
moreover, should take care to reform the monasteries under their jurisdiction, so that when
the aforesaid visitors arrive they will find in them more to commend than to correct. Let them
be very careful lest the said monasteries are weighed down by them with unjust burdens, for
just as we wish the rights of superiors to be upheld so we do not wish to support wrongs done
to subjects. Furthermore, we strictly command both diocesan bishops and those who preside
at chapters to restrain by ecclesiastical censure, without appeal, advocates, patrons, lords’
deputies, governors, officials, magnates, knights, and any other people, from daring to cause
harm to monasteries in respect of their persons and their goods. Let them not fail to compel
such persons, if by chance they do cause harm, to make satisfaction, so that almighty God
may be served more freely and more peacefully.

13. A prohibition against new religious orders

143
Lest too great a variety of religious orders leads to grave confusion in God’s church, we
strictly forbid anyone henceforth to found a new religious order. Whoever wants to become a
religious should enter one of the already approved orders. Likewise, whoever wishes to found
a new religious house should take the rule and institutes from already approved religious
orders. We forbid, moreover, anyone to attempt to have a place as a monk in more than one
monastery or an abbot to preside over more than one monastery.

14. Clerical incontinence

In order that the morals and conduct of clerics may be reformed for the better, let all of them
strive to live in a continent and chaste way, especially those in holy orders. Let them beware
of every vice involving lust, especially that on account of which the wrath of God came down
from heaven upon the sons of disobedience, so that they may be worthy to minister in the
sight of almighty God with a pure heart and an unsullied body. Lest the ease of receiving
pardon prove an incentive to sin, we decree that those who are caught giving way to the vice
of incontinence are to be punished according to canonical sanctions, in proportion to the
seriousness of their sins. We order such sanctions to be effectively and strictly observed, in
order that those whom the fear of God does not hold back from evil may at least be restrained
from sin by temporal punishment. Therefore anyone who has been suspended for this reason
and presumes to celebrate divine services, shall not only be deprived of his ecclesiastical
benefices but shall also, on account of his twofold fault, be deposed in perpetuity. Prelates
who dare to support such persons in their wickedness, especially if they do it for money or for
some other temporal advantage, are to be subject to like punishment. Those clerics who have
not renounced the marriage bond, following the custom of their region, shall be punished
even more severely if they fall into sin, since for them it is possible to make lawful use of
matrimony.

15. Clerical gluttony and drunkeness

All clerics should carefully abstain from gluttony and drunkenness. They should temper the
wine to themselves and themselves to the wine. Let no one be urged to drink, since
drunkenness obscures the intellect and stirs up lust. Accordingly we decree that that abuse is
to be entirely abolished whereby in some places drinkers bind themselves to drink equal
amounts, and that man is most praised who makes the most people drunk and himself drains
the deepest cups. If anyone shows himself worthy of blame in these matters, let him be
suspended from his benefice or office, unless after being warned by his superior he makes
suitable satisfaction. We forbid all clerics to hunt or to fowl, so let them not presume to have
dogs or birds for fowling {4} .

16. Decorum in the dress and behaviour of clerics

144
Clerics should not practice callings or business of a secular nature, especially those that are
dishonourable. They should not watch mimes, entertainers and actors. Let them avoid taverns
altogether, unless by chance they are obliged by necessity on a journey. They should not play
at games of chance or of dice, nor be present at such games. They should have a suitable
crown and tonsure, and let them diligently apply themselves to the divine services and other
good pursuits. Their outer garments should be closed and neither too short nor too long. Let
them not indulge in red or green cloths, long sleeves or shoes with embroidery or pointed
toes, or in bridles, saddles, breast-plates and spurs that are gilded or have other superfluous
ornamentation. Let them not wear cloaks with sleeves at divine services in a church, nor even
elsewhere, if they are priests or parsons, unless a justifiable fear requires a change of dress.
They are not to wear buckles or belts ornamented with gold or silver, or even rings except for
those whose dignity it befits to have them. All bishops should wear outer garments of linen in
public and in church, unless they have been monks, in which case they should wear the
monastic habit; and let them not wear their cloaks loose in public but rather fastened together
behind the neck or across the chest.

17. Dissolute prelates

We regretfully relate that not only certain lesser clerics but also some prelates of churches
pass almost half the night in unnecessary feasting and forbidden conversation, not to mention
other things, and leaving what is left of the night for sleep, they are barely roused at the dawn
chorus of the birds and pass away the entire morning in a continuous state of stupor. There
are others who celebrate mass barely four times a year and, what is worse, do not bother to
attend; if they happen to be present when it is being celebrated, they flee the silence of the
choir and pay attention to conversations of the laity outside and so while they attend to talk
that is unnecessary for them, they do not give an attentive ear to the things of God. We
altogether forbid these and similar things on pain of suspension. We strictly command such
persons, in virtue of obedience, to celebrate the divine office, day and night alike, as far as
God allows them, with both zeal and devotion.

18. Clerics to dissociate from shedding-blood

No cleric may decree or pronounce a sentence involving the shedding of blood, or carry out a
punishment involving the same, or be present when such punishment is carried out. If
anyone, however, under cover of this statute, dares to inflict injury on churches or
ecclesiastical persons, let him be restrained by ecclesiastical censure. A cleric may not write
or dictate letters which require punishments involving the shedding of blood, in the courts of
princes this responsibility should be entrusted to laymen and not to clerics. Moreover no
cleric may be put in command of mercenaries or crossbowmen or suchlike men of blood; nor
may a subdeacon, deacon or priest practise the art of surgery, which involves cauterizing and
making incisions; nor may anyone confer a rite of blessing or consecration on a purgation by

145
ordeal of boiling or cold water or of the red-hot iron, saving nevertheless the previously
promulgated prohibitions regarding single combats and duels.

19. That profane objects may not be stored in churches

We are unwilling to tolerate the fact that certain clerics deposit in churches their own and
even others’ furniture, so that the churches look like lay houses rather than basilicas of God,
regardless of the fact that the Lord would not allow a vessel to be carried through the temple.
There are others who not only leave their churches uncared for but also leave the service
vessels and ministers’ vestments and altar cloths and even corporals so dirty that they at times
horrify some people. Because zeal for God’s house consumes us, we strictly forbid objects of
this kind to be allowed into churches, unless they have to be taken in on account of enemy
incursions or sudden fires or other urgent necessities, and then in such a way that when the
emergency is over the objects are taken back to where they came from. We also order the
aforesaid churches, vessels, corporals and vestments to be kept neat and clean. For it seems
too absurd to take no notice of squalor in sacred things when it is unbecoming even in
profane things.

20. Chrism and the Eucharist to be kept under lock and key

We decree that the chrism and the eucharist are to be kept locked away in a safe place in all
churches, so that no audacious hand can reach them to do anything horrible or impious. If he
who is responsible for their safe-keeping leaves them around carelessly, let him be suspended
from office for three months; if anything unspeakable happens on account of his carelessness,
let him be subject to graver punishment.

21. On yearly confession to one’s own priest, yearly communion, the confessional seal

All the faithful of either sex, after they have reached the age of discernment, should
individually confess all their sins in a faithful manner to their own priest at least once a year,
and let them take care to do what they can to perform the penance imposed on them. Let them
reverently receive the sacrament of the eucharist at least at Easter unless they think, for a
good reason and on the advice of their own priest, that they should abstain from receiving it
for a time. Otherwise they shall be barred from entering a church during their lifetime and
they shall be denied a christian burial at death. Let this salutary decree be frequently
published in churches, so that nobody may find the pretence of an excuse in the blindness of
ignorance. If any persons wish, for good reasons, to confess their sins to another priest let
them first ask and obtain the permission of their own priest; for otherwise the other priest will
not have the power to absolve or to bind them. The priest shall be discerning and prudent, so
that like a skilled doctor he may pour wine and oil over the wounds of the injured one. Let
him carefully inquire about the circumstances of both the sinner and the sin, so that he may

146
prudently discern what sort of advice he ought to give and what remedy to apply, using
various means to heal the sick person. Let him take the utmost care, however, not to betray
the sinner at all by word or sign or in any other way. If the priest needs wise advice, let him
seek it cautiously without any mention of the person concerned. For if anyone presumes to
reveal a sin disclosed to him in confession, we decree that he is not only to be deposed from
his priestly office but also to be confined to a strict monastery to do perpetual penance.

22. Physicians of the body to advise patients to call physicians of the soul

As sickness of the body may sometimes be the result of sin — as the Lord said to the sick
man whom he had cured, Go and sin no more, lest something worse befall you — so we by
this present decree order and strictly command physicians of the body, when they are called
to the sick, to warn and persuade them first of all to call in physicians of the soul so that after
their spiritual health has been seen to they may respond better to medicine for their bodies,
for when the cause ceases so does the effect. This among other things has occasioned this
decree, namely that some people on their sickbed, when they are advised by physicians to
arrange for the health of their souls, fall into despair and so the more readily incur the danger
of death. If any physician transgresses this our constitution, after it has been published by the
local prelates, he shall be barred from entering a church until he has made suitable
satisfaction for a transgression of this kind. Moreover, since the soul is much more precious
than the body, we forbid any physician, under pain of anathema, to prescribe anything for the
bodily health of a sick person that may endanger his soul.

23. Churches are to be without a prelate for no more than 3 months

Lest a rapacious wolf attack the Lord’s flock for want of a shepherd, or lest a widowed
church suffer grave injury to its good, we decree, desiring to counteract the danger to souls in
this matter and to provide protection for the churches, that a cathedral church or a church of
the regular clergy is not to remain without a prelate for more than three months. If the
election has not been held within this time, provided there is no just impediment, then those
who ought to have made the election are to lose the power to elect for that time and it is to
devolve upon the person who is recognized as the immediate superior. The person upon
whom the power has devolved, mindful of the Lord, shall not delay beyond three months in
canonically providing the widowed church, with the advice of his chapter and of other
prudent men, with a suitable person from the same church, or from another if a worthy
candidate cannot be found in the former, if he wishes to avoid canonical penalty.

24. Democratic election of pastors

On account of the various forms of elections which some try to invent, there arise many
difficulties and great dangers for the bereaved churches. We therefore decree that at the

147
holding of an election, when all are present who ought to, want to and conveniently can take
part, three trustworthy persons shall be chosen from the college who will diligently find out,
in confidence and individually, the opinions of everybody. After they have committed the
result to writing, they shall together quickly announce it. There shall be no further appeal, so
that after a scrutiny that person shall be elected upon whom all or the greater or sounder part
of the chapter agree. Or else the power of electing shall be committed to some suitable
persons who, acting on behalf of everybody, shall provide the bereaved church with a pastor.
Otherwise the election made shall not be valid, unless perchance it was made by all together
as if by divine inspiration and without flaw. Those who attempt to make an election contrary
to the aforesaid forms shall be deprived of the power of electing on that occasion. We
absolutely forbid anyone to appoint a proxy in the matter of an election, unless he is absent
from the place where he ought to receive the summons and is detained from coming by a
lawful impediment. He shall take an oath about this, if necessary, and then he may commit
his representation to one of the college, if he so wishes. We also condemn clandestine
elections and order that as soon as an election has taken place it should be solemnly
published.

25. Invalid elections

Whoever presumes to consent to his being elected through abuse of the secular power,
against canonical freedom, both forfeits the benefit of being elected and becomes ineligible,
and he cannot be elected to any dignity without a dispensation. Those who venture to take
part in elections of this kind, which we declare to be invalid by the law itself, shall be
suspended from their offices and benefices for three years and during that time shall be
deprived of the power to elect.

26. Nominees for prelatures to be carefully screened

There is nothing more harmful to God’s church than for unworthy prelates to be entrusted
with the government of souls. Wishing therefore to provide the necessary remedy for this
disease, we decree by this irrevocable constitution that when anyone has been entrusted with
the government of souls, then he who holds the right to confirm him should diligently
examine both the process of the election and the character of the person elected, so that when
everything is in order he may confirm him. For, if confirmation was granted in advance when
everything was not in order, then not only would the person improperly promoted have to be
rejected but also the author of the improper promotion would have to be punished. We decree
that the latter shall be punished in the following way : if his negligence has been proved,
especially if he has approved a man of insufficient learning or dishonest life or unlawful age,
he shall not only lose the power of confirming the person’s first successor but shall also, lest
by any chance he escapes punishment, be suspended from receiving the fruits of his own
benefice until it is right for him to be granted a pardon. If he is convicted of having erred
intentionally in the matter, then he is to be subject to graver punishment. Bishops too, if they

148
wish to avoid canonical punishment, should take care to promote to holy orders and to
ecclesiastical dignities men who will be able to discharge worthily the office entrusted to
them. Those who are immediately subject to the Roman pontiff shall, to obtain confirmation
of their office, present themselves personally to him, if this can conveniently be done, or send
suitable persons through whom a careful inquiry can be made about the process of the
election and the persons elected. In this way, on the strength of the pontiff’s informed
judgment, they may finally enter into the fullness of their office, when there is no impediment
in canon law. For a time, however, those who are in very distant parts, namely outside Italy,
if they were elected peaceably, may by dispensation, on account of the needs and benefit of
the churches, administer in things spiritual and temporal, but in such a way that they alienate
nothing whatever of the church’s goods. They may receive the customary consecration or
blessing.

27. Candidates for the priesthood to be carefully trained and scrutinized

To guide souls is a supreme art. We therefore strictly order bishops carefully to prepare those
who are to be promoted to the priesthood and to instruct them, either by themselves or
through other suitable persons, in the divine services and the sacraments of the church, so that
they may be able to celebrate them correctly. But if they presume henceforth to ordain the
ignorant and unformed, which can indeed easily be detected, we decree that both the
ordainers and those ordained are to be subject to severe punishment. For it is preferable,
especially in the ordination of priests, to have a few good ministers than many bad ones, for if
a blind man leads another blind man, both will fall into the pit.

28. Who asks to resign must resign

Certain persons insistently ask for permission to resign and obtain it, but then do not resign.
Since in such a request to resign they would seem to have in mind either the good of the
churches over which they preside or their own well-being, neither of which do we wish to be
impeded either by the arguments of any people seeking their own interests or even by a
certain fickleness, we therefore decree that such persons are to be compelled to resign.

29. Multiple benefices require papal dispensation

With much foresight it was forbidden in the Lateran council for anyone to receive several
ecclesiastical dignities and several parish churches, contrary to the regulations of the sacred
canons, on pain of both the recipient losing what he had received and the conferrer being
deprived of the power to confer. On account of the presumption and covetousness of certain
persons, however, none or little fruit is resulting from this statute. We therefore, desiring to
remedy the situation more clearly and expressly, ordain by this present decree that whoever
receives any benefice with the cure of souls attached, if he was already in possession of such

149
a benefice, shall be deprived by the law itself of the benefice held first, and if perchance he
tries to retain this he shall also be deprived of the second benefice. Moreover, the person who
has the right to confer the first benefice may freely bestow it, after the recipient has obtained
a second benefice, on someone who seems to deserve it. If he delays in conferring it beyond
three months, however, then not only is the collation to devolve upon another person,
according to the statute of the Lateran council, but also he shall be compelled to assign to the
use of the church belonging to the benefice as much of his own income as is established as
having been received from the benefice while it was vacant. We decree that the same is to be
observed with regard to parsonages adding that nobody shall presume to hold several
dignities or parsonages in the same church even if they do not have the cure of souls. As for
exalted and lettered persons, however, who should be honoured with greater benefices, it is
possible for them to be dispensed by the apostolic see, when reason demands it.

30. Penalties for bestowing ecclesiatical benefices on the unworthy

It is very serious and absurd that prelates of churches, when they can promote suitable men to
ecclesiastical benefices, are not afraid to choose unworthy men who lack both learning and
honesty of behaviour and who follow the urgings of the flesh rather than the judgment of
reason. Nobody of a sound mind is ignorant of how much damage to churches arises from
this. Wishing therefore to remedy this ill, we order that they pass over unworthy persons and
appoint suitable persons who are willing and able to offer a pleasing service to God and to the
churches, and that careful inquiry be made about this each year at the provincial council.
Therefore he who has been found guilty after a first and second correction is to be suspended
from conferring benefices by the provincial council, and a prudent and honest person is to be
appointed at the same council to make up for the suspended person’s failure in this matter.
The same is to be observed with regard to chapters who offend in these matters. The offence
of a metropolitan, however, shall be left by the council to be reported to the judgment of the
superior. In order that this salutary provision may have fuller effect, a sentence of suspension
of this kind may not be relaxed at all without the authority of the Roman pontiff or of the
appropriate patriarch, so that in this too the four patriarchal sees shall be specially honoured.

31. Canons’ sons cannot be canons where their fathers are

In order to abolish a very bad practice that has grown up in many churches, we strictly forbid
the sons of canons, especially if they are illegitimate, to become canons in the secular
churches in which their fathers hold office. If the contrary is attempted, we declare it to be
invalid. Those who attempt to make such persons canons are to be suspended from their
benefices.

32. Parish priests to have adequate incomes

150
There has grown up in certain parts a vicious custom which should be eradicated, namely that
patrons of parish churches and certain other people claim the incomes from the churches
wholly for themselves and leave to the priests, for the appointed services, such a small
portion that they cannot live fittingly on it. For in some regions, as we have learnt for certain,
parish priests receive for their sustenance only a quarter of a quarter, that is to say a sixteenth,
of the tithes. Whence it comes about in these regions that almost no parish priest can be found
who is even moderately learned. As the mouth of the ox should not be muzzled when it is
treading out the grain, and he who serves at the altar should live from it, we therefore decree
that, notwithstanding any custom of a bishop or a patron or anyone else, a sufficient portion is
to be assigned to the priest. He who has a parish church is to serve it not through a vicar but
in person, in the due form which the care of that church requires, unless by chance the parish
church is annexed to a prebend or a dignity. In that case we allow that he who has such a
prebend or dignity should make it his business, since he must serve in the greater church, to
have a suitable and permanent vicar canonically instituted in the parish church; and the latter
is to have, as has been said, a fitting portion from the revenues of the church. Otherwise let
him know that by the authority of this decree he is deprived of the parish church, which is
freely to be conferred on someone else who is willing and able to do what has been said. We
utterly forbid anyone to dare deceitfully to confer a pension on another person, as it were as a
benefice, from the revenues of a church which has to maintain its own priest.

33. Renumeration for visitations to be reasonable

Procurations which are due, by reason of a visitation, to bishops, archdeacons or any other
persons, as well as to legates or nuncios of the apostolic see, should by no means be exacted,
without a clear and necessary reason, unless the visitations were carried out in person, and
then let them observe the moderation in transport and retinue laid down in the Lateran
council. We add the following moderation with regard to legates and nuncios of the apostolic
see : that when it is necessary for them to stay in any place, and in order that the said place
may not be burdened too much on their behalf, they may receive moderate procurations from
other churches and persons that have not yet been burdened with procurations of their own,
on condition that the number of procurations does-not exceed the number of days in the stay;
and when any of the churches or persons have not sufficient means of their own, two or more
of them may be combined into one. Those who exercise the office of visitation, moreover,
shall not seek their own interests but rather those of Jesus Christ, by devoting themselves to
preaching and exhortation, to correction and reformation, so that they may bring back fruit
which does not perish. He who dares to do the contrary shall both restore what he has
received and pay a like amount in compensation to the church which he has thus burdened.

34. Prelates forbidden to procure ecclesiastical services at a profit

Many prelates, in order to meet the cost of a procuration or some service to a legate or some
other person, extort from their subjects more than they pay out, and in trying to extract a

151
profit from their losses they look for booty rather than help in their subjects. We forbid this to
happen in the future. If by chance anyone does attempt it, he shall restore what he has
extorted and be compelled to give the same amount to the poor. The superior to whom a
complaint about this has been submitted shall suffer canonical punishment if he is negligent
in executing this statute.

35. On appeal procedures

In order that due honour may be given to judges and consideration be shown to litigants in
the matter of trouble and expenses, we decree that when somebody sues an adversary before
the competent judge, he shall not appeal to a superior judge before judgment has been given,
without a reasonable cause; but rather let him proceed with his suit before the lower judge,
without it being possible for him to obstruct by saying that he sent a messenger to a superior
judge or even procured letters from him before they were assigned to the delegated judge.
When, however, he thinks that he has reasonable cause for appealing and has stated the
probable grounds of the appeal before the same judge, such namely that if they were proved
they would be reckoned legitimate, the superior judge shall examine the appeal. If the latter
thinks the appeal is unreasonable, he shall send the appellant back to the lower judge and
sentence him to pay the costs of the other party; otherwise he shall go ahead, saving however
the canons about major cases being referred to the apostolic see.

TOP

36. On interlocutory sentences

Since the effect ceases when the cause ceases, we decree that if an ordinary judge or a judge
delegate has pronounced a comminatory or an interlocutory sentence which would prejudice
one of the litigants if its execution was ordered, and then acting on good advice refrains from
putting it into effect, he shall proceed freely in hearing the case, notwithstanding any appeal
made against such a comminatory or interlocutory sentence, provided he is not open to
suspicion for some other legitimate reason. This is so that the process is not held up for
frivolous reasons.

TOP

37. On Summons by Apostolic Letter

Some people, abusing the favour of the apostolic see, try to obtain letters from it summoning
people to distant judges, so that the defendant, wearied by the labour and expense of the
action, is forced to give in or to buy off the importunate bringer of the action. A trial should
not open the way to injustices that are forbidden by respect for the law. We therefore decree
that nobody may be summoned by apostolic letters to a trial that is more than two days’
journey outside his diocese, unless the letters were procured with the agreement of both

152
parties or expressly mention this constitution. There are other people who, turning to a new
kind of trade, in order to revive complaints that are dormant or to introduce new questions,
make up suits for which they procure letters from the apostolic see without authorization
from their superiors. They then offer the letters for sale either to the defendant, in return for
his not being vexed with trouble and expense on account of them, or to the plaintiff, in order
that by means of them he may wear out his adversary with undue distress. Lawsuits should be
limited rather than encouraged. We therefore decree by this general constitution that if
anyone henceforth presumes to seek apostolic letters on any matter without a special mandate
from his superior, then the letters are invalid and he is to be punished as a forger, unless by
chance persons are involved for whom a mandate should not in law be demanded.

38. Written records of trials to be kept

An innocent litigant can never prove the truth of his denial of a false assertion made by an
unjust judge, since a denial by the nature of things does not constitute a direct proof. We
therefore decree, lest falsehood prejudice truth or wickedness prevail over justice, that in both
ordinary and extraordinary trials the judge shall always employ either a public official, if he
can find one, or two suitable men to write down faithfully all the judicial acts — that is to say
the citations, adjournments, objections and exceptions, petitions and replies, interrogations,
confessions, depositions of witnesses, productions of documents, interlocutions {5} , appeals,
renunciations, final decisions and the other things that ought to be written down in the correct
order — stating the places, times and persons. Everything thus written down shall be given to
the parties in question, but the originals shall remain with the scribes, so that if a dispute
arises over how the judge conducted the case, the truth can be established from the originals.
With this measure being applied, such deference will be paid to honest and prudent judges
that justice for the innocent will not be harmed by imprudent and wicked judges. A judge
who neglects to observe this constitution shall, if some difficulty arises from his negligence,
be punished as he deserves by a superior judge; nor shall presumption be made in favour of
his handling of the case except insofar as it accords with the legal documents.

39. On knowingly receiving stolen goods

It often happens, when a person has been unjustly robbed and the object has been transferred
by the robber to a third party, that he is not helped by an action of restitution against the new
possessor because he has lost the advantage of possession, and he loses in effect the right of
ownership on account of the difficulty of proving his case. We therefore decree,
notwithstanding the force of civil law, that if anyone henceforth knowingly receives such a
thing, then the one robbed shall be favoured by his being awarded restitution against the one
in possession. For the latter as it were succeeds the robber in his vice, inasmuch as there is
not much difference, especially as regards danger to the soul, between unjustly hanging on to
another’s property and seizing it.

153
40. True owner is the true possessor even if not possessing the object for a year

It sometimes happens that when possession of something is awarded to the plaintiff in a suit,
on account of the contumacy of the other party, yet because of force or fraud over the thing
he is unable to obtain custody of it within a year, or having gained it he loses it. Thus the
defendant profits from his own wickedness, because in the opinion of many the plaintiff does
not qualify as the true possessor at the end of a year. Lest therefore a contumacious party is in
a better position than an obedient one, we decree, in the name of canonical equity, that in the
aforesaid case the plaintiff shall be established as the true possessor after the year has
elapsed. Furthermore, we issue a general prohibition against promising to abide by the
decision of a layman in spiritual matters, since it is not fitting for a layman to arbitrate in such
matters.

41. No one is to knowingly prescribe an object to the wrong party

Since whatever does not proceed from faith is sin, and since in general any constitution or
custom which cannot be observed without mortal sin is to be disregarded, we therefore define
by this synodal judgment that no prescription, whether canonical or civil, is valid without
good faith. It is therefore necessary that the person who prescribes should at no stage be
aware that the object belongs to someone else.

42. Clerics and laity are not to usurp each others rights

Just as we desire lay people not to usurp the rights of clerics, so we ought to wish clerics not
to lay claim to the rights of the laity. We therefore forbid every cleric henceforth to extend his
jurisdiction, under pretext of ecclesiastical freedom, to the prejudice of secular justice.
Rather, let him be satisfied with the written constitutions and customs hitherto approved, so
that the things of Caesar may be rendered unto Caesar, and the things of God may be
rendered unto God by a right distribution.

43. Clerics cannot be forced to take oaths of fealty to those from whom they hold no
temporalities

Certain laymen try to encroach too far upon divine right when they force ecclesiastics who do
not hold any temporalities from them to take oaths of fealty to them. Since a servant stands or
falls with his Lord, according to the Apostle, we therefore forbid, on the authority of this
sacred council, that such clerics be forced to take an oath of this kind to secular persons.

44. Only clerics may dispose of church property

154
Lay people, however devout, have no power to dispose of church property. Their lot is to
obey, not to be in command. We therefore grieve that charity is growing cold in some of
them so that they are not afraid to attack through their ordinances, or rather their fabrications,
the immunity of ecclesiastical freedom, which has in the past been protected with many
privileges not only by holy fathers but also by secular princes. They do this not only by
alienating fiefs and other possessions of the church and by usurping jurisdictions but also by
illegally laying hands on mortuaries and other things which are seen to belong to spiritual
justice. We wish to ensure the immunity of churches in these matters and to provide against
such great injuries. We therefore decree, with the approval of this sacred council, that
ordinances of this kind and claims to fiefs or other goods of the church, made by way of a
decree of the lay power, without the proper consent of ecclesiastical persons, are invalid since
they can be said to be not laws but rather acts of destitution or destruction and usurpations of
jurisdiction. Those who dare to do these things are to be restrained by ecclesiastical censure.

45. Penalties for patrons who steal church goods or physically harm their clerics

Patrons of churches, lords’ deputies and advocates have displayed such arrogance in some
provinces that they not only introduce difficulties and evil designs when vacant churches
ought to be provided with suitable pastors, but they also presume to dispose of the
possessions and other goods of the church as they like and, what is dreadful to relate, they are
not afraid to set about killing prelates. What was devised for protection should not be twisted
into a means of repression. We therefore expressly forbid patrons, advocates and lords’
deputies henceforth to appropriate more in the aforesaid matters than is permitted in law. If
they dare to do the contrary, let them be curbed with the most severe canonical penalties. We
decree, moreover, with the approval of this sacred council, that if patrons or advocates or
feudatories or lords’ deputies or other persons with benefices venture with unspeakable
daring to kill or to mutilate, personally or through others, the rector of any church or other
cleric of that church, then the patron shall lose completely his right of patronage, the advocate
his advocation, the feudatory his fief, the lord’s deputy his deputyship and the beneficed
person his benefice. And lest the punishment be remembered for less time than the crime,
nothing of the aforesaid shall descend to their heirs, and their posterity to the fourth
generation shall in nowise be admitted into a college of clerics or to hold the honour of any
prelacy in a religious house, except when out of mercy they are dispensed to do so.

46. Taxes cannot be levied on the Church, but the Church can volunteer contributions for the
common good

The Lateran council, wishing to provide for the immunity of the church against officials and
governors of cities and other persons who seek to oppress churches and churchmen with
tallages and taxes and other exactions, forbade such presumption under pain of anathema. It
ordered transgressors and their supporters to be excommunicated until they made adequate

155
satisfaction. If at some time, however, a bishop together with his clergy foresee so great a
need or advantage that they consider, without any compulsion, that subsidies should be given
by the churches, for the common good or the common need, when the resources of the laity
are not sufficient, then the above-mentioned laymen may receive them humbly and devoutly
and with thanks. On account of the imprudence of some, however, the Roman pontiff, whose
business it is to provide for the common good, should be consulted beforehand. We add,
moreover, since the malice of some against God’s church has not abated, that the ordinances
and sentences promulgated by such excommunicated persons, or on their orders, are to be
deemed null and void and shall never be valid. Since fraud and deceit should not protect
anyone, let nobody be deceived by false error to endure an anathema during his term of
government as though he is not obliged to make satisfaction afterwards. For we decree that
both he who has refused to make satisfaction and his successor, if he does not make
satisfaction within a month, is to remain bound by ecclesiastical censure until he makes
suitable satisfaction, since he who succeeds to a post also succeeds to its responsibilities.

47. On unjust excommunication

With the approval of this sacred council, we forbid anyone to promulgate a sentence of
excommunication on anyone, unless an adequate warning has been given beforehand in the
presence of suitable persons, who can if necessary testify to the warning. If anyone dares to
do the contrary, even if the sentence of excommunication is just, let him know that he is
forbidden to enter a church for one month and he is to be punished with another penalty if
this seems expedient. Let him carefully avoid proceeding to excommunicate anyone without
manifest and reasonable cause. If he does so proceed and, on being humbly requested, does
not take care to revoke the process without imposing punishment, then the injured person
may lodge a complaint of unjust excommunication with a superior judge. The latter shall then
send the person back to the judge who excommunicated him, if this can be done without the
danger of a delay, with orders that he is to be absolved within a suitable period of time. If the
danger of delay cannot be avoided, the task of absolving him shall be carried out by the
superior judge, either in person or through someone else, as seems expedient, after he has
obtained adequate guarantees. Whenever it is established that the judge pronounced an unjust
excommunication, he shall be condemned to make compensation for damages to the one
excommunicated, and be nonetheless punished in another way at the discretion of the
superior judge if the nature of the fault calls for it, since it is not a trivial fault to inflict so
great a punishment on an innocent person — unless by chance he erred for reasons that are
credible — especially if the person is of praiseworthy repute. But if nothing reasonable is
proved against the sentence of excommunication by the one making the complaint, then the
complainant shall be condemned in punishment, for the unreasonable trouble caused by his
complaint, to make compensation or in some other way according to the discretion of the
superior judge, unless by chance his error was based on something that is credible and so
excuses him; and he shall moreover be compelled upon a pledge to make satisfaction in the
matter for which he was justly excommunicated, or else he shall be subject again to the
former sentence which is to be inviolably observed until full satisfaction has been made. If

156
the judge, however, recognizes his error and is prepared to revoke the sentence, but the
person on whom it was passed appeals, for fear that the judge might revoke it without making
satisfaction, then the appeal shall not be admitted unless the error is such that it may deserve
to be questioned. Then the judge, after he has given sufficient security that he will appear in
court before the person to whom the appeal had been made or one delegated by him, shall
absolve the excommunicated person and thus shall not be subject to the prescribed
punishment. Let the judge altogether beware, if he wishes to avoid strict canonical
punishment, lest out of a perverse intention to harm someone he pretends to have made an
error.

48. Challenging an ecclesiastical judge

Since a special prohibition has been made against anyone presuming to promulgate a
sentence of excommunication against someone without adequate warning being given
beforehand, we therefore wish to provide against the person warned being able, by means of
a fraudulent objection or appeal, to escape examination by the one issuing the warning. We
therefore decree that if the person alleges he holds the judge suspect, let him bring before the
same judge an action of just suspicion; and he himself in agreement with his adversary (or
with the judge, if he happens not to have an adversary) shall together choose arbiters or, if by
chance they are unable to reach agreement together, he shall choose one arbiter and the other
another, to take cognisance of the action of suspicion. If these cannot agree on a judgment
they shall call in a third person so that what two of them decide upon shall have binding
force. Let them know that they are bound to carry this out faithfully, in accordance with the
command strictly enjoined by us in virtue of obedience and under the attestation of the divine
judgment. If the action of suspicion is not proved in law before them within a suitable time,
the judge shall exercise his jurisdiction; if the action is proved, then with the consent of the
objector the challenged judge shall commit the matter to a suitable person or shall refer it to a
superior judge so that he may conduct the matter as it should be conducted. As for the person
who has been warned but then hastens to make an appeal, if his offence is made manifest in
law by the evidence of the case or by his own confession or in some other way, then
provocation of this kind is not to be tolerated, since the remedy of an appeal was not
established to defend wickedness but to protect innocence. If there is some doubt about his
offence, then the appellant shall, lest he impedes the judge’s action by the subterfuge of a
frivolous appeal, set before the same judge the credible reason for his appeal, such namely
that if it was proved it would be considered legitimate. Then if he has an adversary, let him
proceed with his appeal within the time laid down by the same judge according to the
distances, times and nature of the business involved. If he does not prosecute his appeal, the
judge himself shall proceed notwithstanding the appeal. If the adversary does not appear
when the judge is proceeding in virtue of his office, then once the reason for the appeal has
been verified before the superior judge the latter shall exercise his jurisdiction. If the
appellant fails to get the reason for his appeal verified, he shall be sent back to the judge from
whom it has been established that he appealed maliciously. We do not wish the above two
constitutions to be extended to regulars, who have their own special observances. ‘

157
49. Penalties for excommunication out of avarice

We absolutely forbid, under threat of the divine judgment, anyone to dare to bind anyone
with the bond of excommunication, or to absolve anyone so bound, out of avarice. We forbid
this especially in those regions where by custom an excommunicated person is punished by a
money penalty when he is absolved. We decree that when it has been established that a
sentence of excommunication was unjust, the excommunicator shall be compelled by
ecclesiastical censure to restore the money thus extorted, and shall pay as much again to his
victim for the injury unless he was deceived by an understandable error. If perchance he is
unable to pay, he shall be punished in some other way.

50. Prohibition of marriage is now perpetually restricted to the fourth degree

It should not be judged reprehensible if human decrees are sometimes changed according to
changing circumstances, especially when urgent necessity or evident advantage demands it,
since God himself changed in the new Testament some of the things which he had
commanded in the old Testament. Since the prohibitions against contracting marriage in the
second and third degree of affinity, and against uniting the offspring of a second marriage
with the kindred of the first husband, often lead to difficulty and sometimes endanger souls,
we therefore, in order that when the prohibition ceases the effect may also cease, revoke with
the approval of this sacred council the constitutions published on this subject and we decree,
by this present constitution, that henceforth contracting parties connected in these ways may
freely be joined together. Moreover the prohibition against marriage shall not in future go
beyond the fourth degree of consanguinity and of affinity, since the prohibition cannot now
generally be observed to further degrees without grave harm. The number four agrees well
with the prohibition concerning bodily union about which the Apostle says, that the husband
does not rule over his body, but the wife does; and the wife does not rule over her body, but
the husband does; for there are four humours in the body, which is composed of the four
elements. Although the prohibition of marriage is now restricted to the fourth degree, we
wish the prohibition to be perpetual, notwithstanding earlier decrees on this subject issued
either by others or by us. If any persons dare to marry contrary to this prohibition, they shall
not be protected by length of years, since the passage of time does not diminish sin but
increases it, and the longer that faults hold the unfortunate soul in bondage the graver they
are.

51. Clandestine marriages forbidden

Since the prohibition against marriage in the three remotest degrees has been revoked, we
wish it to be strictly observed in the other degrees. Following in the footsteps of our
predecessors, we altogether forbid clandestine marriages and we forbid any priest to presume

158
to be present at such a marriage. Extending the special custom of certain regions to other
regions generally, we decree that when marriages are to be contracted they shall be publicly
announced in the churches by priests, with a suitable time being fixed beforehand within
which whoever wishes and is able to may adduce a lawful impediment. The priests
themselves shall also investigate whether there is any impediment. When there appears a
credible reason why the marriage should not be contracted, the contract shall be expressly
forbidden until there has been established from clear documents what ought to be done in the
matter. If any persons presume to enter into clandestine marriages of this kind, or forbidden
marriages within a prohibited degree, even if done in ignorance, the offspring of the union
shall be deemed illegitimate and shall have no help from their parents’ ignorance, since the
parents in contracting the marriage could be considered as not devoid of knowledge, or even
as affecters of ignorance. Likewise the offspring shall be deemed illegitimate if both parents
know of a legitimate impediment and yet dare to contract a marriage in the presence of the
church, contrary to every prohibition. Moreover the parish priest who refuses to forbid such
unions, or even any member of the regular clergy who dares to attend them, shall be
suspended from office for three years and shall be punished even more severely if the nature
of the fault requires it. Those who presume to be united in this way, even if it is within a
permitted degree, are to be given a suitable penance. Anybody who maliciously proposes an
impediment, to prevent a legitimate marriage, will not escape the church’s vengeance.

52. On rejecting evidence from hearsay at a matrimonial suit

It was at one time decided out of a certain necessity, but contrary to the normal practice, that
hearsay evidence should be valid in reckoning the degrees of consanguinity and affinity,
because on account of the shortness of human life witnesses would not be able to testify from
first-hand knowledge in a reckoning as far as the seventh degree. However, because we have
learned from many examples and definite proofs that many dangers to lawful marriages have
arisen from this, we have decided that in future witnesses from hearsay shall not be accepted
in this matter, since the prohibition does not now exceed the fourth degree, unless there are
persons of weight who are trustworthy and who learnt from their elders, before the case was
begun, the things that they testify : not indeed from one such person since one would not
suffice even if he or she were alive, but from two at least, and not from persons who are of
bad repute and suspect but from those who are trustworthy and above every objection, since it
would appear rather absurd to admit in evidence those whose actions would be rejected. Nor
should there be admitted in evidence one person who has learnt what he testifies from
several, or persons of bad repute who have learnt what they testify from persons of good
repute, as though they were more than one and suitable witnesses, since even according to the
normal practice of courts the assertion of one witness does not suffice, even if he is a person
resplendent with authority, and since legal actions are forbidden to persons of bad repute. The
witnesses shall affirm on oath that in bearing witness in the case they are not acting from
hatred or fear or love or for advantage; they shall designate the persons by their exact names
or by pointing out or by sufficient description, and shall distinguish by a clear reckoning
every degree of relationship on either side; and they shall include in their oath the statement

159
that it was from their ancestors that they received what they are testifying and that they
believe it to be true. They shall still not suffice unless they declare on oath that they have
known that the persons who stand in at least one of the aforesaid degrees of relationship,
regard each other as blood-relations. For it is preferable to leave alone some people who have
been united contrary to human decrees than to separate, contrary to the Lord’s decrees,
persons who have been joined together legitimately.

53. On those who give their fields to others to be cultivated so as to avoid tithes

In some regions there are intermingled certain peoples who by custom, in accordance with
their own rites, do not pay tithes, even though they are counted as christians. Some landlords
assign their lands to them so that these lords may obtain greater revenues, by cheating the
churches of the tithes. Wishing therefore to provide for the security of churches in these
matters, we decree that when lords make over their lands to such persons in this way for
cultivation, the lords must pay the tithes to the churches in full and without objection, and if
necessary they shall be compelled to do so by ecclesiastical censure. Such tithes are indeed to
be paid of necessity, inasmuch as they are owed in virtue of divine law or of approved local
custom.

54. Tithes should be paid before taxes

It is not within human power that the seed should answer to the sower since, according to the
saying of the Apostle, Neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but rather he
who gives the growth, namely God, who himself brings forth much fruit from the dead seed.
Now, some people from excess of greed strive to cheat over tithes, deducting from crops and
first-fruits the rents and dues, which meanwhile escape the payment of tithes. Since the Lord
has reserved tithes unto himself as a sign of his universal lordship, by a certain special title as
it were, we decree, wishing to prevent injury to churches and danger to souls, that in virtue of
this general lordship the payment of tithes shall precede the exaction of dues and rents, or at
least those who receive untithed rents and dues shall be forced by ecclesiastical censure,
seeing that a thing carries with it its burden, to tithe them for the churches to which by right
they are due.

55. Tithes are to be paid on lands acquired, notwithstanding privileges

Recently abbots of the Cistercian order, assembled in a general chapter, wisely decreed at our
instance that the brethren of the order shall not in future buy possessions from which tithes
are due to churches, unless by chance it is for founding new monasteries; and that if such
possessions were given to them by the pious devotion of the faithful, or were bought for
founding new monasteries, they would assign them for cultivation to other people, who
would pay the tithes to the churches, lest the churches be further burdened on account of the

160
Cistercians’ privileges. We therefore decree that on lands assigned to others and on future
acquisitions, even if they cultivate them with their own hands or at their own expense, they
shall pay tithes to the churches which previously received the tithes from the lands, unless
they decide to compound in another way with the churches. Since we consider this decree to
be acceptable and right, we wish it to be extended to other regulars who enjoy similar
privileges, and we order prelates of churches to be readier and more effectual in affording
them full justice with regard to those who wrong them and to take pains to maintain their
privileges more carefully and completely.

56. A parish priest shall not lose a tithe on account of some people making a pact

Many regulars, as we have learnt, and sometimes secular clerics, when letting houses or
granting fiefs, add a pact, to the prejudice of the parish churches, to the effect that the tenants
and vassals shall pay tithes to them and shall choose to be buried in their ground. We utterly
reject pacts of this kind, since they are rooted in avarice, and we declare that whatever is
received through them shall be returned to the parish churches.

57. Interpreting the words of privileges

In order that privileges which the Roman church has granted to certain religious may remain
unimpaired, we have decided that certain things in them must be clarified lest through their
not being well understood they lead to abuse, on account of which they could deservedly be
revoked. For, a person deserves to lose a privilege if he abuses the power entrusted to him.
The apostolic see has rightly granted an indult to certain regulars to the effect that
ecclesiastical burial should not be refused to deceased members of their fraternity if the
churches to which they belong happen to be under an interdict as regards divine services,
unless the persons were excommunicated or interdicted by name, and that they may carry off
for burial to their own churches their confraters whom prelates of churches will not allow to
be buried in their own churches, unless the confraters have been excommunicated or
interdicted by name. However, we understand this to refer to confraters who have changed
their secular dress and have been consecrated to the order while still alive, or who in their
lifetime have given their property to them while retaining for themselves as long as they live
the usufruct of it. Only such persons may be buried at the non-interdicted churches of these
regulars and of others in which they have chosen to be buried. For if it were understood of
any persons joining their fraternity for the annual payment of two or three pennies,
ecclesiastical discipline would be loosened and brought into contempt. Even the latter may,
however, obtain a certain remission granted to them by the apostolic see. It has also been
granted to such regulars that if any of their brethren, whom they have sent to establish
fraternities or to receive taxes, comes to a city or a castle or a village which is under an
interdict as regards divine services, then churches may be opened once in the year at their
“joyous entry” so that the divine services may be celebrated there, after excommunicated
persons have been excluded. We wish this to be understood as meaning that in a given city,

161
castle or town one church only shall be opened for the brethren of a particular order, as
mentioned above, once in the year. For although it was said in the plural that churches may
be opened at their “joyous entry”, this on a true understanding refers not to each individual
church of a given place but rather to the churches of the aforesaid places taken together.
Otherwise if they visited all the churches of a given place in this way, the sentence of
interdict would be brought into too much contempt. Those who dare to usurp anything for
themselves contrary to the above declarations shall be subjected to severe punishment.

58. On the same in favour of bishops

We wish to extend to bishops, in favour of the episcopal office, the indult which has already
been given to certain religious. We therefore grant that when a country is under a general
interdict, the bishops may sometimes celebrate the divine services, behind closed doors and
in a lowered voice, without the ringing of bells, after excommunicated and interdicted
persons have been excluded, unless this has been expressly forbidden to them. We grant this,
however, to those bishops who have not given any cause for the interdict, lest they use guile
or fraud of any sort and so turn a good thing into a damaging loss.

59. Religious cannot give surety without permission of his abbot and convent

We wish and order to be extended to all religious what has already been forbidden by the
apostolic see to some of them : namely that no religious, without the permission of his abbot
and the majority of his chapter, may stand surety for someone or accept a loan from another
beyond a sum fixed by the common opinion. Otherwise the convent shall not be held
responsible in any way for his actions, unless perchance the matter has clearly redounded to
the benefit of his house. Anyone who presumes to act contrary to this statute shall be severely
disciplined.

60. Abbots not to encroach on episcopal office

From the complaints which have reached us from bishops in various parts of the world, we
have come to know of serious and great excesses of certain abbots who, not content with the
boundaries of their own authority, stretch out their hands to things belonging to the episcopal
dignity : hearing matrimonial cases, enjoining public penances, even granting letters of
indulgences and like presumptions. It sometimes happens from this that episcopal authority is
cheapened in the eyes of many. Wishing therefore to provide for both the dignity of bishops
and the well-being of abbots in these matters, we strictly forbid by this present decree any
abbot to reach out for such things, if he wishes to avoid danger for himself, unless by chance
any of them can defend himself by a special concession or some other legitimate reason in
respect of such things.

162
61. Religious may not receive tithes from lay hands

It was forbidden at the Lateran council, as is known, for any regulars to dare to receive
churches or tithes from lay hands without the bishop’s consent, or in any way to admit to the
divine services those under excommunication or those interdicted by name. We now forbid it
even more strongly and will take care to see that offenders are punished with condign
penalties. We decree, nevertheless that in churches which do not belong to them by full right
the regulars shall, in accordance with the statutes of that council, present to the bishop the
priests who are to be instituted, for examination by him about the care of the people; but as
for the priests’ ability in temporal matters, the regulars shall furnish the proof unto
themselves. Let them not dare to remove those who have been instituted without consulting
the bishop. We add, indeed, that they should take care to present those who are either noted
for their way of life or recommended by prelates on probable grounds.

62. Regarding saint’s relics

The christian religion is frequently disparaged because certain people put saints’ relics up for
sale and display them indiscriminately. In order that it may not be disparaged in the future,
we ordain by this present decree that henceforth ancient relics shall not be displayed outside a
reliquary or be put up for sale. As for newly discovered relics, let no one presume to venerate
them publicly unless they have previously been approved by the authority of the Roman
pontiff. Prelates, moreover, should not in future allow those who come to their churches, in
order to venerate, to be deceived by lying stories or false documents, as has commonly
happened in many places on account of the desire for profit. We also forbid the recognition of
alms-collectors, some of whom deceive other people by proposing various errors in their
preaching, unless they show authentic letters from the apostolic see or from the diocesan
bishop. Even then they shall not be permitted to put before the people anything beyond what
is contained in the letters.

We have thought it good to show the form of letter which the apostolic see generally grants to
alms-collectors, in order that diocesan bishops may follow it in their own letters. It is this :
“Since, as the Apostle says, we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ to receive
according to what we have done in the body, whether it be good or bad, it behooves us to
prepare for the day of the final harvest with works of mercy and to sow on earth, with a view
to eternity, that which, with God returning it with multiplied fruit, we ought to collect in
heaven; keeping a firm hope and confidence, since he who sows sparingly reaps sparingly,
and he who sows bountifully shall reap bountifully unto eternal life. Since the resources of a
hospital may not suffice for the support of the brethren and the needy who flock to it, we
admonish and exhort all of you in the Lord, and enjoin upon you for the remission of your
sins, to give pious alms and grateful charitable assistance to them, from the goods that God
has bestowed upon you; so that their need may be cared for through your help, and you may

163
reach eternal happiness through these and other good things which you may have done under
God’s inspiration. ”

Let those who are sent to seek alms be modest and discreet, and let them not stay in taverns
or other unsuitable places or incur useless or excessive expenses, being careful above all not
to wear the garb of false religion. Moreover, because the keys of the church are brought into
contempt and satisfaction through penance loses its force through indiscriminate and
excessive indulgences, which certain prelates of churches do not fear to grant, we therefore
decree that when a basilica is dedicated, the indulgence shall not be for more than one year,
whether it is dedicated by one bishop or by more than one, and for the anniversary of the
dedication the remission of penances imposed is not to exceed forty days. We order that the
letters of indulgence, which are granted for various reasons at different times, are to fix this
number of days, since the Roman pontiff himself, who possesses the plenitude of power, is
accustomed to observe this moderation in such things.

63. On simony

As we have certainly learnt, shameful and wicked exactions and extortions are levied in many
places and by many persons, who are like the sellers of doves in the temple, for the
consecration of bishops, the blessing of abbots and the ordination of clerics. There is fixed
how much is to be paid for this or that and for yet another thing. Some even strive to defend
this disgrace and wickedness on the grounds of long-established custom, thereby heaping up
for themselves still further damnation. Wishing therefore to abolish so great an abuse, we
altogether reject such a custom which should rather be termed a corruption. We firmly decree
that nobody shall dare to demand or extort anything under any pretext for the conferring of
such things or for their having been conferred. Otherwise both he who receives and he who
gives such an absolutely condemned payment shall be condemned with Gehazi and Simon.

64. Simony with regards to monks and nuns

The disease of simony has infected many nuns to such an extent that they admit scarcely any
as sisters without a payment, wishing to cover this vice with the pretext of poverty. We
utterly forbid this to happen in the future. We decree that whoever commits such wickedness
in the future, both the one admitting and the one admitted, whether she be a subject or in
authority, shall be expelled from her convent without hope of reinstatement, and be cast into
a house of stricter observance to do perpetual penance. As regards those who were admitted
in this way before this synodal statute, we have decided to provide that they be moved from
the convents which they wrongly entered, and be placed in other houses of the same order. If
perchance they are too numerous to be conveniently placed elsewhere, they may be admitted
afresh to the same convent, by dispensation, after the prioress and lesser officials have been
changed, lest they roam around in the world to the danger of their souls. We order the same to
be observed with regard to monks and other religious. Indeed, lest such persons be able to

164
excuse themselves on the grounds of simplicity or ignorance, we order diocesan bishops to
have this decree published throughout their dioceses every year.

65. Simony and extortion

We have heard that certain bishops, on the death of rectors of churches, put these churches
under an interdict and do not allow anyone to be instituted to them until they have been paid a
certain sum of money. Moreover, when a knight or a cleric enters a religious house or
chooses to be buried with religious, the bishops raise difficulties and obstacles until they
receive something in the way of a present, even when the person has left nothing to the
religious house. Since we should abstain not only from evil itself but also from every
appearance of evil, as the Apostle says, we altogether forbid exactions of this kind. Any
offender shall restore double the amount exacted, and this is to be faithfully used for the
benefit of the places harmed by the exactions.

66. Simony and avarice in clerics

It has frequently been reported to the apostolic see that certain clerics demand and extort
payments for funeral rites for the dead, the blessing of those marrying, and the like; and if it
happens that their greed is not satisfied, they deceitfully set up false impediments. On the
other hand some lay people, stirred by a ferment of heretical wickedness, strive to infringe a
praiseworthy custom of holy church, introduced by the pious devotion of the faithful, under
the pretext of canonical scruples. We therefore both forbid wicked exactions to be made in
these matters and order pious customs to be observed, ordaining that the church’s sacraments
are to be given freely but also that those who maliciously try to change a praiseworthy
custom are to be restrained, when the truth is known, by the bishop of the place.

67. Jews and excessive Usury

The more the christian religion is restrained from usurious practices, so much the more does
the perfidy of the Jews grow in these matters, so that within a short time they are exhausting
the resources of Christians. Wishing therefore to see that Christians are not savagely
oppressed by Jews in this matter, we ordain by this synodal decree that if Jews in future, on
any pretext, extort oppressive and excessive interest from Christians, then they are to be
removed from contact with Christians until they have made adequate satisfaction for the
immoderate burden. Christians too, if need be, shall be compelled by ecclesiastical censure,
without the possibility of an appeal, to abstain from commerce with them. We enjoin upon
princes not to be hostile to Christians on this account, but rather to be zealous in restraining
Jews from so great oppression. We decree, under the same penalty, that Jews shall be
compelled to make satisfaction to churches for tithes and offerings due to the churches, which
the churches were accustomed to receive from Christians for houses and other possessions,

165
before they passed by whatever title to the Jews, so that the churches may thus be preserved
from loss.

68. Jews appearing in public

A difference of dress distinguishes Jews or Saracens from Christians in some provinces, but
in others a certain confusion has developed so that they are indistinguishable. Whence it
sometimes happens that by mistake Christians join with Jewish or Saracen women, and Jews
or Saracens with christian women. In order that the offence of such a damnable mixing may
not spread further, under the excuse of a mistake of this kind, we decree that such persons of
either sex, in every christian province and at all times, are to be distinguished in public from
other people by the character of their dress — seeing moreover that this was enjoined upon
them by Moses himself, as we read. They shall not appear in public at all on the days of
lamentation and on passion Sunday; because some of them on such days, as we have heard,
do not blush to parade in very ornate dress and are not afraid to mock Christians who are
presenting a memorial of the most sacred passion and are displaying signs of grief. What we
most strictly forbid however, is that they dare in any way to break out in derision of the
Redeemer. We order secular princes to restrain with condign punishment those who do so
presume, lest they dare to blaspheme in any way him who was crucified for us, since we
ought not to ignore insults against him who blotted out our wrongdoings.

69. Jews not to hold public offices

It would be too absurd for a blasphemer of Christ to exercise power over Christians. We
therefore renew in this canon, on account of the boldness of the offenders, what the council of
Toledo providently decreed in this matter : we forbid Jews to be appointed to public offices,
since under cover of them they are very hostile to Christians. If, however, anyone does
commit such an office to them let him, after an admonition, be curbed by the provincial
council, which we order to be held annually, by means of an appropriate sanction. Any
official so appointed shall be denied commerce with Christians in business and in other
matters until he has converted to the use of poor Christians, in accordance with the directions
of the diocesan bishop, whatever he has obtained from Christians by reason of his office so
acquired, and he shall surrender with shame the office which he irreverently assumed. We
extend the same thing to pagans.

70. Jewish converts may not retain their old rite

Certain people who have come voluntarily to the waters of sacred baptism, as we learnt, do
not wholly cast off the old person in order to put on the new more perfectly. For, in keeping
remnants of their former rite, they upset the decorum of the christian religion by such a
mixing. Since it is written, cursed is he who enters the land by two paths, and a garment that

166
is woven from linen and wool together should not be put on, we therefore decree that such
people shall be wholly prevented by the prelates of churches from observing their old rite, so
that those who freely offered themselves to the christian religion may be kept to its
observance by a salutary and necessary coercion. For it is a lesser evil not to know the Lord’s
way than to go back on it after having known it.

71. Crusade to recover the holy Land

It is our ardent desire to liberate the holy Land from infidel hands. We therefore declare, with
the approval of this sacred council and on the advice of prudent men who are fully aware of
the circumstances of time and place, that crusaders are to make themselves ready so that all
who have arranged to go by sea shall assemble in the kingdom of Sicily on 1 June after next :
some as necessary and fitting at Brindisi and others at Messina and places neighbouring it on
either side, where we too have arranged to be in person at that time, God willing, so that with
our advice and help the christian army may be in good order to set out with divine and
apostolic blessing. Those who have decided to go by land should also take care to be ready by
the same date. They shall notify us meanwhile so that we may grant them a suitable legate a
latere for advice and help. Priests and other clerics who will be in the christian army, both
those under authority and prelates, shall diligently devote themselves to prayer and
exhortation, teaching the crusaders by word and example to have the fear and love of God
always before their eyes, so that they say or do nothing that might offend the divine majesty.
If they ever fall into sin, let them quickly rise up again through true penitence. Let them be
humble in heart and in body, keeping to moderation both in food and in dress, avoiding
altogether dissensions and rivalries, and putting aside entirely any bitterness or envy, so that
thus armed with spiritual and material weapons they may the more fearlessly fight against the
enemies of the faith, relying not on their own power but rather trusting in the strength of God.
We grant to these clerics that they may receive the fruits of their benefices in full for three
years, as if they were resident in the churches, and if necessary they may leave them in
pledge for the same time.

To prevent this holy proposal being impeded or delayed, we strictly order all prelates of
churches, each in his own locality, diligently to warn and induce those who have abandoned
the cross to resume it, and them and others who have taken up the cross, and those who may
still do so, to carry out their vows to the Lord. And if necessary they shall compel them to do
this without any backsliding, by sentences of excommunication against their persons and of
interdict on their lands, excepting only those persons who find themselves faced with an
impediment of such a kind that their vow deservedly ought to be commuted or deferred in
accordance with the directives of the apostolic see. In order that nothing connected with this
business of Jesus Christ be omitted, we will and order patriarchs, archbishops, bishops,
abbots and others who have the care of souls to preach the cross zealously to those entrusted
to them. Let them beseech kings, dukes, princes, margraves, counts, barons and other
magnates, as well as the communities of cities, vills and towns — in the name of the Father,
Son and holy Spirit, the one, only, true and eternal God — that those who do not go in person

167
to the aid of the holy Land should contribute, according to their means, an appropriate
number of fighting men together with their necessary expenses for three years, for the
remission of their sins in accordance with what has already been explained in general letters
and will be explained below for still greater assurance. We wish to share in this remission not
only those who contribute ships of their own but also those who are zealous enough to build
them for this purpose. To those who refuse, if there happen to be any who are so ungrateful to
our lord God, we firmly declare in the name of the apostle that they should know that they
will have to answer to us for this on the last day of final judgment before the fearful judge.
Let them consider beforehand, however with what conscience and with what security it was
that they were able to confess before the only-begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, to whom the
Father gave all things into his hands, if in this business, which is as it were peculiarly his,
they refuse to serve him who was crucified for sinners, by whose beneficence they are
sustained and indeed by whose blood they have been redeemed.

Lest we appear to be laying on men’s shoulders heavy and unbearable burdens which we are
not willing to lighten, like those who say yes but do nothing behold we, from what we have
been able to save over and above necessities and moderate expenses, grant and give thirty
thousand pounds to this work, besides the shipping which we are giving to the crusaders of
Rome and neighbouring districts. We will assign for this purpose, moreover, three thousand
marks of silver, which we have left over from the alms of certain of the faithful, the rest
having been faithfully distributed for the needs and benefit of the aforesaid Land by the hands
of the abbot patriarch of Jerusalem, of happy memory, and of the masters of the Temple and
of the Hospital. We wish, however, that other prelates of churches and all clerics may
participate and share both in the merit and in the reward. We therefore decree, with the
general approval of the council, that all clerics, both those under authority and prelates, shall
give a twentieth of their ecclesiastical revenues for three years to the aid of the holy Land, by
means of the persons appointed by the apostolic see for this purpose; the only exceptions
being certain religious who are rightly to be exempted from this taxation and likewise those
persons who have taken or will take the cross and so will go in person. We and our brothers,
cardinals of the holy Roman church, shall pay a full tenth. Let all know, moreover, that they
are obliged to observe this faithfully under pain of excommunication, so that those who
knowingly deceive in this matter shall incur the sentence of excommunication. Because it is
right that those who persevere in the service of the heavenly ruler should in all justice enjoy
special privilege, and because the day of departure is somewhat more than a year ahead,
crusaders shall therefore be. exempt from taxes or levies and other burdens. We take their
persons and goods under the protection of St Peter and ourself once they have taken up the
cross. We ordain that they are to be protected by archbishops, bishops and all prelates of the
church, and that protectors of their own are to be specially appointed for this purpose, so that
their goods are to remain intact and undisturbed until they are known for certain to be dead or
to have returned. If anyone dares to act contrary to this, let him be curbed by ecclesiastical
censure.

If any of those setting out are bound by oath to pay interest, we ordain that their creditors
shall be compelled by the same punishment to release them from their oath and to desist from

168
exacting the interest; if any of the creditors does force them to pay the interest, we command
that he be forced by similar punishment to restore it. We order that Jews be compelled by the
secular power to remit interest, and that until they do so all intercourse shall be denied them
by all Christ’s faithful under pain of excommunication. Secular princes shall provide a
suitable deferral for those who cannot now pay their debts to Jews, so that after they have
undertaken the journey and until there is certain knowledge of their death or of their return,
they shall not incur the inconvenience of paying interest. The Jews shall be compelled to add
to the capital, after they have deducted their necessary expenses, the revenues which they are
meanwhile receiving from property held by them on security. For, such a benefit seems to
entail not much loss, inasmuch as it postpones the repayment but does not cancel the debt.
Prelates of churches who are negligent in showing justice to crusaders and their families
should know that they will be severely punished.

Furthermore, since corsairs and pirates greatly impede help for the holy Land, by capturing
and plundering those who are travelling to and from it, we bind with the bond of
excommunication everyone who helps or supports them. We forbid anyone, under threat of
anathema, knowingly to communicate with them by contracting to buy or to sell; and we
order rulers of cities and their territories to restrain and curb such persons from this iniquity.
Otherwise, since to be unwilling to disquiet evildoers is none other than to encourage them,
and since he who fails to oppose a manifest crime is not without a touch of secret complicity,
it is our wish and command that prelates of churches exercise ecclesiastical severity against
their persons and lands. We excommunicate and anathematize, moreover, those false and
impious Christians who, in opposition to Christ and the christian people, convey arms to the
Saracens and iron and timber for their galleys. We decree that those who sell them galleys or
ships, and those who act as pilots in pirate Saracen ships, or give them any advice or help by
way of machines or anything else, to the detriment of the holy Land, are to be punished with
deprivation of their possessions and are to become the slaves of those who capture them. We
order this sentence to be renewed on Sundays and feast-days in all maritime towns; and the
bosom of the church is not to be opened to such persons unless they send in aid of the holy
Land the whole of the damnable wealth which they received and the same amount of their
own, so that they are punished in proportion to their offence. If perchance they do not pay,
they are to be punished in other ways in order that through their punishment others may be
deterred from venturing upon similar rash actions. In addition, we prohibit and on pain of
anathema forbid all Christians, for four years, to send or take their ships across to the lands of
the Saracens who dwell in the east, so that by this a greater supply of shipping may be made
ready for those wanting to cross over to help the holy Land, and so that the aforesaid
Saracens may be deprived of the not inconsiderable help which they have been accustomed to
receiving from this.

Although tournaments have been forbidden in a general way on pain of a fixed penalty at
various councils, we strictly forbid them to be held for three years, under pain of
excommunication, because the business of the crusade is much hindered by them at this
present time. Because it is of the utmost necessity for the carrying out of this business that
rulers of the christian people keep peace with each other, we therefore ordain, on the advice

169
of this holy general synod, that peace be generally kept in the whole christian world for at
least four years, so that those in conflict shall be brought by the prelates of churches to
conclude a definitive peace or to observe inviolably a firm truce. Those who refuse to comply
shall be most strictly compelled to do so by an excommunication against their persons and an
interdict on their lands, unless their wrongdoing is so great that they ought not to enjoy peace.
If it happens that they make light of the church’s censure, they may deservedly fear that the
secular power will be invoked by ecclesiastical authority against them as disturbers of the
business of him who was crucified.

We therefore, trusting in the mercy of almighty God and in the authority of the blessed
apostles Peter and Paul, do grant, by the power of binding and loosing that God has conferred
upon us, albeit unworthy, unto all those who undertake this work in person and at their own
expense, full pardon for their sins about which they are heartily contrite and have spoken in
confession, and we promise them an increase of eternal life at the recompensing of the just;
also to those who do not go there in person but send suitable men at their own expense,
according to their means and status, and likewise to those who go in person but at others’
expense, we grant full pardon for their sins. We wish and grant to share in this remission,
according to the quality of their help and the intensity of their devotion, all who shall
contribute suitably from their goods to the aid of the said Land or who give useful advice and
help. Finally, this general synod imparts the benefit of its blessings to all who piously set out
on this common enterprise in order that it may contribute worthily to their salvation.

170
First Council of Lyons – 1245 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1245 A.D.
INTRODUCTION

The dispute, distinctive of the Middle Ages, between the papacy and the empire became very
serious under Pope Innocent IV and Emperor Frederick II. Already in 1240 Pope Gregory IX
had tried to define the questions between the two powers by calling a general council, but
Frederick II by arms had prevented the council from meeting. When Innocent IV succeeded
as pope in 1243 he gave his earnest attention to renewing this policy. He was able to make his
way in 1244 to Lyons, which was outside the direct authority of the emperor, and there
proclaimed a council. Some letters of summons exist, dated 3 January 1245 and the days
following, in which the purpose of the council is stated thus: “That the church, through the
salutary counsel of the faithful and their fruitful help, may have the dignity of its proper
position; that assistance may speedily be brought to the unhappy crisis in the holy Land and
the sufferings of the eastern empire; that a remedy may be found against the Tartars and other
enemies of the faith and persecutors of the christian people; further, for the issue between the
church and the emperor; for these reasons we think that the kings of the earth, the prelates of
the church and other princes of the world should be summoned”. The chief purposes for
which the council was called — and from the beginning it was called “general” — seem to
have been political ones.

When the council opened on 26 June 1245, in a meeting which was probably only
preparatory, there were present three patriarchs and about 150 bishops besides other religious
and secular persons, among whom was the Latin emperor of Constantinople. Emperor
Frederick II sent a legation headed by Thaddaeus of Suessa. Many bishops and prelates were
unable to attend the council because they had been prevented by the invasions of the Tartars
in the east or the attacks of the Saracens in the holy Land, or because Frederick II had
intimidated them (especially the Sicilians and Germans). Thus it was that the four chief
parties of the council were the French and probably the Spanish, English and Italian. In the
three sessions which were held during the council (26 June, 5 and 17 July) the fathers, not
without hesitation and dispute, had to treat especially of Frederick II. There seems to have
been a bitter conflict between Innocent IV on the one side and Thaddaeus of Suessa on the
other. The sources, especially the Brevis nota and Matthew Paris, tell us clearly about the
nature of the discussion and the determined attitude of the pope, who induced the council to
depose the emperor at the session on 17 July 1245, a matter that appeared unprecedented to
the fathers themselves. The council on this question shows us clearly the critical position
reached by the medieval theory and practice of ruling a christian state, which rested on a
double order of authority.

In the same session of 17 July the council also approved some strictly legal constitutions and
others on usury, the Tartars and the Latin east. But the council, unlike the previous councils
of the Middle Ages, did not approve canons concerning the reform of the church and the

171
condemnation of heresy. Enthusiasm for the Gregorian reform movement seems to have died
down completely. The council, however, concerned itself with promoting and confirming the
general canonical legislation for religious life.

The transmission of the text of the constitutions is involved and still partly obscure. Only in
recent times has it been realised that the authentic and definitive drawing up of the
constitutions, and their promulgation, took place after the council. This collection consists of
22 constitutions, all of which are of a legal nature, and was sent to the universities by
Innocent IV on 25 August 1245 (Coll. I). A second collection of 12 decrees was published by
Innocent IV on 21 April 1246 (Coll. II). A final collection (Coll. I + II and 8 other decrees)
was issued on 9 September 1253 (Coll. III), and was included (except for const. 2) in Liber
Sextus in 1298. Coll. I, however, is not identical with the constitutions of the council. For in
it can be found neither the condemnation of Frederick II, which seems to have been the chief
matter of the council, nor the five constitutions pertaining to the important questions
introduced by Innocent IV at the opening of the council, namely those concerned with the
Tartars, the Latin east and the crusades.

Stephen Kuttner has shown that the constitutions have been transmitted to us through three
versions: the conciliar version (= M), known principally from the chronicle of Matthew of
Paris (const. 1-19, and the const. on the crusade corresponding to R 17); the intermediate
version ( = R), known from the register of Innocent IV (const. 1-17, of which const. 1-12
correspond to M 1-10); and the definitive version ( = Coll. I), containing two constitutions
(18 and 22) which are absent from the other versions, but lacking the constitutions not
directly concerned with the law (R 13-17).

Indeed, the origins of the constitutions must be placed before the council, as is shown by an
earlier version of constitutions M 13, 15 and 19, antedating the council. Evidently the council
fathers were discussing matters which had already been partly worked out, and it was
somewhat later that the constitutions acquired their more accurate and definite legal form.

The constitutions taken from Matthew Paris were edited in Bn[1] III/2 (1606) 1482-1489.
Those from the register of Innocent IV were edited in Rm IV (1612) 73-78. All later editions
followed Rm. However, I. H. Boehmer and Msi[1] 2 (1748) 1073-1098 (afterwards in Msi 23
(1779) 651-674) printed Coll. III. in addition. Coll. I, as such, has never been edited; but there
exists both an indirect transmission (Coll. I + II, Coll. III, Liber Sextus) and a direct, single-
family transmission through eight manuscript codices: Arras, Bibl. Municipale 541;
Bratislava, formerly Cathedral Library, 13; Innsbruck, Universitaetsbibl., 70, fos. 335v-338v
(= I); Kassel, Landesbibl., Iur. fol. 32; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibl., Lat. 8201e, fos. 219v-
220r, and Lat. 9654; Trier, Stadtbibl., 864; Vienna, Nationalbibl., 2073, fos. 238v-242v (=
W).

Our edition of the constitutions tries to give all the documents truly belonging to the council.
Coll. I has been taken as the base, and variants from M and R are set out in the critical
apparatus. The text of Coll. I has been established from codices I and W, which we have seen

172
in microfilm. With regard to M, the edition of H.R. Luard has been used. With regard to R,
we have examined directly the register of Innocent IV. We think, moreover, that the last five
constitutions in R (13-17, 17 is also in M and Annales de Burton) should also be included
among the constitutions of the council, even though they were not included in Coil. I. We
have printed the text of these five constitutions from the register of Innocent IV;as regards
const. 17 we have also compared M and Annales de Burton ( = Bu).

We think that the bull of deposition of the emperor Frederick II must be considered a statute
of the council, and we place this in front of the constitutions. The transmission of the text of
the bull is involved, and the editions are very faulty. There are three copies of the bull:
Vatican Archives, AA. Arm. I-XVIII, 171 (= V); Paris, Archives Nationales, L 245 no. 84 (=
P); Lyons, Archives du Rhone, Fonds du chap. primat., Arm. Cham. vol. XXVII no. 2 (= L).
Of these only V has been published. Other transcriptions of the bull are given in the register
of Innocent IV, in some chronicles (Matthew of Paris, Annals of Plasencia, Annals of
Melrose), in collections of decretals, and in some more recent publications (Bzovius). Our
edition takes as its base V, P and L.

{The headings are added by the hypertext editor. Endnotes are given in parenthesis {}. They
should be noted for variant readings and numberings.}

Bull Deposing The Emperor Frederick II

Innocent {1}, bishop, servant of the servants of God, in the presence of the holy council, for
an everlasting record.

Raised, though unworthy, to the highest point of the apostolic dignity, by the will of the
divine majesty, we ought to exercise a watchful, diligent and wise care of all Christians, to
examine with close attention the merits of individuals and to weigh them in the balance of
prudent deliberation, so that we may raise by suitable favours those whom a rigorous and just
examination shows to be worthy, and depress the guilty with due penalties, weighing always
the merit and the reward in a fair scale, repaying to each the amount of penalty or favour
according to the nature of his work. Indeed since the terrible conflict of war has afflicted
some countries of the christian world for a long time, as we desired with our whole heart the
peace and tranquillity of the holy church of God and of all the christian people in general, we
thought that we should send special ambassadors, men of great authority, to {2} the secular
prince who was the special cause of this discord and suffering. He was the man whom our
predecessor of happy memory, Pope Gregory {3}, had bound by anathema because of his
excesses. The ambassadors we sent, men eager for his salvation, were our venerable brethren
Peter of Albano {4}, at that time bishop of Rouen, William of Sabina {5}, at that time bishop
of Modena, and our beloved son William {6}, cardinal-priest of the basilica of the Twelve
Apostles and at that time abbot of Saint Facundus. Through them we proposed to him,
because we and our brethren desired to have peace with him and with all people, as far as lay

173
in our power, that we were ready to grant peace and tranquillity to him and also to the rest of
the whole world.

Because the restitution of the prelates, clerics and all others whom he kept in captivity, and of
all both clerics and laymen whom he had taken in the galleys7, could especially lead the way
to peace, we asked and begged him through our said ambassadors to set these prisoners free.
This both he and his envoys had promised before we had been called to the apostolic office.
Further we informed him that our ambassadors were ready on our behalf to hear and treat of
peace, and even of satisfaction, should the emperor be ready to make it with regard to all
those things for which he had incurred excommunication; and besides to offer him that if the
church had injured him in anything contrary to justice-though it did not believe it had done so
— it was ready to put it to rights and restore the proper position. If he said that he had harmed
the church in nothing unjustly, or that we had harmed him contrary to justice, we were ready
to call the kings, prelates and princes, both ecclesiastical and lay, to some safe place where
either by themselves or by official representatives they might come together, and that the
church was ready on the advice of the council to satisfy him if in anything it had harmed him,
and to recall the sentence of excommunication if it had been brought unjustly against him,
and with all clemency and mercy, in so far as it could be done without offence to God and its
own honour, to receive satisfaction from him for the injuries and wrongs done to the church
itself and its members through him.

The church also wished to secure peace for his friends and supporters and the enjoyment of
full security, so that for this reason they should never incur any danger. But though in our
relations with him, for the sake of peace, we have always taken care to rely on paternal
admonitions and gentle entreaty, yet he, following the hardness of Pharaoh and blocking his
ears like an asp, with proud obstinacy and obstinate pride has despised such prayers and
admonitions. Furthermore on the Maundy Thursday previous to that which has just passed, in
our presence and that of our brother cardinals, and in the presence of our dear son in Christ,
the illustrious emperor of Constantinople {8}, and of a considerable gathering of prelates,
before the senate and people of Rome and a very large number of others, who on that day
because of its solemnity had come to the apostolic see from different parts of the world, he
guaranteed on oath, through the noble count Raymond of Toulouse, and Masters Peter de
Vinea and Thaddaeus of Suessa, judges of his court, his envoys and proctors who had in this
matter a general commission, that he would keep our commands and those of the church.
However afterwards he did not fulfil what he had sworn. Indeed it is likely enough that he
took the oath, as can be clearly gathered from his following actions, with the express
intention of mocking rather than obeying us and the church, since after more than a year he
could not be reconciled to the bosom of the church, nor did he trouble to make satisfaction for
the losses and injuries he had caused it, even though he was asked to do this. For this reason,
as we are unable without giving offence to Christ to bear any longer his wickedness, we are
compelled, urged on by our conscience, justly to punish him.

174
To say nothing about his other crimes, he has committed four of the greatest gravity, which
cannot be hidden by evasion. For, he has often failed to keep his oath; he deliberately broke
the peace previously established between the church and the empire; he committed a
sacrilege by causing the arrest of cardinals of the holy Roman church and of prelates and
clerics of other churches, both religious and secular, who were coming to the council which
our predecessor had decided to summon; he is also suspect of heresy, by proofs which are not
light or doubtful but clear and inescapable.

It is clear that he has often been guilty of perjury. For, once when he was staying in Sicily,
before he had been elected to the dignity of emperor, in the presence of Gregory of happy
memory, cardinal deacon of Saint Theodore {9} and legate of the apostolic see, he took an
oath of loyalty to our predecessor Pope Innocent10 of happy memory and his successors and
the Roman church, in return for the grant of the kingdom of Sicily made to him by this same
church. Likewise, as is said, after he had been elected to that same dignity and had come to
Rome, in the presence of Innocent and his brother cardinals and before many others, he
renewed that oath, making his pledge of hommage in the pope’s hands. Then, when he was in
Germany he swore to the same Innocent, and on his death to our predecessor Pope Honorius
{11} of happy memory and his successors and the Roman church itself, in the presence of the
princes and nobles of the empire, to preserve as far as was in his power, the honours, rights
and possessions of the Roman church, and loyally to protect them, and without difficulty to
see to the restoration of whatever came into his hands, expressly naming the said possessions
in the oath: afterwards he confirmed this when he had gained the imperial crown. But he has
deliberately broken these three oaths, not without the brand of treachery and the charge of
treason. For against our predecessor Gregory and his brother cardinals, he has dared to send
threatening letters to these cardinals, and in many ways to slander Gregory before his brother
cardinals, as is clear from the letters which he then sent to them, and almost throughout the
whole world, as it is said, he has presumed to defame him.

He also personally caused the arrest of our venerable brother Otto {12}, bishop of Porto, at
that time cardinal deacon of Saint Nicholas in Carcere Tulliano, and James of happy memory,
bishop of Palestrina {13}, legates of the apostolic see, noble and important members of the
Roman church. He had them stripped of all their goods, and after more than once being led
shamefully through different places, committed to prison. Furthermore this privilege which
our lord Jesus Christ handed to Peter and in him to his successors, namely, whatever you bind
on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven,
in which assuredly consists the authority and power of the Roman church, he did his best to
diminish or take away from the church itself, writing that he did not fear Pope Gregory’s
condemnations. For, not only by despising the keys of the church he did not observe the
sentence of excommunication pronounced against him, but also by himself and his officials
he prevented others from observing that and other sentences of excommunication and
interdict, which he altogether set at nought. Also without fear he seized territories of the said
Roman church, namely the Marches, the Duchy, Benevento, the walls and towers of which he
has caused to be demolished, and others with few exceptions in parts of Tuscany and
Lombardy and certain other places which he holds, and he still keeps hold of them. And as if

175
it were not enough that he was clearly going against the aforesaid oaths by such presumption,
either by himself or through his officials he has forced the inhabitants of these territories to
break their oath, absolving them in fact, since he cannot do it in law, from the oaths of loyalty
by which they were bound to the Roman church, and making them nonetheless forswear the
said loyalty and take an oath of loyalty to himself.

It is absolutely clear that he is the violator of the peace. For, previously at a time when peace
had been restored between himself and the church, he took an oath before the venerable John
of Abbeville {14}, bishop of Sabina, and Master Thomas {15}, cardinal priest of the title of
Saint Sabina, in the presence of many prelates, princes and barons, that he would observe and
obey exactly and without reserve all the commands of the church with regard to those things
for which he had incurred excommunication, after the reasons of that excommunication had
been set out in order before him. Then, when remitting every sanction and penalty to the
Teutonic knights, the inhabitants of the kingdom of Sicily and any others who had supported
the church against him, he guaranteed on his soul through Thomas, count of Acerra, that he
would never wrong them or cause them to be wronged on the ground that they had supported
the church. But he did not keep the peace and violated these oaths without any sense of
shame that he was guilty of perjury. For afterwards he caused some of these very men, both
nobles and others, to be captured; and after stripping them of all their goods, he had their
wives and children imprisoned; and contrary to the promise he had made to bishop John of
Sabina and cardinal Thomas, he invaded the lands of the church without hesitation, even
though they promulgated in his presence that henceforth he would incur sentence of
excommunication if he broke his promise. And when these two ecclesiastics, by their
apostolic authority, ordered that neither by himself nor through others should he hinder
postulations, elections or confirmations of churches and monasteries in the kingdom of Sicily
from being held freely in future according to the statutes of the general council; that
henceforth nobody in the same kingdom should impose taxes or collections on ecclesiastical
persons or their property; that in the same kingdom no cleric or ecclesiastical person should
in future be brought before a lay judge in a civil or criminal case, except for a suit in civil law
over feudal rights; and that he should make adequate compensation to the Templars,
Hospitallers and other ecclesiastical persons for the loss and injury inflicted upon them; he
nevertheless refused to obey these commands.

It is clear that in the kingdom of Sicily eleven or more archiepiscopal and many episcopal
sees, abbacies and other churches are at present vacant, and through his agency, as is patent,
these have long been deprived of prelates, to their own grave loss and the ruin of souls. And
though perhaps in some churches of the kingdom elections have been held by chapters, since
however they have elected clerics who are Frederick’s dependants, it can be concluded in all
probability that they did not have a free power of choice. Not only has he caused the
possessions and goods of churches in the kingdom to be seized at his pleasure, but also the
crosses, thuribles, chalices and other sacred treasures of theirs, and silk cloth, to be carried
off, like one who sets at nought divine worship, and although it is said that they have been
restored in part to the churches, yet a price was first exacted for them. Indeed clerics are
made to suffer in many ways by collections and taxes, and not only are they dragged before a

176
lay court but also, as it is asserted, they are compelled to submit to duels and are imprisoned,
killed and tortured to the disturbance and insult of the clerical order. Satisfaction has not been
made to the said Templars, Hospitallers and ecclesiastical persons for the loss and injury
done to them.

It is also certain that he is guilty of sacrilege. For when the aforesaid bishops of Porto and
Palestrina, and many prelates of churches and clerics, both religious and secular, summoned
to the apostolic see to hold the council which Frederick himself had previously asked for,
were coming by sea, since the roads had been entirely blocked at his command, he stationed
his son Enzo with a large number of galleys and, by means of many others duly placed long
beforehand, he laid an ambush against them in the parts of Tuscany on the coast; and so that
he might vomit forth in more deadly fashion the poison which had long gathered within him,
by an act of sacrilegious daring he caused them to be captured; during their seizure some of
the prelates and others were drowned, a number were killed, some were put to flight and
pursued, and the rest were stripped of all their possessions, ignominiously led from place to
place to the kingdom of Sicily, and there harshly imprisoned. Some of them, overcome by the
filth and beset by hunger, perished miserably.

Furthermore, he has deservedly become suspect of heresy. For, after he had incurred the
sentence of excommunication pronounced against him by the aforesaid John, bishop of
Sabina, and cardinal Thomas, after the said pope Gregory had laid him under anathema, and
after the capture of cardinals of the Roman church, prelates, clerics and others coming at
different times to the apostolic see; he has despised and continues to despise the keys of the
church, causing the sacred rites to be celebrated or rather, as far as in him lies, to be profaned,
and he has consistently asserted, as said above, that he does not fear the condemnations of the
aforesaid pope Gregory. Besides, he is joined in odious friendship with the Saracens; several
times he has sent envoys and gifts to them, and receives the like from them in return with
expressions of honour and welcome; he embraces their rites; he openly keeps them with him
in his daily services; and, following their customs, he does not blush to appoint as guards, for
his wives descended from royal stock, eunuchs whom it is seriously said he has had castrated.
And what is more loathsome, when he was in the territory overseas, after he had made an
agreement, or rather had come to a wicked understanding with the sultan, he allowed the
name of Mahomet to be publicly proclaimed day and night in the Lord’s temple. Recently,
after the sultan of Babylon and his followers had brought serious loss and untold injury to the
holy Land and its christian inhabitants, he caused the envoys of the sultan to be honourably
received and lavishly entertained throughout the kingdom of Sicily with, it is said, every
mark of honour being paid to the sultan. Using the deadly and hateful service of other
unbelievers against the faithful, and securing a bond by friendship and marriage with those
who, wickedly making light of the apostolic see, have separated from the unity of the church,
he brought about by assassins the death of the famous duke Ludwig of Bavaria {16}, who
was specially devoted to the Roman church, with disregard of the christian religion, and he
gave his daughter in marriage to Vatatzes {17}, that enemy of God and the church who,
together with his counsellors and supporters, was solemnly separated by excommunication
from the communion of the faithful.

177
Rejecting the customs and actions of christian princes and heedless of salvation and
reputation, he gives no attention to works of piety. Indeed to say nothing of his wicked acts of
destruction, though he has learnt to oppress, he does not care mercifully to relieve the
oppressed, and instead of holding out his hand in charity, as befits a prince, he sets about the
destruction of churches and crushes religious and other ecclesiastical persons by constant
affliction. Nor is he seen to have built churches, monasteries, hospitals or other pious places.
Surely these are not light but convincing proofs for suspecting him of heresy? The civil law
declares that those are to be regarded as heretics, and ought to be subject to the sentences
issued against them, who even on slight evidence are found to have strayed from the
judgment and path of the catholic religion. Besides this the kingdom of Sicily, which is the
special patrimony of blessed Peter and which Frederick held as a fief from the apostolic see,
he has reduced to such a state of utter desolation and servitude, with regard to both clergy and
laity, that these have practically nothing at all; and as nearly all upright people have been
driven out, he has forced those who remain to live in an almost servile condition and to
wrong in many ways and attack the Roman church, of which in the first place they are
subjects and vassals. He could also be rightly blamed because for more than nine years he has
failed to pay the annual pension of a thousand gold pieces, which he is bound to pay to the
Roman church for this kingdom.

We therefore, after careful discussion with our brother cardinals and the sacred council on his
wicked transgressions already mentioned and many more besides, since though unworthy we
hold on earth the place of Jesus Christ, and to us in the person of the blessed apostle Peter has
been said, whatever you bind on earth etc., denounce the said prince, who has made himself
so unworthy of the empire and kingdoms and every honour and dignity and who also,
because of his crimes, has been cast out by God from kingdom and empire; we mark him out
as bound by his sins, an outcast and deprived by our Lord of every honour and dignity; and
we deprive him of them by our sentence. We absolve from their oath for ever all those who
are bound to him by an oath of loyalty, firmly forbidding by our apostolic authority anyone in
the future to obey or heed him as emperor or king, and decreeing that anyone who henceforth
offers advice, help or favour to him as to an emperor or king, automatically incurs
excommunication. Let those whose task it is to choose an emperor in the same empire, freely
choose a successor to him. With regard to the aforesaid kingdom of Sicily, we shall take care
to provide, with the counsel of our brother cardinals, as we see to be expedient.

Given at Lyons on 17 July in the third year of our pontificate.

CONSTITUTIONS

1.On rescripts

178
Since in many articles of law failure to define their scope is blameworthy, after prudent
consideration we decree that by the general clause “certain others” which frequently occurs in
papal letters, no more than three or four persons are to be brought to court. The petitioner
should state the names in his first citation, lest by chance a place is left for fraud if the names
can be freely altered {18}.

2. {19} Those to whom cases should be entrusted

By {20} the present decree we ordain that the apostolic see or its legates should not entrust
cases to any persons except those who possess a dignity or belong to cathedrals or other
collegiate churches of high standing; and such cases are to be conducted only in cities or
large and well-known places where are to be found many men learned in the law. Judges
who, contrary to this statute, cite either one or both parties to other places may be disobeyed
without penalty, unless the citation takes place with the consent of both parties.

3. {21} Curtailing legal expenses

As we wish, to the best of our power, to curtail the expenses of lawsuits by shortening the
legal process, extending the decree of Innocent III of happy memory on this matter, we
decree that if anyone wishes to bring several personal claims against another, he must be
careful to gain letters on all these claims to the same judges and not to different ones. If
anyone acts contrary to this, his letters and the processes initiated by them are to lack all
validity; besides if he has caused inconvenience to the defendant by them, he is to be
condemned to pay the legal expenses. Also if the defendant during the course of the same
trial declares that he has a charge against the plaintiff, he ought, through benefit either of
reconvention or of convention, if he prefers to obtain letters against him, to have his case
tried before the same judges, unless he can reject them as being suspect. If he acts contrary to
this, he should suffer the same penalty.

4. {22} On challenging elections etc.

We decree that if anyone attacks an election, postulation or provision already made, bringing
some objection to the form or the person, and should happen to appeal to us in this matter,
both the objector and the defendant, and in general all those who are concerned and whom
the case affects, either by themselves or by their procurators instructed for the case, should
make their way to the apostolic see within a month of the lodging of the objection. But if one
party {23} does not come after twenty days, and the other party has arrived and is waiting,
the case about the election may proceed according to law, notwithstanding the absence of
anyone. We wish and command that this is to be observed in dignities parsonages and
canonries. We {24} also add that anyone who does not fully prove the objection he has
brought regarding the form, shall be condemned to pay the expenses which the other party
claims to have incurred on this account. But anyone who fails to prove his objection against
the person, should know that he is suspended from ecclesiastical benefices for three years,
and if within that time he continues to act with similar reckless conduct, that by the law itself

179
he is deprived of these benefices for ever, and he is to have no hope or confidence of mercy
in this matter, unless it is established by the clearest proof that a probable and sufficient cause
excuses him from a malicious accusation.

5. {25} Only unconditional votes valid

In {26} elections, postulations and ballots, from which the right of election arises, we
completely disapprove of conditional, alternative and indefinite votes, and we decree that the
said votes are to be held invalid, and that the election is to be determined by unconditional
votes; for the power of decision of those who do not express a clear opinion is transferred to
the others {27}.

6. {28} Jurisdiction of conservators

We decree that conservators, whom we frequently appoint, may defend from manifest injury
and violence those whom we entrust to their protection, but that their power does not extend
to other matters which require a judicial investigation.

7. {29} Legates and benefices

We are required by our office to watch for remedies for our subjects, because while we
relieve their burdens and remove their stumbling blocks, so we rest in their ease and enjoy
their peace. Therefore we enact by the present decree that legates of the Roman church,
however much they hold the full power of legates whether they have been sent by us or claim
the dignity of that office on behalf of their own churches, have no power from the office of
legate of conferring benefices, unless we have judged that this is specially to be granted to a
particular one. We do not, however, wish this restriction to hold with our brother cardinals
while acting as legates, because just as they rejoice in a prerogative of honour, so we wish
them to exercise a wider authority.

8. {30} Judge delegates

The law seems to be clear that a judge delegate, unless he has received a special concession
for the purpose from the apostolic see, cannot order either of the parties to appear in person
before him, unless it be a criminal case or, in order to obtain a statement of the truth or an
oath regarding calumny, the necessity of the law demands that the parties appear before him.

9. {31} On peremptory exceptions

The objection of a peremptory exception or of any major defence concerning the trial of a
case, raised before the contestation of the suit, shall not prevent or hold up the contestation,
unless the objector makes an exception concerning a matter already judged or concluded or
brought to a solution, even though the objector says that the rescript would not have been
granted if the grantor had been aware of the things which are adverse to the plaintiff.

180
10. {32} The objection of robbery

We are well aware of the frequent and persistent complaint that the exception of robbery,
sometimes maliciously introduced in trials, hinders and confuses ecclesiastical cases. For
while the exception is admitted, sometimes appeals are introduced. Thus the hearing of the
chief case is interrupted and often comes to nothing. Thus we who are ever ready to take
labours upon ourselves so that we may win peace for others, wishing to limit lawsuits and to
remove material for malicious accusations, decree that in civil suits a judge is not to hold up
the proceedings of the major issue on account of an objection of robbery brought by anyone
except the plaintiff. But if the defendant declares in civil suits that he has been robbed by the
plaintiff, or in criminal cases by anyone at all, then he must prove his assertion within fifteen
days after the day on which the claim is put forward; otherwise he is to be condemned to pay
the expenses which the plaintiff has incurred on this account, after a judicial estimate has
been made, or let him be punished otherwise if the judge thinks right. By the word “robbed”
we wish to be understood in this case a criminal accusation whereby someone declares that
he has been stripped by violence of all his substance or a greater part of it. This we think is
the only honest interpretation of the canons, for we ought not to meet our opponents either
naked or without arms. For the one stripped has the advantage that he cannot be stripped
again. Among the schoolmen the matter is debated, whether one who has been robbed by a
third party can bring an exception against his accuser, or whether a time should be granted
him by the judge within which he should ask for restitution, lest perchance he should wish to
continue in this state in order to evade every accuser, and this we think is fully according to
justice. If he does not seek restitution within the time granted, or does not bring his case to a
conclusion even though he could do so, then he can be accused regardless of the exception of
robbery. In addition to this we decree that robbery of private goods cannot in any way be
brought up against one for ecclesiastics or vice versa.

11. {33} No-show plaintiffs

A plaintiff who does not take the trouble to come on the date for which he has caused his
appeal to be cited, should be condemned on his arrival to pay the expenses incurred by the
defendant on account of this, and he is not to be admitted to another citation unless he gives a
sufficient surety that he will appear on the date.

12. {34} On early possession for the sake of preservation

We decree that a person who, in order to obtain a dignity, parsonage or ecclesiastical

benefice, brings a suit against the possessor, may not be admitted to possession of it for the
sake of its preservation, on the grounds of the other’s contumacy; this is to prevent his
entering upon it from appearing irregular. But in this case the divine presence may make up
for the absence of the contumacious one, so that though the suit is not opposed, the matter
may be brought to the proper conclusion after a careful examination.

181
13. {35} On the acceptability of negative assertions

We decree that negative assertions, which can only be proved by the admission of the
opponent, may be accepted by the judges if they see this to be expedient in the interests of
equity.

14. {36} The exception of major excommunication

After due consideration our holy mother the church decrees that the exception of a major
excommunication should hold up the suit and delay the agents, in whatever part of the
proceedings it is produced. Thus ecclesiastical censure will be the more feared, the danger of
communion avoided, the vice of contumacy checked, and those excommunicated, while they
are excluded from the acts of the community, may the more easily be brought, through a
sense of shame, to the grace of humility and reconciliation. But with the growth of human
evil what was provided as a remedy has turned to harm. For while in ecclesiastical cases this
exception is frequently brought up through malice, it happens that business is delayed and the
parties worn out by toil and expense. Therefore, since this has crept in like a general plague,
we think it right to apply a general remedy. Thus if anyone brings up the objection of
excommunication, he should set out the kind of excommunication and the name of the person
who imposed the penalty. He must know that he is bringing the matter into public notice, and
he must prove it with the clearest evidence within eight days, not counting the day on which
he brings it forward. If he does not prove it, the judge should not fail to proceed in the case,
condemning the accused to repay the sum which the plaintiff shows he has incurred, after an
estimate has been made. If however later, while the hearing continues and the proof is
progressing, an exception is made either with regard to the same excommunication or another
and is proved, the plaintiff is to be excluded from the proceedings until he has deserved to
gain the grace of absolution, and all that has gone before shall nevertheless be regarded as
valid; provided that this exception is not put forward more than twice, unless a new
excommunication has arisen or a clear and ready proof has come to light concerning the old.
If such an exception is brought forward after the case has been decided though it will prevent
the execution it will not weaken the verdict, with the qualification that, if the plaintiff has
been publicly excommunicated, and the judge knows this at any time, then even if the
accused shall not make an exception on this score, the judge should not delay in removing the
plaintiff from his office.

15. {37} On Judges Who Give Dishonest Judgment

Since before the judgment seat of the eternal king a person will not be held guilty when a
judge unjustly condemns him, according to the words of the prophet, the Lord will not
condemn him when he is judged, ecclesiastical judges must take care and be on the watch
that in the process of justice dislike has no power, favour does not take an undue place, fear is
banished, and reward or hope of reward does not overturn justice. Let them bear the scales in
their hands and weigh with an equal balance, so that in all that is done in the court, especially
in forming and giving the verdict, they may have God only before their eyes following the

182
example of him who when entering the tabernacle referred the complaints of the people to the
Lord to judge according to his command. If any ecclesiastical judge, whether ordinary or
delegated, careless of his reputation and seeking his own honour, acts against his conscience
and justice in any way to the injury of one party in his judgment, whether from favour or
from base motives, let him know that he is suspended from the exercise of his office for a
year and he is to be condemned to pay to the injured party the damages incurred; further, let
him know that if during the period of his suspension he sacrilegiously takes part in the sacred
rites of the church, he is caught in the noose of irregularity according to the canonical
sanctions, from which he can be freed only by the apostolic see, saving the other constitutions
which assign and inflict punishment on judges who give dishonest judgment. For it is right
that he who dares to offend in so many ways should suffer a multiple penalty.

16. {38} On appeals

It is our earnest wish to lessen lawsuits and to relieve subjects of their troubles. Therefore we
decree that if anyone thinks that he should appeal to us in a court of law or outside it because
of an interlocutory decree or a grievance, let him at once put in writing the reason for his
appeal, seeking a writ which we order to be granted him. In this writ the judge is to declare
the reason for the appeal, and why the appeal has not been granted or whether it was granted
out of respect for a superior. After this let time be granted to the appellant, according to
distance and the nature of the persons and the business, to follow up his appeal. If the
appellee wishes it and the principals petition for it, let them approach the apostolic see, either
by themselves or through agents who have been instructed and given a commission to act,
bringing with them the reasons and documents relating to the case. Let them come so
prepared that if it seems good to us, when the matter of the appeal has been dealt with or
committed to the parties for agreement, the principal case may proceed, insofar as it can and
should by law; without however any change in what tradition has ordained about appeals
from definitive sentences. If the appellant does not observe the above provisions, he is not to
be reckoned an appellant and he must return to the examination of the former judge, and is to
be condemned to pay the legitimate expenses. If the appellee disregards this statute, he shall
be proceeded against as contumacious, as regards both the costs and the case, in so far as this
is allowed by the law. Indeed it is right that the laws should raise their hands against someone
who mocks the law, judge and litigant.

17. {39} On the same

When reasonable grounds for suspicion have been noted against a judge, and arbitrators have
been chosen by the parties according to the form of law to investigate it, it often happens that
when the two arbitrators fail to agree and do not summon a third one, with whom both or one
of them can proceed to settle the matter as they are obliged, the judge brings a sentence of
excommunication against them, which they through dislike or favour for long disregard. Thus
the case itself, interrupted more than it should be, does not proceed to a settlement of the
principal business. As it is our wish therefore to apply a necessary remedy for a disease of
this nature, we decree that a fitting time-limit should be fixed by the judge for the two

183
arbitrators, so that within it they may either agree or by consent summon a third one, with
whom both or one of them may put an end to the suspicion. Otherwise the judge thenceforth
shall proceed in the principal business.

18. {40} On employing assassins

The son of God, Jesus Christ, for the redemption of the human race descended from the
height of heaven to the lowest part of the world and underwent a temporal death. But when
after his resurrection he was about to ascend to his Father, that he might not leave the flock
redeemed by his glorious blood without a shepherd, he entrusted its care to the blessed
apostle Peter, so that by the firmness of his own faith he might strengthen others in the
christian religion and kindle their minds with the ardour of devotion to the works of their
salvation. Hence we who by the will of our Lord, though without merit of our own, have been
made successors of this apostle and hold on earth, though unworthy, the place of our
Redeemer, should always be careful and vigilant in the guarding of that flock and be forced
to direct our thoughts continuously to the salvation of souls by removing what is harmful and
doing what is profitable. Thus casting off the sleep of negligence and with the eyes of our
heart ever vigilant, we may be able to win souls to God with the cooperation of his grace.
Since therefore there are people who with a terrible inhumanity and loathsome cruelty thirst
for the death of others and cause them to be killed by assassins, and thus bring about not only
the death of the body but also of the soul, unless the abundant divine grace prevents it, we
wish to meet such danger to souls, so that the victims may be defended beforehand by
spiritual arms and all power may be bestowed by God for justice and the exercise of right
judgment, and to strike those wicked and reckless people with the sword of ecclesiastical
punishment, so that the fear of punishment may set a limit to their audacity. We do so
especially since some persons of high standing, fearing to be killed in such a way, are forced
to beg for their own safety from the master of these assassins, and thus so to speak to redeem
their life in a way that is an insult to christian dignity. Therefore, with the approval of the
sacred council, we decree that if any prince, prelate or any ecclesiastical or secular person
shall cause the death of any Christian by such assassins, or even command it — even though
death does not follow from this-or receives, defends or hides such persons, he automatically
incurs the sentence of excommunication and of deposition from dignity, honour, order, office
and benefice, and these are to be conferred on others by those who have the right to do so.
Let such a one with all his worldly goods be cast out for ever by all christian people as an
enemy of religion, and after it has been established by reasonable evidence that so loathsome
a crime has been committed, no other sentence of excommunication, deposition or rejection
shall in any way be needed.

19. {41} On excommunication 1

Since the aim of excommunication is healing and not death, correction and not destruction, as
long as the one against whom it is pronounced does not treat it with contempt, let an
ecclesiastical judge proceed with caution, so that in pronouncing It he may be seen as one
who acts with a correcting and healing hand. Whoever pronounces an excommunication,

184
therefore, should do this in writing and should write down expressly the reason why the
excommunication was pronounced. He is bound to hand over a copy of this written document
to the one excommunicated within a month after the date of sentence, if requested to do so.
As to this request, we wish a public document to be drawn up or testimonial letters to be
furnished, sealed with an official seal. If any judge rashly violates this constitution, let him
know that he is suspended for one month from entering a church or attending divine services.
The superior to whom the one excommunicated has recourse, should readily remove the
excommunication and condemn the judge who pronounced it to repay the expenses and all
losses, or punish him in other ways with a fitting penalty, so that judges may learn by the
lesson of punishment how serious it is to hurl the bolt of excommunication without due
consideration. We wish the same to be observed in sentences of suspension and interdict. Let
prelates of churches and all judges take care that they do not incur the foresaid penalty of
suspension. But if it happens that they take part m divine offices as before, they will not
escape irregularity according to the canonical sanctions, in a matter where dispensation
cannot be granted except by the sovereign pontiff.

20. {42} On excommunication 2

The question is sometimes asked whether, when a person who asks to be absolved by a
superior by way of precaution, asserting that the sentence of excommunication pronounced
against him is void, the act of absolution should be performed for him without objection; and
whether one who declares before such absolution that he will prove in a court of law that he
was excommunicated after a legitimate appeal, or that an intolerable mistake was clearly
expressed in the sentence, should be avoided in all things except in what concerns the proof.
To the first question we decree that the following is to be observed: absolution is not to be
refused to the petitioner, even though the pronouncer of the sentence or the adversary
opposes it, unless he says that the petitioner was excommunicated for a manifest offence, in
which case a limit of eight days is to be granted to the one saying this. If he proves his
objection, the sentence is not to be set aside unless there is sufficient guarantee of amendment
or an adequate assurance that the petitioner will appear in court if the offence with which he
is charged is still doubtful. To the second question, we decree that he who is allowed to
submit a proof, as long as the matter of proof is in dispute, is to be avoided in all matters in
the court in which he is engaged as an agent, but outside the court he may take part in offices,
postulations, elections and other lawful acts.

21. {43} On excommunication 3

We decree {44} that no judge should presume to pronounce, before a canonical warning, a
sentence of major excommunication upon persons who associate, in speech or other ways by
which an associate incurs a minor excommunication, with persons already excommunicated
by the judge; saving those decrees which have legitimately been promulgated against those
who presume to associate with one condemned for grievous crime. But it the
excommunicated person becomes hardened in speech or other ways by which an associate
incurs a minor excommunication, the judge can, after canonical warning, condemn such

185
associates with a similar censure. Otherwise excommunication pronounced against these
associates is not to have any binding power, and those who pronounce it may fear the penalty
of the law.

22. {45} On excommunication 4

Since there is danger that bishops and their superiors in the execution of their pontifical
office, which is often their duty, may incur in some case an automatic sentence of interdict or
suspension, we have thought it right, after careful consideration, to decree that bishops and
other higher prelates in no way incur, because of any decree, sentence or order, the aforesaid
sentence by reason of the law itself, unless there is express mention in them of bishops and
superiors. In the constitution Solet a nonnullis, previously promulgated by us, it is laid down
that when someone offers in court to prove that a sentence of excommunication was passed
against him after a legitimate appeal, he is not to be avoided during the period of proof in
matters which lie outside the court, such as elections, postulations and offices. To this we add
that this constitution should not be extended to the sentences of bishops and archbishops, but
what was previously observed in such actions should be observed in the future for these too.

II

1. {46} Management of church debts

Our pastoral care incites and urges us to look to the interest of those churches which have
fallen into debt, and to provide by a salutary constitution that this should not happen for the
future. The abyss of usury has almost destroyed many churches, and some prelates are found
to be very careless and remiss in the payment of debts, especially those contracted by their
predecessors, too ready to contract heavier debts and mortgage the property of the church,
slothful in guarding what has been acquired, and preferring to win praise for themselves by
making some small innovation than to guard their possessions, recover what has been thrown
away, restore what is lost and repair damage. For this reason, so that they may not be able for
the future to excuse themselves for an inefficient administration and to throw the blame on
their predecessors and others, we lay down the following rules, with the approval of the
present council. Bishops, abbots, deans and others who exercise a lawful and common
administration, within one month after they have assumed office, having first informed their
immediate superior, so that he may be present either in person or through some suitable and
faithful ecclesiastical person, in the presence of the chapter or convent especially summoned
for this purpose, must see that an inventory is made of the goods that belong to the
administration they have taken up. In this the movable and immovable goods, books,
charters, legal instruments, privileges, ornaments or fittings of the church, and all things
which belong to the equipment of the estate, whether urban or rural, as well as debts and
credits, are to be carefully written down. Thus, what was the condition of the church or the
administration when they took it up, how they governed it during their incumbency, and what
was its state when they laid it down by death or withdrawal, may be clearly known to the
superior, if necessary, and those who are appointed for the service of the church. Archbishops

186
who have no superior except the Roman pontiff, are to see to it that for this purpose they
summon one of their suffragans, either in person or through another, as is expressed above,
and abbots and other lesser exempt prelates, a neighbouring bishop, who is to claim no right
for himself in the exempt church. The said inventory is to be furnished with the seals of the
new incumbent and his chapter, and of the archbishop’s suffragan or the neighbouring bishop
called for the purpose. It is to be preserved in the archives of the church with due safeguards.
Moreover a transcript of this inventory is to be given to both the new incumbent and the
prelate summoned for the above purpose, and is to be similarly sealed. Existing goods are to
be carefully guarded, their administration carried out in a worthy manner, and the debts
which have been found are to be speedily paid, if possible, from the movable possessions of
the church. If these movable goods are not sufficient for a speedy payment, all revenues are
to be directed to the payment of debts that are usurious or burdensome; only necessary
expenses are to be deducted from these revenues, after a reasonable estimate has been made
by the prelate and his chapter. But if the debts are not burdensome or usurious, a third part of
these revenues is to be set aside for this obligation, or a greater part with the agreement of
those whom we have said must be summoned to take the inventory.

Further we strictly forbid, with the authority of the same council, those mentioned above to
mortgage to others their persons or the churches entrusted to them, or to contract debts on
behalf of themselves or the churches which may be a source of trouble. If evident necessity
and the reasonable advantage of their churches should persuade them, then prelates with the
advice and consent of their superiors, and archbishops and exempt abbots with the advice and
consent of those already mentioned and of their chapter, may contract debts which, if
possible, are not usurious and which are never in fairs or public markets. The names of the
debtors and creditors and the reason why the debt was contracted are to be included in the
written contract, even if it is turned to the advantage of the church, and for this purpose we
wish that in no way ecclesiastical persons or churches should be given as security. Indeed the
privileges of churches, which we command should be faithfully guarded in a safe place, are
never to be given as securities, nor are other things, except for necessary and useful debts
contracted with the full legal forms mentioned above.

That this salutary constitution should be kept unbroken, and the advantage which we hope
from it may be clearly seen, we consider that we must lay down by an inviolable decree that
all abbots and priors as well as deans and those in charge of cathedrals or other churches, at
least once a year in their chapters, should render a strict account of their administration, and a
written and sealed account should be faithfully read out in the presence of the visiting
superior. Likewise archbishops and bishops are to take care each year to make known to their
chapters with due fidelity the state of administration of the goods belonging to their
households, and bishops to their metropolitans, and metropolitans to the legates of the
apostolic see, or to others to whom the visitation of their churches has been assigned by the
same see. Written accounts are always to be kept in the treasury of the church for a record, so
that in the accounts a careful comparison can be made between future years and the present
and past; and the superior may learn from this the care or negligence of the administration.
Let the superior requite any negligence, keeping God only before his eyes and putting aside

187
love, hate and fear of humans, with such a degree and kind of correction that he may not on
this account receive from God or his superior or the apostolic see condign punishment. We
order that this constitution is to be observed not only by future prelates but also by those
already promoted.

2. {47} On help for the empire of Constantinople

Though we are engaged in difficult matters and distracted by manifold anxieties, yet among
those things which demand our constant attention is the liberation of the empire of
Constantinople. This we desire with our whole heart, this is ever the object of our thoughts.
Yet though the apostolic see has eagerly sought a remedy on its behalf by earnest endeavour
and many forms of assistance, though for long Catholics have striven by grievous toils, by
burdensome expense, by care, sweat, tears and bloodshed, yet the hand that extended such aid
could not wholly, hindered by sin, snatch the empire from the yoke of the enemy. Thus not
without cause we are troubled with grief. But because the body of the church would be
shamefully deformed by the lack of a loved member, namely the aforesaid empire, and be
sadly weakened and suffer loss; and because it could rightly be assigned to our sloth and that
of the church, if it were deprived of the support of the faithful, and left to be freely oppressed
by its enemies; we firmly propose to come to the help of the empire with swift and effective
aid. Thus at the same time as the church eagerly rises to its assistance and stretches out the
hand of defence, the empire can be saved from the dominion of its foes, and be brought back
by the Lord’s guidance to the unity of that same body, and may feel after the crushing
hammer of its enemies the consoling hand of the church its mother, and after the blindness of
error regain its sight by the possession of the catholic faith. It is the more fitting that prelates
of churches and other ecclesiastics should be watchful and diligent for its liberation, and
bestow their help and assistance, the more they are bound to work for the increase of the faith
and of ecclesiastical liberty, which could chiefly come about from the liberation of the
empire; and especially because while the empire is helped, assistance is consequently
rendered to the holy Land.

Indeed, so that the help to the empire may be speedy and useful, we decree, with the general
approval of the council, that half of all incomes of dignities parsonages and ecclesiastical
prebends, and of other benefices of ecclesiastics who do not personally reside in them for at
least six months, whether they hold one or more, shall be assigned in full for three years to
the help of the said empire, having been collected by those designated by the apostolic see.
Those are exempt who are employed in our service or in that of our brother cardinals and of
their prelates, those who are on pilgrimages or in schools, or engaged in the business of their
own churches at their direction, and those who have or will take up the badge of the cross for
the aid of the holy Land or who will set out in person to the help of the said empire; but if any
of these, apart from the crusaders and those setting out, receive from ecclesiastical revenues
more than a hundred silver marks, they should pay a third part of the remainder in each of the
three years. This is to be observed notwithstanding any customs or statutes of churches to the
contrary, or any indulgences granted by the apostolic see to these churches or persons,

188
confirmed by oath or any other means. And if by chance in this matter any shall knowingly
be guilty of any deceit, they shall incur the sentence of excommunication.

We ourselves, from the revenues of the church of Rome, after first deducting a tenth from
them to be assigned to the aid of the holy Land, will assign a tenth part in full for the support
of the said empire. Further, when help is given to the empire, assistance is given in a very
particular way and directed to the recovery of the holy Land, while we are striving for the
liberation of the empire itself. Thus trusting in the mercy of almighty God and the authority
of his blessed apostles Peter and Paul, from the power of binding and loosing which he
conferred upon us though unworthy, we grant pardon of their sins to all those who come to
the help of the said empire, and we desire they may enjoy that privilege and immunity which
is granted to those who come to the help of the holy Land.

3. {48} Admonition to be made by prelates to the people in their charge

In the belief that it is for ever our native country, from times long past all the children of the
church have not only poured out countless sums of money but have also freely shed their
blood to recover the holy Land, which the Son of God has consecrated with the shedding of
his own blood. This we learn, sad at heart, from what has happened across the sea where the
unbelievers fight against the faithful. Since it is the special prayer of the apostolic see that the
desire of all for the redemption of the holy Land may, if God so wills, be speedily
accomplished, we have made due provision, in order to win God’s favour, to arouse you to
this task by our letter. Therefore we earnestly beg all of you, commanding you in our lord
Jesus Christ, that by your pious admonitions you should persuade the faithful committed to
your care, in your sermons or when you Impose a penance upon them, granting a special
indulgence, as you see it to be expedient, that in their wills, in return for the remission of their
sins, they should leave something for the help of the holy Land or the eastern empire. You are
carefully to provide that what they give for this support by way of money, through reverence
of our crucified Lord, is faithfully preserved in definite places under your seal, and that what
is bequeathed for this purpose in other forms is accurately recorded in writing. May your own
devotion carry out this work of piety, in which the only aim is God’s cause and the salvation
of the faithful, so readily that with full assurance you may look at least for the reward of
glory from the hand of the divine judge.

4. {49} On the Tartars

Since we desire above all things that the christian religion should be spread still further and
more widely throughout the world, we are pierced with the deepest sorrow when any people
by aim and action go against our wishes, and strive with all their might to blot out utterly this
religion from the face of the world. Indeed the wicked race of the Tartars, seeking to subdue,
or rather utterly destroy the christian people, having gathered for a long time past the strength
of all their tribes, have entered Poland, Russia, Hungary and other christian countries. So
savage has been their devastation that their sword spared neither sex nor age, but raged with
fearful brutality upon all alike. It caused unparalleled havoc and destruction in these countries

189
in its unbroken advance; for their sword, not knowing how to rest in the sheath, made other
kingdoms subject to it by a ceaseless persecution. As time went on, it could attack stronger
christian armies and exercise its savagery more fully upon them. Thus when, God forbid, the
world is bereaved of the faithful, faith may turn aside from the world to lament its followers
destroyed by the barbarity of this people. Therefore, so that the horrible purpose of this
people may not prevail but be thwarted, and by the power of God be brought to the opposite
result, all the faithful must carefully consider and ensure by their earnest endeavour that the
Tartar advance may be hindered and prevented from penetrating any further by the power of
their mailed arm. Therefore, on the advice of the holy council, we advise, beg, urge and
earnestly command all of you, as far as you can, carefully to observe the route and
approaches by which this people can enter our land, and by ditches, walls or other defences
and fortifications, as you think fitting, to keep them at bay, so that their approach to you may
not easily be open. Word of their arrival should previously be brought to the apostolic see.
Thus we may direct the assistance of the faithful to you, and thus you may be safe against the
attempts and raids of this people. For to the necessary and useful expenses which you should
make for that purpose, we shall contribute handsomely, and we shall see that contributions
are made in proportion by all christian countries, for in this way we may meet common
dangers. Nevertheless, in addition to this, we shall send similar letters to all Christians
through whose territories this people could make its approach.

5 [On the crusade{50}]{51}

Deeply sorrowful at the grievous dangers of the holy Land, but especially at those which have
recently happened to the faithful settled there, we seek with all our heart to free it from the
hands of the wicked. Thus with the approval of the sacred council, in order that the crusaders
may prepare themselves, we lay it down that at an opportune time, to be made known to all
the faithful by preachers and our special envoys, all who are ready to cross the sea should
gather at suitable places for this purpose, so that they may proceed from there with the
blessing of God and the apostolic see to the assistance of the holy Land. Priests and other
clerics who will be in the christian army, both those under authority and prelates, shall
diligently devote themselves to prayer and exhortation, teaching the crusaders by word and
example to have the fear and love of God always before their eyes, so that they say or do
nothing that might offend the majesty of the eternal king. If they ever fall into sin, let them
quickly rise up again through true penitence. Let them he humble in heart and in body,
keeping to moderation both in food and in dress, avoiding altogether dissensions and
rivalries, and putting aside entirely any bitterness or envy, so that thus armed with spiritual
and material weapons they may the more fearlessly fight against the enemies of the faith,
relying not on their own power but rather trusting in the strength of God. Let nobles and the
powerful in the army, and all who abound in riches, be led by the holy words of prelates so
that, with their eyes fixed on the crucified one for whom they have taken up the badge of the
cross, they may refrain from useless and unnecessary expenditure, especially in feasting and
banquets, and let they give a share of their wealth to the support of those persons through
whom the work of God may prosper; and on this account, according to the dispensation of the
prelates themselves, they may be granted remission of their sins. We grant to the aforesaid

190
clerics that they may receive the fruits of their benefices in full for three years, as if they were
resident in the churches, and if necessary they may leave them in pledge for the same time.

To prevent this holy proposal being impeded or delayed, we strictly order all prelates of
churches, each in his own locality, diligently to warn and induce those who have abandoned
the cross to resume it, and them and others who have taken up the cross, and those who may
still do so, to carry out their vows to the Lord. And if necessary they shall compel them to do
this without any backsliding, by sentences of excommunication against their persons and of
interdict on their lands, excepting only those persons who find themselves faced with an
impediment of such a kind that their vow deservedly ought to be commuted or deferred in
accordance with the directives of the apostolic see. In order that nothing connected with this
business of Jesus Christ be omitted, we will and order patriarchs, archbishops, bishops,
abbots and others who have the care of souls to preach the cross zealously to those entrusted
to them. Let them beseech kings, dukes, princes, margraves, counts, barons and other
magnates, as well as the communes of cities, vills and towns — in the name of the Father,
Son and holy Spirit, the one, only, true and eternal God — that those who do not go in person
to the aid of the holy Land should contribute, according to their means an appropriate number
of fighting men together with their necessary expenses for three years, for the remission of
their sins, in accordance with what has already been explained in general letters and will be
explained below for still greater assurance. We wish to share in this remission not only those
who contribute ships of their own but also those who are zealous enough to build them for
this purpose. To those who refuse, if there happen to be any who are so ungrateful to our lord
God, we firmly declare in the name of the apostle that they should know that they will have
to answer to us for this on the last day of final judgment before the fearful judge. Let them
consider beforehand, however, with what knowledge and with what security it was that they
were able to confess before the only-begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, to whom the Father
gave all things into his hands, if in this business, which is as it were peculiarly his, they
refuse to serve him who was crucified for sinners, by whose beneficence they are sustained
and indeed by whose blood they have been redeemed.

We therefore decree, with the general approval of the council, that all clerics, both those
under authority and prelates, shall give a twentieth of the revenues of their churches for a full
three years to the aid of the holy Land, by means of the persons appointed by the apostolic
see for this purpose; the only exceptions being certain religious who are rightly to be
exempted from this taxation and likewise those persons who have taken or will take the cross
and so will go in person. We and our brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church, shall pay
a full tenth. Let all know, moreover, that they are obliged to observe this faithfully under pain
of excommunication, so that those who knowingly deceive in this matter shall incur the
sentence of excommunication. Because it is right that those who persevere in the service of
the heavenly ruler should in all justice enjoy special privilege, the crusaders shall therefore be
exempt from taxes or levies and other burdens. We take their persons and goods under the
protection of St Peter and ourself once they have taken up the cross. We ordain that they are
to be protected by archbishops, bishops and all prelates of the church of God, and that
protectors of their own are to be specially appointed for this purpose, so that their goods are

191
to remain intact and undisturbed until they are known for certain to be dead or to have
returned. If anyone dares to act contrary to this, let him be curbed by ecclesiastical censure.

If any of those setting out are bound by oath to pay interest, we ordain that their creditors
shall be compelled by the same punishment to release them from their oath and to desist from
exacting the interest; if any of the creditors does force them to pay the interest, we command
that he be forced by similar punishment to restore it. We order that Jews be compelled by the
secular power to remit interest, and that until they do so all intercourse shall be denied them
by all Christ’s faithful under pain of excommunication. Secular princes shall provide a
suitable deferral for those who cannot now pay their debts to Jews, so that after they have
undertaken the journey, and until there is certain knowledge of their death or of their return,
they shall not incur the inconvenience of paying interest. The Jews shall be compelled to add
to the capital, after they have deducted their necessary expenses, the revenues which they are
meanwhile receiving from property held by them on security. For, such a benefit seems to
entail not much loss, inasmuch as it postpones the repayment but does not cancel the debt.
Prelates of churches who are negligent in showing justice to crusaders and their families
should know that they will be severely punished. Furthermore, since corsairs and pirates
greatly impede help for the holy Land, by capturing and plundering those who are travelling
to and from it, we bind with the bond of excommunication them and their principal helpers
and supporters. We forbid anyone, under threat of anathema, knowingly to communicate with
them by contracting to buy or to sell; and we order rulers of cities and their territories to
restrain and curb such persons from this iniquity. Otherwise, since to be unwilling to disquiet
evildoers is none other than to encourage them, and since he who fails to oppose a manifest
crime is not without a touch of secret complicity, it is our wish and command that prelates of
churches exercise ecclesiastical severity against their persons and lands. We excommunicate
and anathematise, moreover, those false and impious Christians who, in opposition to Christ
and the christian people, convey {52} arms and iron and timber for galleys; and we decree
that those who sell them galleys or ships, and those who act as pilots in pirate Saracen ships,
or give them any help or advice by way of machines or anything else, to the detriment of the
holy Land, are to be punished with deprivation of their possessions and are to become the
slaves of those who capture them. We order this sentence to be renewed publicly on Sundays
and feast-days in all maritime towns; and the bosom of the church is not to be opened to such
persons unless they send in aid of the holy Land all that they received from this damnable
commerce and the same amount of their own, so that they are punished in proportion to their
sins. If perchance they do not pay, they are to be punished in other ways in order that through
their punishment others may be deterred from venturing upon similar rash actions. In
addition, we prohibit and on pain of anathema forbid all Christians, for four years, to send or
take their ships across to the lands of the Saracens who dwell in the east, so that by this a
greater supply of shipping may be made ready for those wanting to cross over to help the
holy Land, and so that the aforesaid Saracens may be deprived of the not inconsiderable help
which they have been accustomed to receiving from this.

Although tournaments have been forbidden in a general way on pain of a fixed penalty at
various councils, we strictly forbid them to be held for three years, under pain of

192
excommunication, because the business of the crusade is much hindered by them at this
present time. Because it is of the utmost necessity for the carrying out of this business that
rulers and christian peoples keep peace with each other, we therefore ordain, on the advice of
this holy and general synod, that peace be generally kept in the whole christian world for four
years, so that those in conflict shall be brought by the prelates of churches to conclude a
definitive peace or to observe inviolably a firm truce. Those who refuse to comply shall be
most strictly compelled to do so by an excommunication against their persons and an interdict
on their lands, unless the malice of the wrongdoers is so great that they ought not to enjoy
peace. If it happens that they make light of the church’s censure, they may deservedly fear
that the secular power will be invoked by ecclesiastical authority against them, as disturbers
of the business of him who was crucified.

We therefore, trusting in the mercy of almighty God and in the authority of the blessed
apostles Peter and Paul, do grant, by the power of binding and loosing that God has conferred
upon us, albeit unworthy, unto all those who undertake this work in person and at their own
expense, full pardon for their sins about which they are heartily contrite and have spoken in
confession, and we promise them an increase of eternal life at the recompensing of the just.
To those who do not go there in person but send suitable men at their own expense, according
to their means and status, and likewise to those who go in person but at others’ expense, we
grant full pardon for their sins. We grant to share in this remission, according to the amount
of their help and the intensity of their devotion, all who shall contribute suitably from their
goods to the aid of the said Land or who give useful advice and help regarding the above.
Finally, this holy and general synod imparts the benefit of its prayers and blessings to all who
piously set out on this enterprise in order that it may contribute worthily to their salvation.

193
Second Council of Lyons – 1274
Council Fathers - 1274 A.D.
Introduction

After the death of Pope Clement IV (29 November 1268) almost three years passed before
the cardinals were able to elect a new pope, Gregory X (1 September 1271). The political
aspect of Europe in those times was undergoing great change. The popes themselves in their
struggles with the German emperors had sought help from various states and had placed
Charles of Anjou on the throne of Sicily. This long conflict, which the popes fought in order
to protect their freedom and immunity, had finally upset the traditional system of government
in Christendom. This system depended on two institutions, the papacy and the empire. In the
East, moreover, the emperor Michael VIII Palaeologus had captured Constantinople in 1261
and brought the Latin empire there to an end.

Since the state of affairs was undoubtedly complex and difficult, Gregory X had conceived a
very broad plan involving the whole christian world. In this plan the eastern question was of
the highest importance. The pope sought to conclude a treaty with Michael VIII Palaeologus
and to unite the eastern and western churches. For if the churches were united and the
strength of all christian peoples were combined, the problem of the holy Land could be
resolved and the Roman church could flourish with fresh authority and influence in the
western states.

Gregory X, therefore, when he convoked the general council on 31 March 1272, outlined
three themes: union with the Greeks, the crusade, and the reform of the church. Regarding the
third theme, which was not only traditional in medieval councils but was also required by the
actual state of ecclesiastical morals, the pope in March 1273 sought the opinion of all
christian people and asked for their help. Some reports sent to him for this purpose are still
extant. After long preparatory arrangements the council assembled at Lyons and opened on 7
May 1274. Probably there were present about 300 bishops, 60 abbots and a large number of
other clergy, many of whom apparently were theologians (Thomas Aquinas died while on his
journey to Lyons), as well as king James of Aragon and the delegates sent by the rulers of
France, Germany, England and Sicily. The Greeks arrived late, on 24 June, since they had
been shipwrecked. Meanwhile a delegation of Tartars had also arrived. Although the number
of participants does not seem to have been especially large, the whole christian world was
present either in person or through representatives, and it was evident that the council, as
Gregory X had wished, was universal and ecumenical.

The council had six general sessions: on 7 and 18 May, 4 or 7 June, 6, 16 and 17 July. In the
fourth session the union of the Greek church with the Latin church was decreed and defined,
this union being based on the consent which the Greeks had given to the claims of the Roman
church. In the last session the dogmatic constitution concerning the procession of the holy

194
Spirit was approved, this question having been a cause of disagreement between the two
churches. The union however appears to have been imposed, on the Greek side by the
emperor Michael VIII. He wanted the support of the pope in order to deter Charles of Anjou
from an attack on the Byzantine empire, while the majority of the Greek clergy opposed the
union. The union was therefore fleeting, either because in the East the clergy steadily resisted
it, or because the popes after Gregory X changed their plan of action.

The weakness of the union with the Greeks also rendered a crusade impossible. Gregory X
won the approval of the principal states of Europe for the undertaking and was able, in the
second session, to impose heavy taxes (a tenth for six years) in order to carry it out (const.
Zelus fidei, below pp. 309-314). The council however merely decided to engage in the
crusade; no start was made at getting things done and the project came to nothing. Moreover
Gregory died soon afterwards (10 January 1276), and he was not sufficiently influential or
powerful to bring to a conclusion his plans for church and state.

With regard to the reform of the church, Gregory complained in the council’s last session that
discussion had not been sufficient to pass any definite decree. However, he was able to bring
about that certain constitutions relating to the parish should be delegated to the curia. For the
rest, some constitutions concerning church institutions were approved in various sessions.
The most important one prescribed that a pope should be elected by the college of cardinals
assembled in conclave (const. 2); constitution 23 attempts to adjust relations between secular
clerics and religious; constitutions 26-27 treat of usury; and others treat of particular
questions about the reform of morals and of the church.

There are at least two redactions (conciliar and post-conciliar) of the council’s constitutions,
as S. Kuttner has shown. In the second session the fathers had approved the decree Zelus
fidei, which was rather a collection of constitutions about the holy Land, the crusade, the war
against Saracens and pirates, and the order and procedure to be observed in the council (here
for the first time the nations appear as ecclesiastical parts of a council). Next, twenty-eight
constitutions were approved in the following sessions: const. 3-9, 15, 19, 24, 29-30 in the
third, const. 2, 10-12, 16-17, 20-22, 25-28, 31 in the fifth, const. 1, 23 in the sixth session.
The pope promulgated a collection of the council’s constitutions on 1 November 1274, sent
this to the universities with the bull Cum nuper, and informed all the faithful in the encyclical
Infrascriptas. In this collection, however, three of the thirty-one constitutions are post-
conciliar (const. 13-14, 18). These concern the parish, on which subject the pope and the
council fathers had decided in the last session of the council that some decrees should be
made later on. Moreover the constitution Zelus fidei is missing from the collection, perhaps
because it contained no juridical statutes of universal validity; and the other constitutions had
been subjected to the examination of the curia and emended, notably as far as we know const.
2 on the conclave and const. 26-27 On usury.

The collection of constitutions promulgated by Gregory X was incorporated into Boniface

VIII’s Liber Sextus (1298) . It also survives, together with the encyclical Infrascriptas, in
Gregory X’s register (=R), on which we have based our text. The conciliar redaction,

195
however, is known only in part. The constitution Zelus fidei was discovered first by H. Finke
in an Osnabruck codex (= O), and then by S. Kuttner, without its beginning, in a Washington
codex (= W), it is also extant in three English cartularies, which we have not examined; our
edition relies on the transcriptions of Finke (= F) and Kuttner (= K). The other constitutions
of the conciliar redaction we know only from W and, as regards const. 2, from eight scrolls
containing the approval of the council fathers for this constitution (Vatican Archives, AA.
arm. I-XVIII, 2187-2194 = V I-8). We therefore give the conciliar redaction on the basis of V
and W; but W is very incomplete, having only 20 constitutions (const. 2-8, 9 mutilated, 10-12
16-17, 20, 22-23, 25-27, 31), and is full of errors. As the best solution at this intermediate
stage, we therefore give the constitution Zelus fidei (below pp. 309-314) separately from the
post-conciliar collection (below pp. 314-331), and we note in the critical apparatus the latter
the variant readings of the conciliar redaction. In the main editions of the council’s acts only
the collection of constitutions promulgated by Gregory X is to be found; all these editions
depend on Rm (4, 95-104), which is taken from R (R was edited later by Guiraud).

CONSTITUTIONS

[1a]. Zeal for the faith, fervent devotion and compassionate love ought to rouse the hearts of
the faithful, so that all who glory in the name of Christian grieved to the heart by the insult to
their redeemer, should rise vigorously and openly in defence of the holy Land and support for
God’s cause. Who, filled with the light of the true faith and thinking over with filial affection
the marvellous favours conferred on the human race by our saviour in the holy Land, would
not burn with devotion and charity, and sorrow deeply with that holy Land, portion of the
Lord’s inheritance ? Whose heart will not soften with compassion for her, from so many
proofs of love given in that land by our creator? Alas! the very land in which the Lord
deigned to work our salvation and which, in order to redeem humanity by payment of his
death, he has consecrated by his own blood, has been boldly attacked and occupied over a
long period by the impious enemies of the christian name, the blasphemous and faithless
Saracens. They not only rashly retain their conquest, but lay it waste without fear. They
slaughter savagely the christian people there to the greater offence of the creator, to the
outrage and sorrow of all who profess the catholic faith. “Where is the God of the Christians
?” is the Saracens‘ constant reproach, as they taunt them. Such scandals, which neither mind
can fully conceive nor tongue tell, inflamed our heart and roused our courage so that we who
from experience overseas have not only heard of those events but have looked with our eyes
and touched with our hands, might rise to avenge, as far as we can, the insult to the crucified
one. Our help will come from those afire with zeal of faith and devotion. Because the
liberation of the holy Land should concern all who profess the catholic faith, we convoked a
council, so that after consultation with prelates, kings, princes and other prudent men, we
might decide and ordain in Christ the means for liberating the holy Land. We also proposed
to lead back the Greek peoples to the unity of the church; proudly striving to divide in some

196
way the Lord’s seamless tunic, they withdrew from devotion and obedience to the apostolic
see. We purposed also a reform of morals, which have become corrupt owing to the sins of
both clergy and people. In everything we have mentioned he to whom nothing is impossible
will direct our acts and counsels; when he wills, he makes what is difficult easy, and levelling
by his power the crooked ways, makes straight the rough going. Indeed, in order the more
readily to effect our plans, having regard to the risks from wars and dangers of journeys for
those whom we judged should be summoned to the council, we did not spare ourself and our
brothers but rather sought hardships so that we might arrange rest for others. We came to the
city of Lyons with our brothers and curia, believing that in this place those summoned to the
council might meet with less exertion and expense. We came undertaking various dangers
and troubles, running many risks, to where all those summoned to the council were
assembled, either in person or through suitable representatives. We held frequent
consultations with them about help for the holy Land, and they, zealous to avenge the insult
to the Saviour, thought out the best ways to succour the said Land and gave, as was their
duty, advice and insight. [ I b].

Having listened to their advice, we rightly commend their resolutions and praiseworthy
enthusiasm for the liberation of that Land. Lest, however, we seem to lay on others’ shoulders
heavy burdens, hard to bear, which we are unwilling to move with our finger, we begin with
ourself; declaring that we hold all we have from God’s only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, by
whose gift we live, by whose favour we are sustained, by whose blood even we have been
redeemed. We and our brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church, shall pay fully for
six successive years a tenth of all our ecclesiastical revenues, fruits and incomes for the aid of
the holy Land. With the approval of this sacred council, we decree and ordain that for the said
six years, beginning from the next feast of the birthday of blessed John the Baptist, all
ecclesiastical persons of whatever rank or pre-eminence, condition, order, or religious state or
order-and we wish none to invoke for themselves and their churches any privileges or indults,
in whatever form of words or expression these were granted, rather we recall completely
those we have granted till now–shall pay wholly and without any reduction a tenth of all
ecclesiastical revenues, fruits and incomes of each year in the following way: that is, half on
the feast of the Lord’s birth and the other half on the feast of blessed John the Baptist. In
order to observe more carefully the reverence due to him whose undertaking this is, in
himself and in his saints and especially in the glorious Virgin whose intercession we ask in
this and in our other needs, and in order that there may be a fuller subsidy for the holy Land,
we order that the constitution of Pope Gregory our predecessor of happy memory against
blasphemers be inviolably observed. The fines prescribed in this constitution are to be
exacted in full through the authorities of the place where blasphemy is committed, and
through others who exercise temporal jurisdiction there. Coercive measures, if necessary, are
to be taken through diocesan and other local ordinaries. The money is to be assigned to the
collectors for the subsidy. Moreover, we strictly command confessors who hear confessions
by ordinary jurisdiction or by privilege to prompt and enjoin on their penitents to give the
said money to the holy Land in full satisfaction for their sins; and they should persuade those
making wills to leave, in proportion to their means, some of their goods for aid to the holy
Land. We direct also that in each church there should be placed a box fitted with three keys,

197
the first to be kept in the possession of the bishop, the second in that of the priest of the
church, the third in that of some conscientious lay person. The faithful are to be instructed to
place their alms, as the Lord inspires them, in this box for the remission of their sins. Mass is
to be sung publicly in the churches once a week, on a certain day to be announced by the
priest, for the remission of such sins and especially of those offering alms. Besides these
measures, to provide more assistance for the holy Land, we exhort and urge kings and
princes, marquises, counts and barons, magistrates, governors and other secular leaders to
arrange that in the lands subject to their jurisdiction each of the faithful pays a coin to the
value of a tournois or of one sterling in accordance with the customs or circumstances of the
region, and they should order a further small tax of no burden to anyone for the remission of
sins; these contributions are to be made each year in aid of the holy Land, so that just as
nobody may excuse himself from compassion for the wretched state of the holy Land,
nobody may be dismissed from contributing or shut out from meriting. Also, lest these
prudent arrangements concerning the subsidy to the holy Land be hindered by anyone’s fraud
or malice or craft, we excommunicate and anathematise one and all who knowingly offer
hindrance, directly or indirectly, publicly or secretly, to the payment, as described above, of
the tithes in aid of the holy Land.

Furthermore, since corsairs and pirates greatly impede those travelling to and from that Land,
by capturing and plundering them, we bind with the bond of excommunication them and their
principal helpers and supporters. We forbid anyone, under threat of anathema, knowingly to
communicate with them by contracting to buy or sell. We also order rulers of cities and their
territories to restrain and curb such persons from this iniquity; otherwise it is our wish that
prelates of churches exercise ecclesiastical severity in their land. We excommunicate and
anathematise, moreover, those false and impious Christians who, in opposition to Christ and
the christian people, convey to the Saracens arms and iron, which they use to attack
Christians and timber for their galleys and other ships; and we decree that those who sell
them galleys or ships, and those who act as pilots in pirate Saracen ships, or give them any
help or advice by way of machines or anything else to the detriment of Christians and
especially of the holy Land, are to be punished with deprivation of their possessions and are
to become the slaves of those who capture them. We order this sentence to be renewed
publicly on Sundays and feast-days in all maritime towns; and the bosom of the church is not
to be opened to such persons unless they send in aid of the holy Land all that they received
from this damnable commerce and the same amount of their own, so that they are punished in
proportion to their sins. If perchance they do not pay, they are to be punished in other ways in
order that through their punishment others may be deterred from venturing upon similar rash
actions. In addition, we prohibit and on pain of anathema forbid all Christians, for six years,
to send or take their ships across to the lands of the Saracens who dwell in the east, so that by
this a greater supply of shipping may be made ready for those wanting to cross over to help
the holy Land, and so that the aforesaid Saracens may be deprived of the considerable help
which they have been accustomed to receiving from this. Because it is of the utmost necessity
for the carrying out of this business that rulers and christian peoples keep peace with each
other, we therefore ordain, with the approval of this holy and general synod, that peace be
generally kept in the whole world among Christians, so that those in conflict shall be led by

198
the prelates of churches to observe inviolably for six years a definitive agreement or peace or
a firm truce. Those who refuse to comply shall be most strictly compelled to do so by a
sentence of excommunication against their persons and an interdict on their lands, unless the
malice of the wrongdoers is so great that they ought not to enjoy peace. If it happens that they
make light of the church’s censure, they may deservedly fear that the secular power will be
invoked by ecclesiastical authority against them as disturbers of the business of him who was
crucified. We therefore, trusting in the mercy of almighty God and in the authority of the
blessed apostles Peter and Paul, do grant, by the power of binding and loosing that God has
conferred upon us, albeit unworthy, unto all those who undertake this work of crossing the
sea to aid the holy Land, in person and at their own expense, full pardon for their sins about
which they are truly and heartily contrite and have spoken in confession, and we promise
them an increase of eternal life at the recompensing of the just. To those who do not go there
in person but send suitable men at their own expense, according to their means and status,
and likewise to those who go in person but at others’ expense, we grant full pardon for their
sins. We wish to grant to share in this remission, according to the nature of their help and the
intensity of their devotion, all who shall contribute suitably from their goods to the aid of the
said Land, or who give useful advice and help regarding the above, and all who make
available their own ships for the help of the holy Land or who undertake to build ships for
this purpose. Finally, this dutiful and holy general synod imparts the benefit of its prayers and
blessings to all who piously set out on this enterprise in order that it may contribute to their
salvation. ‘ [Id].

Not to us but to the Lord we give glory and honour; let us also thank him that to so sacred a
council a very great number of patriarchs, primates, archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors
provosts, deans, archdeacons and other prelates of churches, both personally and by suitable
procurators, and the procurators of chapters, colleges and convents, have assembled at our
call. However, although for the happy pursuit of so great an enterprise their advice would be
useful, and their presence as beloved sons is so delightful, filling us in a certain way with
spiritual joy, there are difficulties for some as to staying on. Various inconveniences result
from their great number; we do not wish them to suffer any longer the squeezing of the
enormous crowd; and their absence may be harmful to them and their churches. A certain
prudent love moves us to decide with our brothers’ advice how to lighten the burden of these
representatives, while pursuing our object no less ardently or zealously. We therefore have
decided that all patriarchs, primates, archbishops, bishops, abbots and priors whom we
summoned specially and by name are to remain, they are not to depart without our special
leave before the council ends. The other non-mitred abbots and priors and the other {1}
abbots and priors, who were not summoned by us specially and by name, and the provosts,
deans, archdeacons and other prelates of churches, and the procurators of any prelates,
chapters, colleges and convents, have our gracious leave to depart with the blessing of God
and our own. We commission all who so depart to leave enough procurators, as described
below, to receive our commands and both the decrees of our present council and any other
decrees that may, with God’s inspiration, be issued in the future. Thus, all so departing are to
leave behind the following adequate number of procurators: namely, four from the realm of
France, four from the realm of Germany, four from the realms of the Spains, four from the

199
realm of England one from the realm of Scotland {2} , two from the realm of Sicily, two
from Lombardy, one from Tuscany, one from the states of the church, one from the realm of
Norway, one from the realm of Sweden, one from the realm of Hungary {3} , one from the
realm of Dacia, one from the realm of Bohemia, one from the duchy of Poland. Furthermore
{4} , it has come to our ears that some archbishops, bishops and other prelates, when they
were summoned by us to the council, asked an excessive contribution from their subjects and
committed great extortion, imposing heavy taxes on them. Some of these prelates, although
they made great exactions, did not come to the council. Since it neither was nor is our
intention that prelates in coming to the council should associate the virtue of obedience with
the oppression of their subjects, we admonish prelates one and all with great firmness, that
none may presume to use the council as a pretext for burdening his subjects with taxes or
exactions. If in fact some prelates have not come to the council and have made demands on
the pretext of coming, it is our will and precise command that they make restitution without
delay. Those however who have oppressed their subjects, demanding excessive contributions,
should take care to make amends to them without creating difficulties, and so fulfil our
commands that we do not have to apply a remedy by our authority.

II

1. On the supreme Trinity and the catholic faith{5}

1. We profess faithfully and devotedly that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father
and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but
by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful,
has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and
teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin
and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth,
have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval
of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the holy Spirit
proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or rashly to assert that the holy Spirit
proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and not as from one.

2. On election and the power of the elected person {6}

2. {7} Where there is greater danger, there must certainly be greater foresight. We learn from
the past how heavy are the losses sustained by the Roman church in a long vacancy, how
perilous it is; we see this all too clearly when we wisely consider the crises undergone.
Reason therefore openly challenges us, while we devote ourselves skilfully to the reform of
lesser evils, certainly not to leave without appropriate remedy those of greater danger. We
judge therefore that everything wisely instituted by our predecessors and especially by Pope
Alexander III of happy memory, for avoiding discord in the election of the Roman pontiff,

200
should remain altogether intact. We intend in no way to detract from this legislation, but to
supply by the present constitution what experience has shown to be missing.

With the approval of the sacred council {8} , we decree that if the pope dies in a city where
he was residing with his curia, the cardinals present in that city are obliged to await the absent
cardinals, but for ten days only. When these days have passed, whether those absent have
arrived or not, all are to assemble in the palace where the pope lived. Each is to be content
with one servant only, clerical or lay, at choice. We allow however those in evident need to
have two, with the same choice. In this palace all are to live in common in one room, with no
partition or curtain. Apart from free entry to a private room, the conclave is to be completely
locked, so that no one can enter or leave. No one may have access to the cardinals or
permission to talk secretly with them, nor are they themselves to admit anyone to their
presence, except those who, by consent of all the cardinals present, might be summoned only
for the business of the imminent election. It is not lawful for anyone to send a messenger or a
written message to the cardinals or to any one of them. Whoever acts otherwise, sending a
messenger or a written message, or speaking secretly to one of the cardinals, is to incur
automatic excommunication. In the conclave some suitable window is to be left open through
which the necessary food may be served conveniently to the cardinals, but no entry for
anyone is to be possible through this way.

If, which God forbid, within three days after the cardinals have entered the said conclave, the
church has not been provided with a shepherd, they are to be content for the next five days,
every day both at dinner and supper, with one dish only. If these days also pass without the
election of a pope, henceforth only bread, wine and water are to be served to the cardinals
until they do provide a pope. While the election is in process, the cardinals are to receive
nothing from the papal treasury, nor any other revenue coming from whatever source to the
church while the see is vacant. Everything during this period remains in the custody of him to
whose faithfulness and care the treasury has been entrusted, to be kept by him for the disposal
of the future pope. Those who have accepted something are obliged from then on to abstain
from receiving any of the revenues due to them until they have made full restitution of what
they have accepted in this way. The cardinals are to devote their time so carefully to
hastening the election as to occupy themselves with no other business whatever unless
perhaps there occurs such an urgent necessity as the defence of the states of the church or
some part of them, or there be threat of such a great and evident danger that it seems to each
and all the cardinals present, by general consent, that they should quickly counteract it.

Of course if one of the cardinals does not enter the conclave, which we have described above,
or having entered leaves without evident cause of illness, the others, without in any way
searching for him and without re-admitting him to the election, may proceed freely to elect
the next pope. If in fact, owing to sudden illness, one of them leaves the conclave, the
election may proceed without the need for his vote, even while the illness lasts. But if after
regaining his health or even before, he wishes to return, or even if other absentees, for whom
a wait of ten days should be made as we have said, come on the scene while the election is
still undecided, that is, before the church has been provided with a shepherd, they are to be

201
admitted to the election in the state in which they find it; they are to keep the rules with the
others as regards enclosure, servants, food and drink and everything else.

If the Roman pontiff happens to die outside the city in which he resided with his curia, the
cardinals are obliged to assemble in the city in whose territory or district the pontiff died,
unless perhaps the city lies under interdict or persists in open rebellion against the Roman
church. In which case they are to meet in another city, the nearest which is neither under
interdict nor openly rebellious. In this city also, the same rules about waiting for absentees,
living together, enclosure and everything else, in the episcopal palace or any other residence
specified by the cardinals, are to be observed as above when the pope dies in the city where
he resided with his curia.

Moreover, since it is not enough to make laws unless there is someone to see that they are
kept, we further ordain that the lord and other rulers and officials of the city where the
election of the Roman pontiff is to be held, by the power given to them by our authority and
the approval of the council, are to enforce the observance of everything prescribed above in
every detail, fully and inviolably without any deceit and trickery, but they may not presume
to restrict the cardinals beyond what has been said. As soon as the said lord, rulers and
officials hear of the supreme pontiff’s death, they are to take an oath as a body, in the
presence of the clergy and people specially mustered for the purpose, to observe these
prescriptions. If it happens that they commit fraud in this matter or do not observe the
regulations with care, of whatever pre-eminence, condition or status they may be, they lose
all privileges; they are automatically subject to the bond of excommunication and are forever
infamous; and they are permanently excluded from all honours, nor may they be admitted to
any public office. We have decreed that over and above this they are automatically deprived
of the fiefs goods and all they hold from the same Roman church or any other churches, this
property returns fully and freely to the churches themselves, to be without any opposition at
the disposal of the administrators of those churches. The city itself is to be not only laid under
interdict but also deprived of its episcopal dignity.

Furthermore {9} , since when a disordered passion enslaves the will or some pledge compels
it to one way of acting, the election is null from lack of freedom, we implore the cardinals
through the tender mercy of our God’, and we call them to witness through the sprinkling of
his precious blood, that they consider very carefully what they are about to do. They are
electing the vicar of Jesus Christ, the successor of Peter, the ruler of the universal church, the
guide of the Lord’s flock. They are to lay aside all the disorder of private affection, to be free
from any bargain, agreement or pledge; they are not to consider any promise or
understanding, to have no regard for their mutual advantage or that of their friends. They are
not to look after their own interests or their individual convenience. Without any constraint
on their judgment other than God, they are to seek purely and freely the public good, with the
election alone in mind. They are to use every endeavour and care that is possible. Their one
aim is to provide, by their service and speedily, what is so useful and necessary for the whole
world, a fitting spouse for the church. Those who act otherwise are subject to the divine
retribution, their fault never to be pardoned except after severe penance. We invalidate all

202
bargains, agreements, pledges, promises and understandings, whether confirmed by oath or
any other bond; we nullify all these and decree that such have no force whatever. No one is
constrained in any way to observe them, nor anyone to fear that by transgressing them he is
breaking faith. Rather he deserves praise, for even human law testifies that such
transgressions are more acceptable to God than the keeping of the oath.

Since the faithful should rely not so much on human resource, however solicitous, than on the
urgency of humble and devoted prayer, we make an addition to this decree. In all the cities
and important places, as soon as the death of the pope becomes known, solemn exequies are
to be celebrated for him by clergy and people. After this, every day until undoubted news is
brought that the church truly has her pastor, there is to be humble and devoted prayer to the
Lord, that he who makes peace in his high heaven may so unite the hearts of the cardinals in
their choice that provision may be made for the church swiftly, harmoniously, unanimously
and beneficially, for the salvation of souls and the advantage of the whole world. And lest
this salutary decree be disregarded on pretext of ignorance, we strictly order patriarchs,
archbishops, bishops, other prelates of churches, and all who have faculties to explain the
word of God, that they should often gather together the clergy and people for the purpose of
urging them in sermons to pray earnestly and repeatedly for a swift and happy outcome of the
conclave. With the same authority they should prescribe not only frequent prayer but also, as
circumstances recommend, the observance of fasting.

3 {10} That we may, as far as possible, close the way to evil practices in ecclesiastical
elections, postulations and provisions, and that churches may not have long and dangerous
vacancies or the provision of parsonages, dignities and other ecclesiastical benefices be
delayed, we make this perpetual decree. When opponents to elections, postulations or
provisions raise difficulties against the form of the election, postulation or provision, or
against the persons of the electors or of the one elected or of him for whom the provision was
to be made or has been made, and for these reasons make an appeal, the appellants are to
express in a public document or letter of appeal every individual objection they intend to
make against the form or persons. They shall do this in the presence of a qualified person or
persons bearing witness to the truth on the above points, and they shall personally swear that
they believe what they say to be true and can prove it. If this is not done, both the objectors
and, during the time of appeal or afterwards, their adherents are to know that the power of
objecting anything not expressed in these letters or documents is forbidden to them, unless
there is some new evidence or there suddenly appears means of proving the former
objections, or some facts of the past have newly come to the knowledge of the objectors, facts
of which at the time of the appeal the appellants probably could have been, and in fact were,
ignorant. They are to establish their good faith concerning this ignorance and the subsequent
possibility of proof by taking an oath personally, adding in the same oath that they believe
they have sufficient proof. It is our will certainly that the penalties imposed by Pope Innocent
IV of happy memory on those who do not fully substantiate their objections against the form
or the person, shall remain in force.

203
4 {11} Blind greed and criminal, dishonest ambition, seizing on certain minds, drive them to
the rash attempt to usurp by ingenious fraud what they know is forbidden to them by the law.
Some, indeed, are elected to the government of churches and, because the law forbids any
interference in the administration of churches before the election has been confirmed,
contrive to have the churches entrusted to themselves as procurators and managers. Since it is
not good to give way to human trickery, we wish to take wider precautions in this general
constitution. We decree that none may henceforth presume, before confirmation of his
election, to conduct or accept the administration of an office to which he has been elected, or
to interfere in it, under the pretext of management or procuratorship or some other newly
invented disguise, in things spiritual or temporal, directly or through others, in part or in
whole. We decree that all who act otherwise are by that very fact deprived of the right they
would have acquired by the election.

5. {12} Not only do the laws bear witness but also experience, that effective teacher of
reality, makes clear how damaging to churches is their vacancy, how dangerous it usually is
to souls. Desirous, then, of counteracting the long duration of vacancies by suitable remedies,
we make a perpetual decree that after there has been an election in any church, the electors
are obliged to inform the elect as soon as conveniently possible and to ask his consent. The
elect in his turn is to give it within a month from the day of being informed. If the elect
delays beyond this, he is to know that from then on he is deprived of the right he would have
acquired from his election, unless perhaps his condition is such that he cannot consent to his
election without his superior’s leave, on account of a prohibition or some disposition of the
apostolic see {13} . The elect or his electors must then earnestly seek and gain the superior’s
leave as quickly as his presence or absence will permit. Otherwise, if the time has expired,
even with the allowance made for the presence or absence of the superior, and permission has
not been obtained, the electors are then free to proceed to another election. Furthermore, any
elect must ask for confirmation of his election within three months after giving consent. If
without lawful impediment he omits to do this within such a three-month period, the election
is by that very fact null and void.

6. {14} We declare, with the force of a perpetual decree, that they who in an election vote
knowingly for an unworthy candidate are not deprived of the power of electing, unless they
have so far persisted as to make the election depend on their votes, even though in
nominating an unworthy person they have deliberately acted against their consciences and
may rightly fear divine retribution and a punishment, in accordance with the offence, from
the apostolic see.

7. {15} We decree that nobody, after voting for someone whose election follows, or after
giving consent to an election made by others, may oppose him concerning the election itself,
except for reasons coming to light afterwards, or unless the elect’s evil character previously
hidden from the objector is now disclosed, or the existence of some other hidden vice or
defect, of which in all probability he could have been ignorant, is revealed. He is however to
guarantee his good faith regarding this lack of knowledge by oath.

204
8. {16} If after two scrutinies one part of the electors is to be found more than double the
number of the other, we by this decree take away from the minority all power of imputing
lack of zeal, merit or authority to the majority or their candidate. We do not however forbid
such objections as would render null, in virtue of the law itself, the election of the candidate
so opposed.

9. {17} The constitution of Pope Alexander IV, our predecessor of happy memory, rightly
includes cases about episcopal elections, and those arising therefrom, in the category of major
cases and asserts that their judicial inquiry subsequent to any appeal falls to the apostolic see.
We, however, wishing to curb both the rash boldness and unbridled frequency of appeals,
have considered that we should make provision by this general constitution. If someone
appeals extrajudicially with an evidently frivolous motive in the aforesaid elections or in
others which concern dignities higher than the episcopate, such an appeal is by no means to
go before the apostolic see. When however in the business of such elections an appeal is
made in writing, judicially or extrajudicially, from a credible motive which on proof ought to
be considered legitimate, such business is to be brought to the apostolic see. Furthermore, it is
lawful for the parties in these cases, provided there is no malice, to withdraw from such
appeals before they are laid before the said see. Subordinate judges, who were competent for
these cases, should on withdrawal of the appeal first of all inquire carefully whether there has
been any irregularity. If they find such, they are to have no further dealings with the case
itself, but shall set for the parties a suitable fixed term in which they are to present themselves
with all their acts and records to the apostolic see. I

10. {18} If among other objections against the elect or nominee or candidate to be promoted
in any other way to some dignity, it is said that he clearly lacks the requisite knowledge or
has some other obvious personal defect, we decree that there is to be an invariable order in
discussing the objections. The candidate is to be examined first of all concerning the alleged
defect, the outcome deciding whether other objections are to be considered or not. If the
result of the said examination shows that the objections concerning the alleged defect are
devoid of truth, we exclude the objectors altogether from pursuing further the case in which
they have made their objections, and we decree that they are to be punished exactly as if they
had thoroughly failed to prove any of their objections.

11. {19} All those who presume to oppress clerics or any other ecclesiastical persons having
the right of election in certain churches, monasteries or other pious places, because they have
refused to elect the person for whom they were asked or urged to vote, or who presume to
oppress their relatives or the said churches, monasteries or other places, robbing them of
benefices or other property, either directly or through others, or taking revenge in other ways,
are to know that they incur automatic excommunication.

12 20 We decree by a general constitution that one and all, however high their rank, who try
to usurp the royal privileges, the custody or guard, or the title of advocate or defender, in
churches, monasteries and any other pious places, and presume to take possession of their
property during a vacancy, lie under automatic sentence of excommunication. The clerics of

205
the churches, the monks of the monasteries, and the other persons in the above places, who
abet these offences, are automatically excommunicated in the same way. We indeed strictly
forbid those clerics who do not oppose, as they ought, those who act in such a way, to receive
any income from these churches or places during the time they have allowed the usurpation
to happen without opposition. Those who claim these rights by the foundation of the churches
or of the other places, or by reason of ancient custom, are prudently to avoid abusing their
rights and take care that their agents do not abuse them, so that they appropriate nothing
beyond what pertains to the fruits or revenues accruing during the vacancy, and do not allow
the dilapidation of the other property of which they claim to be the guardians but preserve it
in good condition.

13. The canon promulgated by Pope Alexander III, our predecessor of happy memory,
decreed among other things that nobody is to be appointed parish priest until he is twenty-
five and approved as to knowledge and morals; and that after his appointment, if he has not
been ordained priest within the time fixed by the canons, despite being warned to this effect,
he is to be removed from office and it is to be conferred on someone else. Since many neglect
to observe this canon, we wish their dangerous negligence to be made good by observance of
the law. We therefore decree that nobody is to be appointed parish priest unless he is suitable
by knowledge, morals and age. Any appointments from now of those younger than twenty-
five are to lack all validity. The person appointed is obliged to reside in the parish church of
which he has become rector, in order that he may take more diligent care of the flock
entrusted to him. Within a year of being appointed to his charge he is to have himself
ordained to the priesthood. If within that time he has not been ordained, he is deprived of his
church, even without previous warning, by authority of the present constitution. As to
residence, as above described, the ordinary may grant a dispensation for a time and for a
reasonable cause.

14. No one may henceforth presume to give a parish church “in commendam” to anyone
under the lawful age and not ordained priest. Such a commendatory may have only one parish
church and there must be an evident need or advantage for the church itself. We declare,
however, that such a commendam, even when properly made, is not to last more than six
months. We decree that any contrary procedure relating to commendams of parish churches is
invalid by law.

15. On the circumstances of ordination and the quality of ordinands

15. {21} We decree that those who knowingly or with affected ignorance or on any other
pretext presume to ordain clerics of another diocese without permission of the ordinands’
superior, are suspended for a year from conferring any orders. The penalties prescribed by
law against those so ordained are to remain in full vigour. We also grant the faculty to clerics
of the dioceses of bishops thus suspended, after their suspension has become public, freely to
receive orders meanwhile from neighbouring bishops, even without their own bishop’s leave,
but in other respects canonically.

206
16. On bigamists

16. {22} Putting an end to an old debate by the present declaration, we declare that bigamists
are deprived of any clerical privilege and are to be handed over to the control of the secular
law, any contrary custom notwithstanding. We also forbid bigamists under pain of anathema
to wear the tonsure or clerical dress.

17. On the office of ordinary judge

17. {23} If canons wish to suspend the celebration of divine worship, as is their claim from
custom or otherwise in certain churches, they are obliged, before taking any steps to suspend
the celebration, to express their reasons for this in a confirmation of authenticity. They are to
consign this document or letter to the person against whom the suspension is directed. They
are to know that if they suspend services without this formality or the reason expressed is not
canonical, they shall restore all the income they have received, during the time of the
suspension, from the church in which the suspension has taken place. They shall in no way
receive anything owing to them for that period but make it over to the church in question.
They will, moreover, be obliged to make restitution for the loss or injustice done to the
person whom they intended to punish. If however their cause is judged to be canonical, the
one who occasioned the suspension is to be sentenced to compensate the said canons and the
church from which divine service has been withdrawn through his fault. The superior is to
adjudicate the compensation and it is to be used for the benefit of divine worship.
Nevertheless we utterly rebuke the detestable abuse and horrible impiety of those who
treating with irreverent boldness crucifixes and images or statues of the blessed Virgin and
other saints, throw them to the ground in order to emphasise the suspension of divine
worship, and leave them under nettles and thorns. We forbid severely any sacrilege of this
kind. We decree that those who disobey are to receive a hard retributive sentence which will
so chastise the offenders as to suppress the like arrogance in others.

18. Local ordinaries must strictly compel their subjects to produce the dispensations by which
they hold canonically, as they assert, several dignities or churches to which is annexed the
cure of souls, or a parsonage or dignity together with another benefice to which a similar cure
is annexed. These dispensations are to be shown within a time proportionate to the situation
as judged by the ordinaries themselves. If without just reason no dispensation has been shown
within that time, the churches, benefices, parsonages or dignities which it is now obvious are
held unlawfully without dispensation, are to be conferred freely on suitable persons by those
who have the right. If on the other hand the dispensation shown seems clearly sufficient, the
holder is not to be troubled in any way in the possession of these benefices canonically
obtained. The ordinary is however to make provision that neither the care of souls in those
churches, parsonages or dignities is neglected nor the benefices themselves are defrauded of
the services owing to them. If there is doubt whether the dispensation is sufficient, recourse

207
should be had to the apostolic see, to which judgment belongs concerning its benefices.
Ordinaries, moreover, in bestowing parsonages, dignities and other benefices involving the
cure of souls, are to take care not to confer one on someone already holding several similar
benefices, unless an obviously sufficient dispensation is shown for those already held. Even
then, we wish the ordinary to confer the benefice only if it appears from the dispensation that
the beneficiary may lawfully retain this parsonage, dignity or benefice together with those he
already holds, or if he is prepared freely to resign those he already holds. If not, the
bestowing of such parsonages, dignities and benefices is to be of no consequence whatever. ‘

19. On pleading

19 {24} It seems that we must counteract promptly the crafty dragging-out of lawsuits. We
hope to do this effectively by giving suitable remedial directives to those who offer their
services in legal matters. Since the things that have been beneficially provided by legal
sanction concerning advocates seem to have fallen into disuse, we renew the same sanction
by the present constitution, with some addition and modification. We decree that each and
every advocate in the ecclesiastical forum, whether before the apostolic see or elsewhere, is
to swear on the holy gospels that in all ecclesiastical causes and others in the same forum, of
which they have assumed or will assume the defence, they will do their utmost for their
clients in what they judge to be true and just. They are also to swear that at whatever part of
the process they find out that the cause which they had accepted in good faith is unjust, they
will cease to defend it; they will rather abandon it altogether, having nothing further to do
with it, and will inviolably observe the rest of the above sanction. Proctors also are to be
bound by a similar oath. Both advocates and proctors are obliged to renew this oath every
year in the forum in which they have assumed office. Those who come before the apostolic
see or to the court of some ecclesiastical judge, in which they have not yet taken such an oath,
in order to act as advocate or proctor in some individual case, are to take a like oath, in each
case, at the beginning of the litigation. Advocates and proctors who refuse to swear in the
above way are forbidden to practise while their refusal persists. If they deliberately violate
their oath, counsellors who have knowingly encouraged an unjust cause incur, in addition to
the guilt of perjury, the divine and our malediction, from which they cannot be absolved
unless they restore double the amount they accepted for such evil work as advocate, proctor
or counsel. They are moreover obliged to make restitution for the loss caused to the parties
wronged by their unjust ministry. Furthermore, lest insatiate greed drive some into contempt
for these sound decrees, we strictly forbid an advocate to accept more than twenty tournois
pounds for any case, a proctor more than twelve, as salary or even on the pretext of a reward
for winning. Those who accept more are not in any way to acquire ownership of the excess,
but are obliged to restitution; none of this penalty of restitution can be remitted in evasion of
the present constitution. In addition, advocates who thus violate the present constitution are to
be suspended from their office for three years. Proctors, on the other hand, shall be denied
permission to exercise their office in a court of law.

208
20. On what is done by force or because of fear

20. {25} We annul by authority of this constitution any absolution from sentence of
excommunication or any recall of it, or of suspension or even of interdict, which has been
extorted by force or fear. Lest boldness increase when violence goes unpunished, we decree
that those who have extorted such an absolution or withdrawal by force or fear lie under
sentence of excommunication.

21. On prebends and dignities

21. {26} We have decreed that the statute of Pope Clement IV, our predecessor of happy
memory, that dignities and benefices which become vacant in the Roman curia are to be
conferred by nobody other than the Roman pontiff, is to be modified as follows. Those who
have the conferring of these benefices and dignities may confer them validly, notwithstanding
the said statute, but not till a month after the day on which the dignities and benefices have
become vacant, and then only by themselves personally or, if they are at a distance, through
their vicar-generals in their dioceses, to whom this charge has been canonically entrusted . 5

22. On not alienating the property of the church

22. {27} By this well-considered decree we forbid each and every prelate to submit, subject
or subordinate the churches entrusted to him, their immovable property or rights, to lay
people without the consent of his chapter and the special leave of the apostolic see. It is not a
question of granting the property or rights in emphyteusis or otherwise alienating them in the
form and in the cases permitted by the law. What is forbidden is the establishment or
recognition of these laity as superiors from whom the property and rights are held, or making
them the protectors, an arrangement which is called in the vernacular of certain places “to
avow”, that is, the laity are appointed patrons or advocates of the churches or their property,
either perpetually or for a long period. We decree that all such contracts of alienation, even
when fortified by oath, penalty or any other confirmation, which are made without the above
leave and consent, and any consequences of these contracts, are entirely null; no right is
conferred, no cause for prescription is provided. We decree moreover that prelates who
disobey are automatically suspended for three years from office and administration, and
clerics who know that the prohibition has been violated but fail to give notice of it to the
superior, are automatically suspended for three years from receiving the fruits of benefices
they hold in the church so oppressed. The laity indeed, who have hitherto forced prelates,
chapters of churches or other ecclesiastical persons to make these submissions, are to be
bound by sentence of excommunication, unless after suitable admonition, having given up the
submission they exacted through force or fear, they set free the churches and return the
property thus surrendered to them. Those also who in future shall compel prelates or other
ecclesiastical persons to make such submissions are also to be excommunicated, whatever be
their condition or status. Even when contracts have been or will be made with the due leave

209
and consent, or on the occasion of such contracts, the laity are not to transgress the limits set
by the nature of the contract itself or the law on which the contract is based. Those indeed
who act otherwise, unless after lawful admonition they desist from such usurpation restoring
also what they have usurped, incur automatic excommunication, and henceforward the way is
open, if need be, to lay their land under ecclesiastical interdict.

23. On religious houses, that they are to be subject to the bishop

23 {28} A general council by a considered prohibition averted the excessive diversity of

religious orders, lest it might lead to confusion. Afterwards, however, not only has the
troublesome desire of petitioners extorted their multiplication, but also the presumptuous
rashness of some has produced an almost unlimited crowd of diverse orders, especially
mendicant, which have not yet merited the beginnings of approval. We therefore renew the
constitution, and severely prohibit that anyone found henceforth a new order or form of
religious life, or assume its habit. We perpetually forbid absolutely all the forms of religious
life and the mendicant orders founded after the said council which have not merited
confirmation of the apostolic see, and we suppress them in so far as they have spread. As to
those orders, however, confirmed by the apostolic see and instituted after the council, whose
profession, rule or constitutions forbid them to have revenues or possessions for their fitting
support but whose insecure mendicancy usually provides a living through public begging, we
decree that they may survive on the following terms. The professed members of these orders
may continue in them if they are willing not to admit henceforth anyone to profession, nor to
acquire a new house or land, nor to have power to alienate the houses or land they have,
without special leave of the apostolic see. We reserve these possessions for the disposal of the
apostolic see, to be used for aid to the holy Land or for the poor or to be turned to other pious
uses through local ordinaries or others commissioned by the apostolic see. If the above
conditions are violated, neither the reception of persons nor the acquisition of houses or land
nor the alienation of these or other property is valid, and in addition excommunication is
incurred. We also forbid absolutely to members of these orders, in regard to externs, the
office of preaching and hearing confessions and the right of burial. Of course we do not allow
the present constitution to apply to the orders of Preachers and Minors; their approval bears
witness to their evident advantage to the universal church. Furthermore, we grant that the
order of Carmelites and that of the Hermits of Saint Augustine, the institution of which
preceded the said general council {29} , may remain as they are, until other regulations are
made for them. We intend in fact to provide both for them and for the other orders, even the
non-mendicants, as we shall see to be for the good of souls and for the good state of the
orders. We grant also a general permission to members of orders to which this present
constitution applies, to pass to the other approved orders on this condition: no order is to
transfer itself wholly to another, no community is to transfer itself and its possessions wholly
to another, without special permission from the apostolic see. ‘

24. On taxes and procurations

210
24 {30} The boldness of wicked people demands that we should not be satisfied with merely
forbidding offences, but should inflict punishment on the offenders. The constitution of Pope
Innocent IV, our predecessor of happy memory, forbade procurations to be received in the
form of money, or the acceptance of gifts by pastoral visitors and their attendants. It is said
that many rashly transgress this constitution. We wish it to be inviolably observed and have
decreed that it should be strengthened by adding a penalty. We decree that one and all who
presume, because of the procuration owing to them by reason of a visitation, to exact money
or even to accept money from someone willing; or to violate the constitution in another way
by accepting gifts or, without making the visitation, accepting procurations in food or
anything else; are obliged to give back double of what they have received to the church from
which they received it, and this within a month. If they do not, from that time patriarchs,
archbishops and bishops who put off restoration of the double payment beyond the said
period, are to know that entry into the church is forbidden them; and lower clergy are to know
that they are suspended from office and benefice until they have made full satisfaction of this
double to the burdened churches; the remission, liberality or kindness of the givers is to avail
nothing.

25. On the immunity of churches

25 {31} Holiness befits the house of the Lord; it is fitting that he whose abode has been
established in peace should be worshipped in peace and with due reverence. Churches, then,
should be entered humbly and devoutly; behaviour inside should be calm, pleasing to God,
bringing peace to the beholders, a source not only of instruction but of mental refreshment.
Those who assemble in church should extol with an act of special reverence that name with is
above every name, than which no other under heaven has been given to people, in which
believers must be saved, the name, that is, of Jesus Christ, who will save his people from
their sins. Each should fulfil in himself that which is written for all that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bow; whenever that glorious name is recalled, especially during the sacred
mysteries of the mass, everyone should bow the knees of his heart, which he can do even by a
bow of his head. In churches the sacred solemnities should possess the whole heart and mind;
the whole attention should be given to prayer. Here where it is proper to offer heavenly
desires with peace and calm, let nobody arouse rebellion, provoke clamour or be guilty of
violence. The consultations of universities and of any associations whatever must cease to be
held in churches, so also must public speeches and parliaments. Idle and, even more, foul and
profane talk must stop; chatter in all its forms must cease. Everything, in short, that may
disturb divine worship or offend the eyes of the divine majesty should be absolutely foreign
to churches, lest where pardon should be asked for our sins, occasion is given for sin, or sin is
found to be committed. No more business is to be conducted in churches or their cemeteries,
especially they are not to have the bustle of markets and public squares. All noise of secular
courts must be stilled. The laity are not to hold their trials in churches, more especially
criminal cases. The church is not to be a place for lay judicial inquiries. Local ordinaries
should see that all this is observed, persuade where persuasion is needed, suppress by their

211
authority what is forbidden by this canon. They should also depute for this purpose persons in
the churches who are most assiduous and suitable for the above aims. Moreover, the
proceedings of secular judges, and in particular the sentences passed in these sacred places,
are to lack all validity. Those indeed who impudently defy the above prohibitions, in addition
to the sanctions imposed by ordinaries and their deputies, will have to fear the sternness of
the divine retribution and our own until, having confessed their guilt, they have firmly
resolved to avoid such conduct for the future.

26. On usury

26. {32} Wishing to close up the abyss of usury, which devours souls and swallows up
property, we order under threat of the divine malediction that the constitution of the Lateran
council against usurers be inviolably observed. Since the less convenient it is for usurers to
lend, the more their freedom to practise usury is curtailed, we ordain by this general
constitution as follows. Neither a college, nor other community, nor an individual person, of
whatever dignity, condition or status, may permit those foreigners and others not originating
from their territories {33} , who practise usury or wish to do so, to rent houses for that
purpose or to occupy rented houses or to live elsewhere. Rather, they must expel all such
notorious usurers from their territories within three months, never to admit any such for the
future. Nobody is to let houses to them for usury, nor grant them houses under any other title
{34} . Those indeed who act otherwise, if they are ecclesiastical persons, patriarchs,
archbishops or bishops, are to know that they incur automatic suspension; lesser individual
persons, excommunication, colleges or other communities, interdict. If they remain obdurate
throughout a month, their territories shall lie henceforth under ecclesiastical interdict as long
as the usurers remain there. Furthermore, if they are layfolk, they are to be restrained from
such transgression through their ordinaries by ecclesiastical censure, all privileges ceasing
{35}

27 {36} Although notorious usurers give orders in their wills that restitution be made for their
usurious gains, either in express terms or in general, ecclesiastical burial is nevertheless to be
refused until full restitution has been made as far as the usurer’s means allow, or until a
pledge has been given of fitting restitution. This pledge is to be given to those to whom
restitution is due, if they themselves or others who can receive for them are present. If they
are absent, the pledge is to be given to the local ordinary or his vicar or the rector of the
parish where the testator lives, in the presence of trustworthy persons from the parish (the
ordinary, vicar and rector, as just mentioned, shall have permission to receive such pledge in
their name by authority of the present constitution, so that these ecclesiastics have the right to
action). The pledge may also be given to a public servant commissioned by the ordinary. If
the sum owing from usury is openly known, we wish this sum always to be expressed in the
pledge, if the amount is not clearly known, the sum is to be determined by the receiver of the
pledge {37} . The receiver must make his estimate at not less than the probable amount; if he
does otherwise, he is obliged to restitution for anything still owing. We decree that all
religious and others who presume to grant ecclesiastical {38} burial to notorious usurers,

212
contrary to this decree, are subject to the penalty promulgated against usurers at the Lateran
council . Nobody is to assist at the wills of notorious usurers or hear their confessions or
absolve them, unless they have made restitution for their usury or have given a fitting
guarantee, as far as they can, as described above. The wills made in any other way by
notorious usurers have no validity, but are by law null and void. {39}

28. On wrongs and the loss caused

28. {40} The distraints which in the vernacular are called “reprisals”, by which some people
are burdened in place of others, have been forbidden by the civil constitution as oppressive
and contrary to the laws and natural equity. In order, however, that offenders may have
greater fear of breaking the law where ecclesiastical persons are concerned, in accordance
with the more particular prohibition of reprisals against them, we severely forbid the granting
of reprisals against ecclesiastical persons or their goods. By this present decree we also forbid
the extension of such reprisals, perhaps granted universally on pretext of some custom which
we would prefer to call an abuse, to these persons. Those who act otherwise, by granting
distraints or reprisals against such persons or extending the grant to include them, unless they
revoke such presumption within a month, incur sentence of excommunication, if they are
individuals; they are to be laid under ecclesiastical interdict, if they are a community.

29. On the sentence of excommunication

29. {41} The constitution of Pope Innocent IV, our predecessor of happy memory, forbids
that those who communicate with excommunicated persons in matters carrying only a minor
excommunication should be bound, without first receiving canonical admonition, by a major
excommunication; the sentence of excommunication thus promulgated does not bind. In
order to remove any scruple of ambiguity, we declare that the admonition is canonical only if,
after all other formalities have been duly observed, it names the persons admonished. We
decree also that in the course of the admonitions required for the sentence to be promulgated
canonically, the judges, whether they give three admonitions or one for all three, should
observe fitting intervals of some days, unless the urgency of the situation counsels otherwise.

{42} 30. By the present general decree we declare that the benefit of provisional absolution
does not in any way apply to cities, villages or any other places against which a general
interdict has been promulgated.

31. {43} Whoever, from the fact that a sentence of excommunication, suspension or interdict
has been promulgated against kings, princes, barons, nobles, bailiffs or their agents or anyone
else, gives leave to someone to kill, capture or molest, in their persons or goods or in those of
their relatives, those who have published such sentences, or on whose account the sentences
were published, or who observe such sentences or refuse to communicate with those so
excommunicated, unless they revoke in time such permission, automatically fall under

213
sentence of excommunication. If property has been seized on the occasion of such
permission, the same sentence is incurred unless the goods are returned within eight days or
satisfaction is made for the loss. All who have dared to make use of the permission, or
commit on their own initiative any of the above crimes for which we have forbidden
permission to be given, are bound by the same sentence. Those who remain under this
sentence of excommunication for two months cannot henceforth obtain absolution except
through the apostolic see.

214
Council of Vienne 1311-1312 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1311-1312 A.D.

INTRODUCTION

The general council of Vienne was summoned by pope Clement V with the bull Regnans in
caelis, which he had written on 12 August 1308 at Poitiers (the Roman pontiff had remained
in France from the year of his election, thus beginning the period of the church’s history
known as the Avignon captivity). The pope was subject to forceful pressure from the
European states, particularly from France. Philip IV of France, the king who had opposed
Boniface VIII so bitterly, had so much power over Clement V that he seems to have been
able to change the whole state of ecclesiastical affairs at will. The council of Vienne is seen
as an outstanding example of this political pressure, although the pope energetically defended
the liberty of the church as far as circumstances allowed and he himself had the power. The
council had been summoned for 1 October 1310 at Vienne. This city did not belong to the
kingdom of France, though Philip IV in 1310 had occupied nearby Lyons by force. There
were no general summonses and only 231 ecclesiastics were invited; the others however
could employ a procurator .

The complaint against the Templars seems to have been the first and greatest concern of the
council. Thus the bull convoking the council was written at the same time as Clement V
summoned the Templar order to a canonical enquiry. Through the whole of Europe cases
were heard concerning the order and individual Templars. This work had not been completed
by 1310 and so the pope deferred the opening of the council to 1 October 1311. Events had
moved, however, in such a way that the Templars’ condemnation and Philip’s victory seemed
very probable. This placed the authority and freedom of the council under severe constraint.

The council began at Vienne on the 16 October 1311 in the presence of 20 cardinals, 4
patriarchs, about 100 archbishops and bishops, and a number of abbots and priors. From the
sermon given in the first session by Clement V, three questions were seen as of greatest
importance: the case of the Templars, the business of the holy Land, and the reform of the
church. Clement-himself gave an account of the allegations which had been made against the
Templar order. The work of the council was carried on outside the full assembly, that is to
say, through a consistory of cardinals together with the pope, and through a committee which
was elected by the council fathers from their own body and which seems to have acted in
place of the whole council, the full assembly merely confirmed the decrees and bulls,
promulgating them in the second and third sessions. A commission of cardinals was
appointed in order to probe the grievances and advice put forward by the bishops and other
fathers on the subject of church reform.

215
The council fathers gave long and careful consideration to the case of the Templars. It is
likely that they preferred the order to be allowed to defend itself against the accusations than
to condemn it too easily and without sure proof. However, “all the difficult questions which
were considered in the council seemed to be left doubtful or unsettled, or else to be treated”.
So when the case was still unresolved in January 1312, the fathers devoted themselves to the
business of the holy Land and to decrees which seemed timely for the reform of ecclesiastical
morals. Regarding the former, the delegates of the king of Aragon thought the city of
Granada should first be attacked and occupied in order that the enemy might be enfeebled by
a threat to each flank. Other fathers and ambassadors favoured an expedition to the east only.
As far as we know, however, after an agreement by kings and princes that a crusade to the
holy Land was opportune and necessary, and the imposition of a tithe on all ecclesiastical
provinces, no decision was taken.

Meanwhile in March 1312 Philip IV held a general assembly of his kingdom in Lyons, his
object being to disturb and steamroller the minds of the council fathers and of the pope
himself. Secret bargains had been made between Clement V and the envoys of Philip IV from
17 to 29 February 1312; the council fathers were not consulted. By this bargaining Philip
obtained the condemnation of the Templars. It is most likely he used the threat that he would
bring a public action against Boniface VIII. The king of France made for Vienne on 20
March, and after two days Clement V delivered to the commission of cardinals for approval
the bull by which the order of Templars was suppressed (the bull Vox in excelso). In the
second session of the council, which took place on 3 April 1312, this bull was approved and
the pope announced a future crusade. The Templars’ property, of immense value, was
entrusted to other persons by the bulls Ad providam of 2 May and Nuper in concilio of 16
May. The fate of the Templars themselves was decided by the bull Considerantes of 6 May.
In the bulls Licet dudum (18 Dec. 1312), Dudum in generali concilio (31 Dec. 1312) and
Licet pridem (13 Jan. 1313) Clement V gave further treatment to the question of the
Templars’ property.

In the third session of the council, which was held on 6 May 1312, certain constitutions were
promulgated. We do not know their text or number. In Mueller’s opinion, what happened was
this: the constitutions, with the exception of a certain number still to be polished in form and
text, were read by the council fathers; Clement V then ordered the constitutions to be
corrected and arranged after the pattern of decretal collections. This text, although read in the
consistory held in the castle of Monteux near Carpentras on 21 March 1314 was not
promulgated, since Clement V died a month later. It was pope John XXII who, after again
correcting the constitutions, finally sent them to the universities. It is difficult to decide which
constitutions are the work of the council. We adopt Mueller’s opinion that 38 constitutions
may be counted as such, but only 20 of these have the words “with the approval of the sacred
council”. The texts that we publish are taken from Hefele’s edition (see above p. 334, n. 17)
for the bull Vox in excelso, and from the edition of the Vatican register (= Regestum) for the
other bulls; for the text of the constitutions, we have used Friedberg’s edition of Corpus Iuris
Canonici (= Fr).

216
[Where there is considerable doubt that a document is the work of the council it is in smaller
print]

[Bulls and ordinances of the Roman curia concerning the order of the Templars and the
business of the holy Land]

[1]. Clement, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. A voice was
heard from on high, of lamentation and bitter weeping, for the time is coming, indeed has
come, when the Lord shall complain through his prophet: This house has aroused my anger
and wrath, so that I will remove it from my sight because of the evil of its sons, for they have
provoked me to anger turning their backs to me, not their faces, and setting up their idols in
the house in which my name is invoked, to defile it. They have built the high places of Baal
in order to consecrate their sons to idols and demons. They have sinned deeply as in the days
of Gibeah. When I learnt of such deeds of horror, at the dread of such notorious scandal —
for who ever heard of such infamy? who ever saw the like? — I fell down at hearing it, I was
dismayed at seeing it, my heart grew embittered and darkness overwhelmed me. Hark, a
voice of the people from the city! a voice from the temple! the voice of the Lord rendering
recompense to his enemies. The prophet is compelled to exclaim: Give them, Lord, a barren
womb and dry breasts. Their worthlessness has been revealed because of their malice. Throw
them out of your house, and let their roots dry up; let them not bear fruit, and let not this
house be any more a stumbling block of bitterness or a thorn to hurt.

Not slight is the fornication of this house, immolating its sons, giving them up and
consecrating them to demons and not to God, to gods whom they did not know. Therefore
this house will be desolate and in disgrace, cursed and uninhabited, thrown into confusion
and levelled to the dust, lowly, forsaken, inaccessible, spurned by the anger of the Lord,
whom it has despised; let it not be lived in but reduced to a wilderness. Let everyone be
astonished at it and hiss at all its wounds. For the Lord did not choose the people on account
of the place, but the place on account of the people. Therefore the very place of the temple
was made to share in the punishment of the people, as the Lord proclaimed openly to
Solomon when he built the temple for him, to Solomon who was filled with wisdom like a
river: But if your sons turn aside from me, not following and honouring me but going instead
after strange gods and worshipping them, then I will cut them off from before me and expel
them from the land which I have given to them; and the temple which I have consecrated to
my name I will cast out of my sight, and it will become a proverb and a byword among all
peoples. Everyone passing by it will be astonished and shall hiss, and shall say, “Why has the
Lord done thus to this temple and to this house?” And they will say : “Because they forsook
the Lord their God who bought and redeemed them, and followed instead Baal and other
gods, worshipping and serving them. Therefore the Lord has brought all this evil upon
them'”.

Indeed a little while ago, about the time of our election as supreme pontiff before we came to
Lyons for our coronation, and afterwards, both there and elsewhere, we received secret
intimations against the master, preceptors and other brothers of the order of Knights Templar

217
of Jerusalem and also against the order itself. These men had been posted in lands overseas
for the defence of the patrimony of our lord Jesus Christ, and as special warriors of the
catholic faith and outstanding defenders of the holy Land seemed to carry the chief burden of
the said holy Land. For this reason the holy Roman church honoured these brothers and the
order with her special support, armed them with the sign of the cross against Christ’s
enemies, paid them the highest tributes of her respect, and strengthened them with various
exemptions and privileges; and they experienced in many and various ways her help and that
of all faithful Christians with repeated gifts of property. Therefore it was against the lord
Jesus Christ himself that they fell into the sin of impious apostasy, the abominable vice of
idolatry, the deadly crime of the Sodomites, and various heresies. Yet it was not to be
expected nor seemed credible that men so devout, who were outstanding often to the
shedding of their blood for Christ and were seen repeatedly to expose their persons to the
danger of death, who even more frequently gave great signs of their devotion both in divine
worship and in fasting and other observances, should be so unmindful of their salvation as to
commit such crimes. The order, moreover, had a good and holy beginning; it won the
approval of the apostolic see. The rule, which is holy, reasonable and just, had the deserved
sanction of this see. For all these reasons we were unwilling to lend our ears to insinuation
and accusation against the Templars; we had been taught by our Lord’s example and the
words of canonical scripture.

Then came the intervention of our dear son in Christ, Philip, the illustrious king of France.
The same crimes had been reported to him. He was not moved by greed. He had no intention
of claiming or appropriating for himself anything from the Templars’ property; rather, in his
own kingdom he abandoned such claim and thereafter released entirely his hold on their
goods. He was on fire with zeal for the orthodox faith, following in the well marked footsteps
of his ancestors. He obtained as much information as he lawfully could. Then, in order to
give us greater light on the subject, he sent us much valuable information through his envoys
and letters. The scandal against the Templars themselves and their order in reference to the
crimes already mentioned increased. There was even one of the knights, a man of noble blood
and of no small reputation in the order, who testified secretly under oath in our presence, that
at his reception the knight who received him suggested that he deny Christ, which he did, in
the presence of certain other knights of the Temple, he furthermore spat on the cross held out
to him by this knight who received him. He also said that he had seen the grand master, who
is still alive, receive a certain knight in a chapter of the order held overseas. The reception
took place in the same way, namely with the denial of Christ and the spitting on the cross,
with quite two hundred brothers of the order being present. The witness also affirmed that he
heard it said that this was the customary manner of receiving new members: at the suggestion
of the person receiving the profession or his delegate, the person making profession denied
Jesus Christ, and in abuse of Christ crucified spat upon the cross held out to him, and the two
committed other unlawful acts contrary to christian morality, as the witness himself then
confessed in our presence.

We were duty-bound by our office to pay heed to the din of such grave and repeated
accusations. When at last there came a general hue and cry with the clamorous denunciations

218
of the said king and of the dukes, counts, barons, other nobles, clergy and people of the
kingdom of France, reaching us both directly and through agents and officials, we heard a
doleful tale: that the master, preceptors and other brothers of the order as well as the order
itself had been involved in these and other crimes. This seemed to be proved by many
confessions, attestations and depositions of the master, of the visitor of France, and of many
preceptors and brothers of the order, in the presence of many prelates and the inquisitor of
heresy. These depositions were made in the kingdom of France with our authorisation, edited
as public documents and shown to us and our brothers. Besides, the rumour and clamour had
grown to such insistence that the hostility against both the order itself and the individual
members of it could not be ignored without grave scandal nor be tolerated without imminent
danger to the faith. Since we though unworthy, represent Christ on earth, we considered that
we ought, following in his footsteps, to hold an inquiry. We called to our presence many of
the preceptors, priests, knights and other brothers of the order who were of no small
reputation. They took an oath, they were adjured urgently by the Father, Son and holy Spirit;
we demanded, in virtue of holy obedience, invoking the divine judgment with the menace of
an eternal malediction, that they tell the pure and simple truth. We pointed out that they were
now in a safe and suitable place where they had nothing to fear in spite of the confessions
they had made before others. We wished those confessions to be without prejudice to them.
In this way we made our interrogation and examined as many as seventy-two, many of our
brothers being present and following the proceedings attentively. We had the confessions
taken down by notary and recorded as authentic documents in our presence and that of our
brothers. After some days we had these confessions read in consistory in the presence of the
knights concerned. Each was read a version in his own language; they stood by their
confessions, expressly and spontaneously approving them as they had been read out.

After this, intending to make a personal inquiry with the grand master, the visitor of France
and the principal preceptors of the order, we commanded that the grand master, the visitor of
France and the chief preceptors of Outremer, Normandy, Aquitaine and Poitou be presented
to us while we were at Poitiers. Some of them, however, were ill at the time and could not
ride a horse nor conveniently be brought to our presence. We wished to know the truth of the
whole matter and whether their confessions and depositions, which were said to have been
made in the presence of the inquisitor of heresy in the kingdom of France and witnessed by
certain public notaries and many other good men, and which were produced in public and
shown to us and our brothers by the inquisitor, were true. We empowered and commanded
our beloved sons Berengar, cardinal, then with the title of Nereus and Achilleus, now bishop
of Frascati, and Stephen, cardinal priest with the title of saint Cyriacus at the Baths, and
Landulf, cardinal deacon with the title of saint Angelo, in whose prudence, experience and
loyalty we have the fullest confidence, to make a careful investigation with the grand master,
visitor and preceptors, concerning the truth of the accusations against them and individual
persons of the order and against the order itself. If there was evidence, it was to be brought to
us; the confessions and depositions were to be taken down in writing by a public notary and
presented to us. The cardinals were to grant absolution from the sentence of
excommunication, according to the form of the church, to the master, visitor and preceptors

219
— a sentence incurred if the accusations were true — provided the accused humbly and
devoutly requested absolution, as they ought to do.

The cardinals went to see the grand master, the visitor and the preceptors personally and
explained the reason for their visit. Since these men and other Templars resident in the
kingdom of France had been handed over to us because they would freely and without fear of
anyone reveal the truth sincerely to the cardinals, the cardinals by our apostolic authority
enjoined on them this duty of telling the truth. The master, the visitor and the preceptors of
Normandy, Outremer, Aquitaine and Poitou, in the presence of the three cardinals, four
notaries and many other men of good repute, took an oath on the holy gospels that they would
tell the truth, plainly and fully. They deposed one by one, in the cardinals’ presence, freely
and spontaneously, without any compulsion or fear. They confessed among other things that
they had denied Christ and spat upon the cross at their reception into the order of the Temple.
Some of them added that they themselves had received many brothers using the same rite,
namely with the denial of Christ and the spitting on the cross. There were even some who
confessed certain other horrible crimes and immoral deeds, we say nothing more of these at
present. The knights confessed also that the content of their confessions and depositions made
a little while ago before the inquisitor was true. These confessions and depositions of the
grand master, visitor and preceptors were edited as a public document by four notaries, the
master and the others being present and also certain men of good repute. After some days, the
confessions were read to the accused on the orders and in the presence of the cardinals; each
knight received an account in his own language. They persisted in their confessions and
approved them, expressly and spontaneously, as they had been read out to them. After these
confessions and depositions, they asked from the cardinals absolution from the
excommunication incurred by the above crimes; humbly and devoutly, on bended knee, with
hands joined, they made their petition with many tears. Since the church never shuts her heart
to the sinner who returns, the cardinals granted absolution by our authority in the customary
form of the church to the master, visitor and preceptors on abjuration of their heresy. On their
return to our presence, the cardinals presented to us the confessions and depositions of the
master, visitor and preceptors in the form of a public document, as has been said. They also
gave us a report on their dealings with these knights.

From these confessions, depositions and report we find that the master, the visitor and the
preceptors of Outremer, Normandy, Aquitaine and Poitou have often committed grave
offences, although some have erred less frequently than others. We considered that such
dreadful crimes could not and should not go unpunished without insult to almighty God and
to every Catholic. We decided on the advice of our brothers to hold an enquiry into the above
crimes and transgressions. This would be carried out through the local ordinaries and other
wise, trustworthy men delegated by us in the case of individual members of the order; and
through certain prudent persons of our considered choice in the case of the order as a whole.
After this, investigations were made both by the ordinaries and by our delegates into the
allegations against individual members, and by the inquisitors appointed by us into those
against the order itself, in every part of the world where the brothers of the order have usually
lived. Once made and sent to us for examination, these investigations were very carefully

220
read and examined, some by us and our brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church others
by many very learned, prudent, trustworthy and God-fearing men, zealous for and well-
trained in the catholic faith, some being prelates and others not. This took place at Malaucene
in the diocese of Vaison.

Later we came to Vienne where there were assembled already very many patriarchs,
archbishops, selected bishops, exempt and non-exempt abbots, other prelates of churches, and
procurators of absent prelates and of chapters, all present for the council we had summoned.
In the first session we explained to them our reasons for calling the council. After this,
because it was difficult indeed almost impossible, for the cardinals and all the prelates and
procurators gathered for the council to meet in our presence in order to discuss how to
proceed in the matter of the Templars, we gave orders as follows. Certain patriarchs,
archbishops, bishops, exempt and non-exempt abbots, other prelates of churches, and
procurators from all parts of Christendom, of every language nation and region, were
concordantly chosen out of all the prelates and procurators at the council. The choice was
made from those believed to be among the more skilful, discreet and apt for consultation on
such an important affair and for discussing it with us and the above-mentioned cardinals.
After this we had the attestations received during the inquiry read publicly in the presence of
the prelates and procurators. This reading went on during several days, for as long as they
wished to listen, in the place assigned for the council, namely the cathedral church.
Afterwards the said attestations and the summaries made from them were considered and
examined, not in a perfunctory manner but with great care, by many of our venerable
brethren, by the patriarch of Aquileia, by archbishops and bishops of the present sacred
council who were specially chosen and delegated for the purpose, and by those whom the
whole council had chosen very carefully and earnestly.

We convoked therefore the said cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops and bishops, the exempt
and non-exempt abbots, and the other prelates and procurators elected by the council to
consider this affair, and we asked them, in the course of a secret consultation in our presence,
how we should proceed, taking special account of the fact that certain Templars were
presenting themselves in defence of their order. The greater part of the cardinals and nearly
the whole council, that is those who were elected by the whole council and were representing
the whole council on this question, in short the great majority, indeed four-fifths among every
nation taking part, were firmly convinced, and the said prelates and procurators advised
accordingly, that the order should be given an opportunity to defend itself and that it could
not be condemned, on the basis of the proof provided thus far, for the heresies that had been
the subject of the inquiry, without offence to God and injustice. Certain others on the contrary
said that the brothers should not be allowed to make a defence of their order and that we
should not give permission for such a defence, for if a defence were allowed or given there
would be danger to a settlement of the affair and no small prejudice to the interests of the
holy Land. There would be dispute, delay and putting off a decision, many different reasons
were mentioned. Indeed although legal process against the order up to now does not permit
its canonical condemnation as heretical by definitive sentence, the good name of the order
has been largely taken away by the heresies attributed to it. Moreover, an almost indefinite

221
number of individual members, among whom are the grand master the visitor of France and
the chief preceptors, have been convicted of such heresies, errors and crimes through their
spontaneous confessions. These confessions render the order very suspect, and the infamy
and suspicion render it detestable to the holy church of God, to her prelates, to kings and
other rulers, and to Catholics in general. It is also believed in all probability that from now on
there will be found no good person who wishes to enter the order, and so it will be made
useless to the church of God and the carrying on of the undertaking to the holy Land, for
which service the knights had been destined. Furthermore, the putting off of a settlement or
arrangement of this affair of the Templars, for which we had set ourselves a final decision or
sentence to be promulgated in the present council, would lead in all probability to the total
loss, destruction and dilapidation of the Templars’ property. This has for long been given,
bequeathed and granted by the faithful for the aid of the holy Land and to oppose the enemies
of the christian faith.

There were therefore two opinions: some said that sentence should immediately be
pronounced, condemning the order for the alleged crimes, and others objected that from the
proceedings taken up to now the sentence of condemnation against the order could not justly
be passed. After long and mature deliberation, having in mind God alone and the good of the
holy Land without turning aside to right or to left, we elected to proceed by way of provision
and ordinance, in this way scandal will be removed, perils avoided and property saved for the
help of the holy Land. We have taken into account the disgrace, suspicion, vociferous reports
and other attacks mentioned above against the order, also the secret reception into the order,
and the divergence of many of the brothers from the general behaviour, way of life and
morals of other Christians. We have noted here especially that when new members are
received, they are made to swear not to reveal the manner of their reception to anyone and not
to leave the order; this creates an unfavourable presumption. We observe in addition that the
above have given rise to grave scandal against the order, scandal impossible to allay as long
as the order continues to exist. We note also the danger to faith and to souls, the many
horrible misdeeds of so many brothers of the order, and many other just reasons and causes,
moving us to the following decision.

The majority of the cardinals and of those elected by the council, a proportion of more than
four-fifths, have thought it better, more expedient and advantageous for God’s honour and for
the preservation of the christian faith, also for the aid of the holy Land and many other valid
reasons, to suppress the order by way of ordinance and provision of the apostolic see,
assigning the property to the use for which it was intended. Provision is also to be made for
the members of the order who are still alive. This way has been found preferable to that of
safeguarding the right of defence with the consequent postponement of judgment on the
order. We observe also that in other cases the Roman church has suppressed other important
orders for reasons of far less gravity than those mentioned above, with no fault on the part of
the brethren. Therefore, with a sad heart, not by definitive sentence, but by apostolic
provision or ordinance, we suppress, with the approval of the sacred council, the order of
Templars, and its rule, habit and name, by an inviolable and perpetual decree, and we entirely
forbid that anyone from now on enter the order, or receive or wear its habit, or presume to

222
behave as a Templar. If anyone acts otherwise, he incurs automatic excommunication.
Furthermore, we reserve the persons and property for our disposition and that of the apostolic
see. We intend with divine grace, before the end of the present sacred council, to make this
disposition to the honour of God the exaltation of the christian faith and the welfare of the
holy Land. We strictly forbid anyone, of whatever state or condition, to interfere in any way
in this matter of the persons and property of the Templars. We forbid any action concerning
them which would prejudice our arrangements and dispositions, or any innovation or
tampering. We decree that from now on any attempt of this kind is null and void, whether it
be made knowingly or in ignorance. Through this decree, however, we do not wish to
derogate from any processes made or to be made concerning individual Templars by diocesan
bishops and provincial councils, in conformity with what we have ordained at other times.
Let nobody therefore … If anyone …

Given at Vienne on 22 March in the seventh year of our pontificate.

[2]. For an everlasting record. It belongs to Christ’s vicar, exercising his vigilant care from
the apostolic watch-tower, to judge the changing conditions of the times, to examine the
causes of the affairs which crop up and to observe the characters of the people concerned. In
this way he can give due consideration to each affair and act opportunely; he can tear out the
thistles of vice from the field of the Lord so that virtue may increase; and he can remove the
thorns of false dealing so as to plant rather than to destroy. He transfers slips dedicated to
God into the places left empty by the eradication of the harmful thistles. By thus transferring
and uniting in a provident and profitable way, he brings a joy greater than the harm he has
caused to the people uprooted; true justice has compassion for sorrow. By enduring the harm
and replacing it profitably, he increases the growth of the virtues and rebuilds what has been
destroyed with something better.

A little while ago we suppressed definitively and perpetually the order of the Knights
Templar of Jerusalem because of the abominable, even unspeakable, deeds of its master,
brothers and other persons of the order in all parts of the world. These men were spattered
with indecent errors and crimes, with depravity- they were blemished and stained. We are
silent here as to detail because the memory is so sad and unclean. With the approval of the
sacred council we abolished the constitution of the order, its habit and name, not without
bitterness of heart. We did this not by definitive sentence, since this would be unlawful
according to the inquiries and processes carried out, but by apostolic provision or ordinance.
We issued a strict prohibition that nobody might henceforth enter the order or wear its habit
or presume to behave as a Templar. Anyone doing otherwise incurred automatic
excommunication. We commanded, by our apostolic authority, that all the property of the
order be left to the judgment and disposition of the apostolic see. We strictly forbade anyone,
of whatever state or condition, to interfere in any way regarding the persons or property of
the order or to act in prejudice of the direction or disposition of the apostolic see in this
matter, or to alter or even to tamper; we decreed all attempts of this kind to be henceforth null
and void, whether made knowingly or in ignorance.

223
Afterwards we took care lest the said property, which over a long period had been given,
bequeathed, granted and acquired from the worshippers of Christ for the help of the holy
Land and to assail the enemies of the christian faith, should be left without management and
perish as belonging to nobody or be used in ways other than those intended by the pious
devotion of the faithful. There was the further danger that tardiness in our arrangements and
dispositions might lead to destruction or dilapidation. We therefore held difficult, lengthy and
varied consultations and discussions with our brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman
church, with patriarchs, archbishops, bishops and prelates, with certain outstanding and
distinguished persons, and with the procurators at the council of the chapters, convents,
churches and monasteries, and of the remaining absent prelates, in order that, through this
painstaking deliberation, a wholesome and beneficial disposal of the said property might be
made to the honour of God, the increase of the faith, the exaltation of the church, the help of
the holy Land, and the salvation and peace of the faithful. After especially long carefully
thought out, deliberate and complete consultations, for many just reasons, we and the said
fathers and patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, other prelates, and the outstanding and
distinguished persons, then present at the council, finally came to a conclusion. The property
should become forever that of the order of the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem, of the
Hospital itself and of our beloved sons the master and brothers of the Hospital, in the name of
the Hospital and order of these same men, who as athletes of the Lord expose themselves to
the danger of death for the defence of the faith, bearing heavy and perilous losses in lands
overseas.

We have observed with the fullness of sincere charity that this order of the Hospital and the
Hospital itself is one of the bodies in which religious observance flourishes. Factual evidence
tells us that divine worship is fervent, works of piety and mercy are practised with great
earnestness, the brothers of the Hospital despise the attractions of the world and are devoted
servants of the most High. As fearless warriors of Christ they are ardent in their efforts to
recover the holy Land, despising all human perils. We bear in mind also that the more
plentifully they are supplied with means, the more will the energy of the master and brothers
of the order and Hospital grow, their ardour increase and their bravery be strengthened to
repel the insults offered to our Redeemer and to crush the enemies of the faith. They will be
able to carry more lightly and easily the burdens demanded in the execution of such an
enterprise. They will therefore, not unworthily, be made more watchful and apply themselves
with greater zeal.

In order that we may grant them increased support, we bestow on them, with the approval of
the sacred council, the house itself of the Knights Templar and the other houses, churches,
chapels, oratories, cities, castles, towns, lands, granges, places, possessions, jurisdictions,
revenues, rights, all the other property, whether immovable, movable or self-moving, and all
the members together with their rights and belongings, both beyond and on this side of the
sea, in each and every part of the world, at the time when the master himself and some
brothers of the order were arrested as a body in the kingdom of France, namely in October
1308. The gift is to include everything which the Templars had, held or possessed of
themselves or through others, or which belonged to the said house and order of Knights

224
Templar, or to the master and brothers of the order as also the titles, actions and rights which
at the time of their arrest belonged in any way to the house, order or persons of the order of
Knights Templar, or could belong to them, against whomsoever of whatever dignity, state or
condition, with all the privileges, indults, immunities and liberties with which the said master
and brothers of the house and order of Knights Templar, and the house and order itself, had
been legitimately endowed by the apostolic see or by catholic emperors, kings and princes, or
by other members of the faithful, or in any other way. All this we present, grant, unite,
incorporate, apply and annex in perpetuity, by the fullness of our apostolic power, to the said
order of the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem and to the Hospital itself.

We except the property of the said former order of Knights Templar in the kingdoms and
lands of our beloved sons in Christ, the illustrious kings of Castile, Aragon, Portugal and
Majorca, outside the kingdom of France. We reserve this property, from the said gift, grant,
union, application, incorporation and annexation, to the disposal and regulation of the
apostolic see. We wish the prohibition made a little while ago by other proceedings of ours to
remain in full force. Nobody of any state or condition may intervene in any way as regards
these persons and property in prejudice to the regulation or disposition of the apostolic see.
We wish that our decree concerning these persons and property in the kingdoms and lands of
the above kings should remain in full force until the apostolic see makes another
arrangement.

Occupiers and unlawful detainers of the property, irrespective of state, condition, eminence
or dignity, even if this is pontifical, imperial or royal, unless they abandon the property within
a month after it is called for by the master and brothers of the Hospital, or by any of them, or
by their procurators [. . .]. The property must be fully and freely restored to the order of
Hospitallers and to the said Hospital, or to the master, priors, preceptors or brothers of the
said Hospital, in any regions or provinces, or to any of them individually, or to their
procurator or procurators, in the name of the said order of Hospitallers, even if the priors,
preceptors and brothers and their procurators or any one of them have no special mandate
from the master of the Hospital, provided that the procurators hold or show a special
commission from the priors and preceptors or from any one of them, in the provinces or
regions in which these priors and preceptors have been delegated. The priors, preceptors and
brothers are obliged to give a full reckoning to the master concerning everything: conduct,
actions, receipts and negotiations. The procurators are to render a similar account to the priors
and preceptors, and to each one of them, by whom they were delegated. All who have
knowingly given counsel, aid or favour to the occupiers and detainers mentioned above
concerning such occupation or detention, publicly or secretly, lie under excommunication.
Chapters, colleges or governing bodies of churches and monasteries, and the corporations of
cities, castles, towns and other places, as well as the cities, castles, towns and other places
themselves which were at fault in this, and the cities, castles and places in which the detainers
and occupiers hold temporal lordship, if such temporal lords place obstacles to the giving up
of the property and its restoration to the master and brothers of the Hospital, in the name of
the Hospital, not desisting from such conduct within a month after the property is called for,
are automatically laid under interdict. They cannot be absolved from this until they offer full

225
satisfaction. Moreover the occupiers and detainers and those who have given them counsel,
aid or favour, whether individuals or the chapters, colleges or governing bodies of churches
or monasteries, as also the corporations of cities, castles, lands or other places, incur, in
addition to the above-mentioned penalties, automatic deprivation of everything they hold as
fiefs from the Roman or other churches. These fiefs are to revert freely without opposition to
the churches concerned, and the prelates or rulers of those churches may dispose of the fiefs
at will, as they judge will be to the advantage of the churches. Let nobody therefore . . . If
anyone . . .

Given at Vienne on 2 May in the seventh year of our pontificate.

Continued in E:

We therefore commission you by our apostolic letters, that acting together or in pairs or
singly, directly or through one or more others, you induct the master or priors or preceptors or
brothers of the Hospital, or any individual member, or their procurator or procurators, in the
name of the Hospital, into possession of the house of the Knights Templar and of their other
houses, churches, chapels, oratories, cities, castles, towns, lands, granges, places, possessions,
jurisdictions, revenues and rights to all their other movable, immovable and self-moving
property, with all their members, rights and belongings, both on the near and far side of the
sea and in every part of the world, which the order, master and brothers of the Knights
Templar had, held or possessed, directly or through others, at the time of their arrest. The
Hospitallers are to be inducted by our authority and defended afterwards; occupiers,
detainers, administrators and conservators are to be removed. You are to ask a full account
from those who have been delegated by apostolic authority and any other, including those
sub-delegated, to care for the aforesaid property. The account is to comprise all the fruits,
revenues, incomes, rights and accretions. The occupiers or detainers, administrators,
conservators and others, unless within the prescribed time they abandon the property and
revenues, and restore them freely and fully to the order of the Hospital and to the same
Hospital, or to the master, prior, preceptors or brothers of the Hospital, in the regions and
provinces in which the property has been, including to each of them individually, or to their
procurator or procurators, in the name of the Hospital, as said above, as well as those who
give help, counsel or favour to the occupiers, detainers, administrators or conservators, are to
be excommunicated by you, if they are individuals; but if they are chapters, colleges,
convents or corporations, as well as the cities, castles, towns and places themselves at fault in
this, and those in which the detainers and occupiers have temporal dominion and are
obstructive when asked to abandon the property and restore it to the master and brothers of
the Hospital, in the name of the Hospital, and refuse to desist from such conduct within a
month, you are to lay them under interdict. The offenders are also to be deprived of all
property which they hold in fief from the Roman or any other church. You will give notice
everywhere where you think it useful and have it announced by others that the
excommunicated persons are to be strictly avoided until they have made suitable satisfaction
and merited absolution. No exception is to be made on account of any indult from the
apostolic see to the effect that they cannot be laid under interdict, suspended or

226
excommunicated by apostolic letters which do not make an express, full and word for word
declaration. You are also to suppress any other objectors, if there be such, by ecclesiastical
censure, disregarding appeals. It is our will also and we decree by our apostolic authority, that
with the present instruction you all and singly are given power and jurisdiction in every detail
of this matter. You may from now proceed freely as if this same jurisdiction were perpetuated
by citation or by any other lawful way. The jurisdiction shall be considered perpetuated as
though the case were no longer undecided. Each of you may continue the part which has been
left unfinished by one of your colleagues, in spite of his opposition and unhampered,
notwithstanding the constitution of pope Boniface VIII, our predecessor of happy memory, as
often and whenever this is suitable. Given as above.

[3]. Clement, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for assurance in the present and for
future record. The inquiries and various processes commissioned not long ago by the
apostolic see through all parts of Christendom against the former order of Knights Templar
and its individual members, concerning accusation of heresies, brought them into grave
disrepute. In particular there was the accusation that the brothers of the former order at, and
sometimes after, their reception denied Christ and spat in his dishonour on a cross held out to
them, and sometimes trampled it underfoot. The master of the order, the visitor of France, the
chief preceptors and many brothers of the order confessed at their trial to these heresies. The
confessions cast grave suspicion on the order. In addition, the widespread disgrace, the strong
suspicion, and the clamorous charges of the prelates, dukes, communes, barons and counts of
the kingdom of France also gave grave scandal which could hardly be allayed without
suppression of the order. There were many other just reasons mentioned in the legal process
which influenced us. We therefore, with the approval of the sacred council, our heart filled
with great bitterness and sorrow, suppressed and abolished the said former order of the
Temple and its constitution, habit and name and we forbade its restoration. We did this, not
by definitive sentence since we could not legally do this according to the inquiries and
processes mentioned above, but by apostolic provision and ordinance. We reserved the
persons and property of the order to the decision and disposal of the apostolic see. In doing
so, however, we had no intention of derogating from the processes made or to be made
concerning individual persons or brothers of the said former order by diocesan bishops and
provincial councils, as we have ordained elsewhere.

Now therefore we wish to provide more suitably for individual persons or brothers. We
reserved lately for our own disposition the master of the former order, the visitor of France
and the chief preceptors of the holy Land, Normandy, Aquitaine, Poitou and the province of
Provence, as well as brother Oliver de Penne, a knight of the said former order, whom
henceforth we reserve to the disposition of the apostolic see. We have decided that all the
other brothers should be left to the judgment and disposition of provincial councils, as we
have indeed done until now. We wish judgment to be given by these councils in accordance
with the different cases of individuals. Thus those who have been legally acquitted, or will be
acquitted in the future, shall be supplied with the goods of the former order whereby they can
live as becomes their state. With those who have confessed concerning the above errors, we
wish the provincial councils prudently to temper justice with mercy: the situation of these

227
men and the extent of their confessions are to be duly weighed. With regard to those who are
impenitent and have relapsed, if any — which God forbid — be found among them, justice
and canonical censure are to be observed. As for those who even when questioned have
denied their involvement in the above errors, the councils are to observe justice and equity
according to the canons. With the approval of the sacred council, we hereby cite those who
have not yet been questioned and who are not held by the power or authority of the church
but are perhaps fugitives, to appear in person before their diocesans within a year from today.
This we assign them as a precise and final limit. They are to undergo an examination by their
diocesans, receiving a just judgment from the said councils according to their deserts. Great
mercy however is to be shown and observed both to these last and to those previously
mentioned, except the relapsed and impenitent. They should also be provided from the
property of the order with the necessities of life; all the brothers of the former order,
whenever they return to the obedience of the church and as long as they persist in that
obedience, shall be maintained as becomes the circumstances of their state. All of them shall
be placed in houses of the former order or in monasteries of other religious, at the expense
however of the former order itself according to the judgment of the said provincial councils;
but many of them shall not be placed together at the same time in one house or monastery.

We order also and strictly command all those with whom and by whom the brothers of the
former order are detained, to surrender them freely whenever required to do so by the
metropolitans and the ordinaries of the brothers. If within the year those cited do not appear
before the diocesans, as stated above, they incur automatically sentence of excommunication;
and because in a case especially concerning the faith, contumacy adds strong presumption to
suspicion, the contumacious who stubbornly remain excommunicate for a year are henceforth
to be condemned as heretics. This citation of ours is made of set purpose and we wish the
brothers to be obliged by it as if they had received a special citation personally, for as
vagabonds they can in no way be found or at least not easily. In order, then, to prevent all
subterfuge, we publish our edict in the present sacred council. And in order to bring this
citation more assuredly to the knowledge of the brothers themselves and to the general
knowledge of all, we shall have papers or parchments containing the citation and sealed with
our bull hung or fastened to the doors of the principal church of Vienne. This will secure a
loud and widespread publication of this citation, so that the brothers whom the citation
concerns can claim no excuse that the citation has not reached them or that they were
ignorant of it, since it is improbable that what is so openly made public to all can remain
unknown or hidden to them. Furthermore, in order to observe greater precaution, we order the
local diocesans to make public this edict of our citation, as soon as conveniently possible, in
their cathedrals and in the churches at the most conspicuous places in their dioceses.

Given at Vienne on 6 May 1312 in the seventh year.

[4]. To all the administrators and guardians of the property of the former house and order of
the Knights Templar, delegated by apostolic and any other authority. Recently we held, as the
Lord so disposed, a general council at Vienne. There we gave long and careful consideration
to the disposal of the former house and order of the Knights Templar. We thought it more

228
acceptable to the most High, more honourable to those who worship in the true faith, and
more useful for the aid of the holy Land, to grant this property to the order of the Hospital of
saint John of Jerusalem, rather than to give it or even attach it to a new order to be created.
There were some, however, who asserted that it would be better to confer the property on an
order to be newly created than to attach it to the order of the Hospital, and so we were unable
to obtain the result we hoped for. At last, however, by God’s favour, on 2 May of this present
month, with the approval of the sacred council, we judged that the property should be granted
and attached and even united to the said Hospital or order. We made an exception, for certain
reasons, of the Templars’ property in the kingdoms and lands of our beloved sons in Christ,
the illustrious kings . . . of Castile, . . . of Aragon, . . . of Portugal, and . . . of Majorca’,
outside the kingdom of France. We reserved this property for our disposition and that of the
apostolic see, until some other arrangement be made by us and the apostolic see for its use to
aid the holy Land.

We therefore strictly command all of you, by apostolic ordinance, to restore in full, in the
name of the said Hospital and order, this property with the revenue gathered from it, after all
expenses have been paid, to the master and brothers of the Hospital, or to restore individual
items to the said Hospital’s individual priors or preceptors of the provinces or cities or
dioceses or places in which the property lies, or to the procurator or procurators of one or
more of them, according to the terms of your commission, within a month of being so
required. For this the master, brothers, priors and preceptors, or their procurator or
procurators, shall fittingly commend you, and we shall rightly acknowledge your prompt and
devoted obedience.

Given at Livron in the diocese of Valence on 16 May in the seventh year.{1}

[5].{2} Our redeemer, the only-begotten Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, loved so much
the daughter of Zion, the holy Land, that he chose her as his inheritance and his own
patrimony. He therefore, clothed with our flesh, honoured her with his presence and
consecrated her by the shedding of his precious blood. But we mourn and bitterly lament that
so noble an inheritance of our redeemer has been turned over to strangers and laid low by the
frenzy of the Babylonian persecutor, trampled underfoot by the feet of the defiled. She is
dishonoured by the vile grasp of the unclean Saracens, faithless enemies of the christian
name. She has been occupied and wretchedly retained, the christian people have been
savagely slaughtered. To the insult of the creator, to the outrage and sorrow of all
Christendom, the name of Christ is horribly blasphemed by the filthy and detestable conduct
of the enemy. This sad region therefore weeps under the lash and repeatedly laments to the
vicar of Christ about this intolerable persecution. Wounded by her disgrace, she pleads with
christian princes and the catholic people. She uncovers her wounds to those from whom she
awaits the work of the healer. She demands liberation from those for whose salvation the
author of salvation bore within her borders the suffering of the cross. All this and more
besides, which the mind cannot fully conceive nor the tongue tell, rose to our heart and
roused our mind as soon as we were called by divine favour, though unworthy, to the summit
of apostolic dignity. We gazed tenderly at the doleful state of the holy Land and we applied

229
ourselves to think out remedies by which, with the aid of heaven, that Land, freed from the
enemy’s criminal hands, might see, after the darkness of so many tribulations, the bright
times of longed-for peace

For this and other holy works acceptable to God, to be advanced by his almighty power, we
convoked a general council in the city of Vienne{3}. Then, together with our brothers the
cardinals of the holy Roman church, the patriarchs, archbishops, bishops and other prelates
and our beloved sons in Christ the illustrious kings Philip of the Franks and Louis of Navarre,
who were present at the council, as also some other eminent men and the procurators of the
remaining absent prelates and of chapters, convents, churches and monasteries, assembled at
the council, we held a long, complete and careful discussion on bringing aid to the holy Land.
At last we resolved, with the council’s approval, to succour the holy Land by a general
crusade. Intending to use our apostolic power zealously to this end, and having duly weighed
all we have said, we judged, with the approval of the sacred council, that a tithe should be
imposed by our apostolic authority on all ecclesiastical revenues and incomes throughout the
world. Only the persons and places belonging to the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem and
the other military orders were to be exempted. The tithe was to be collected and paid for six
years to be reckoned from 1 January last, in fixed installments, as we should find best, and to
be directed to helping the holy Land and opposing the infidels and the enemies of the catholic
faith.{4}

But actually we reflected of late that our letters concerning the imposition, collection and
payment of the tithe had not reached you by I January, nor could easily do so in a short time,
on account of the great distance of those parts from the Roman curia. Wishing, then, to
consult your ease and convenience, we have decreed that the six years are to begin in your
region on I October next. We therefore ask, admonish and earnestly exhort you, also
commanding you strictly by apostolic ordinance in virtue of obedience, to pay without
difficulty the tithe for six years beginning from I October. The tithe is to be paid in the
customary way, namely for the first half of the first year on 1 October next, and for the
second half on I April immediately following, and in the same way for each of the remaining
five years. Each of you is to pay it in full from your ecclesiastical revenues and incomes. If
you fail to pay the tithe within the above periods, each of you automatically incurs sentences
similar to those pronounced for nonpayment by you or by the suitable and trustworthy
persons delegated by you to collect the tithe in your cities and dioceses.

Furthermore, you are to collect the tithe from our beloved sons, the abbots, priors, deans,
archdeacons, provosts, archpriests and other prelates of churches, the chapters, colleges and
convents of the Cistercians, Cluniacs, Premonstratensians, of saint Benedict and saint
Augustine, of the Carthusians, Grandmontines and other orders, and other non-exempt
secular and regular ecclesiastical persons, in your cities and dioceses, that is, each of you in
each city and diocese. The priors, preceptors, masters and other persons and the places of the
Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem and of the other military orders are to be the only
exceptions made. The tithe is to be collected by you or by other suitable and trustworthy
persons delegated by you for this service in each of your cities and dioceses. It is altogether

230
our wish and command that you should delegate such persons. We entrust to them and
command them by this document to claim and collect it in full by our authority, in each of the
cities and dioceses where they are delegated, from our beloved sons the abbots, priors, deans,
provosts, archdeacons, archpriests and other prelates of churches, and the exempt chapters,
colleges and convents of the above-mentioned orders, in your cities and dioceses. Only the
priors, preceptors, masters, persons and places of the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem and
of the said other military orders are to be excepted.

The tithe is to be claimed and collected in full from the ecclesiastical revenues and incomes,
by our authority, in the customary way according to the years and periods mentioned above.
The delegates are to collect it from both the exempt and the non-exempt: each is to hand over
and assign it for each period to the person among you by whom he was delegated, without
delay or as soon as he conveniently can. You are to compel them by ecclesiastical censure,
without any appeal, to give you an account of the money claimed and collected from the
aforesaid non-exempt persons, as well as to hand over and assign the tithe claimed and
collected from both the exempt and the non-exempt. Public instruments are to be drawn up
and other due precautions taken concerning the handing over and assigning of the tithe. In
this way, when needed, it can be established how much, from whom, when and for what
period the delegates received the money and how much, when and for what period they
handed over and assigned it to each of you.

The money which has been duly claimed and collected by you and your delegates from the
exempt and non-exempt persons and has been handed over to you, including that which has
been claimed and collected by your delegates from the said exempt persons, as mentioned
above, and also the money which you will pay from your own revenues and incomes, is to be
put away by each of you, together with your cathedral chapter, beneath the church or even
elsewhere, as you think best, in some more becoming and safe place. Here, at your expense
and that of the chapter, you will have it guarded carefully and faithfully, to be consigned by
each of you to our delegates as and when shall seem good to us, for the business of the holy
Land and the service of the faith.

In order that you may more easily and effectively collect this tithe, we grant by this document
full and unrestricted power to each of you to constrain by ecclesiastical censure directly or
through your delegates, disregarding any appeal, the abbots, priors, deans, provosts and other
aforesaid non-exempt persons, in your cities and dioceses. We grant the same power to your
delegates, in each city or diocese for which they have been delegated, with regard to the
abbots, priors, deans, provosts and other aforesaid exempt persons. This power may also be
used to constrain any opponents and rebels. In addition, we grant full and unrestricted power
to you to absolve in your cities and dioceses, after satisfaction has been made, the aforesaid
non-exempt persons, and to your delegates regarding the aforesaid exempt persons who,
because of non-payment of the tithe in due time, are bound by sentences of
excommunication, suspension or interdict; also to dispense from irregularity contracted by
celebrating divine worship or taking part in it while bound by one or more of the above

231
sentences. In order that you and your delegates may have a reward for the labours
undertaken, we enjoin on you the above things in remission of your sins.

The tithe is to be paid even if the apostolic see has granted an indult to you or some of you, or
to the abbots, priors and other aforesaid exempt or non-exempt persons, or to anyone else,
that you are not obliged and compelled to pay, or that you cannot be laid under interdict,
suspension or excommunication by apostolic letters which have not made full and express
mention of this indult and its tenor word for word, or of the names of your orders, localities
and persons. The same applies to any privileges, indulgences, exemptions and apostolic
letters which have been granted generally or specially in any form of words by the said
apostolic see to any dignities, orders, places or persons, and of which and their whole tenor
there should be made in our letters word for word, special, full and express mention.
Consider, besides, that in these duties you are engaged in God’s business, and that you are
acting in the sight of him who sees all. You will therefore be obliged to render an account to
him and to us; we intend to use all diligence in this matter. You will receive due reward from
both him and us. You should therefore act prudently and carefully, not only to avoid the
danger of punishment and confusion, but also to gain the glory of praise and well-deserved
reward.

It is our wish also that each of you oblige the persons delegated by you for collecting the
tithe, to swear that they will be diligent and careful in their work and to use this formula: “I
swear . . . by you, lord . . ., who am delegated by the authority of the apostolic see and by the
same see itself to claim, collect and receive a tithe of all ecclesiastical revenues and incomes
from all exempt and non-exempt ecclesiastical persons in your city and diocese, that I will
faithfully claim, collect, receive and guard this tithe which has been imposed by the apostolic
see for the business of the holy Land and of the catholic faith. Only the priors, preceptors
masters and other persons and places of the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem and of the
other military orders are excepted. I shall not give way in this to any person, of whatever
dignity, status or condition, whether from entreaty, fear, gratitude, favour or any other cause.
I shall restore and consign the full tithe to you at your order. I shall render a final and integral
account concerning everything in detail, namely to you regarding what I have claimed,
collected and received from non-exempt persons, and to the delegate or delegates of the holy
see regarding exempt persons. If you lay down your office in this matter, I shall do the same
according to the orders of your successor. So may God help me and these holy gospels of
God.”

Given at Avignon on 1 December in the eighth year.

[6]. For future record. Not long ago, in the general council at Vienne, we transferred, with the
approval of the sacred council, the property, rights, privileges, indults, immunities and
liberties of the former order of the Temple to the order of the Hospital of saint John of
Jerusalem. For the sake of greater peace and concord between prelates of churches and other
clergy on the one hand, and the brothers of the order of the Hospital on the other, as also for
other justifiable reasons, we suspended, in the last session of the council, all the privileges

232
granted to the Hospital by the apostolic see, and with them as a necessary consequence the
privileges of the former Temple, which should be thought of as belonging to the said Hospital
and transferred to it. We excepted the privilege of exemption, if they had any. We wished
these privileges to be suspended at our good pleasure. There are some, however, who assert
on insufficient grounds that the suspension of these privileges of the Hospital does not extend
to the privileges of the former order of the Temple. Although there is not the faintest reason
for such an assertion, we wish to remove from their minds the slightest doubt that it was our
intention, by the said suspension of the privileges of the order of the Hospital, to suspend the
privileges of the former Temple, which have become by the transference those of the
Hospital itself. We declare therefore by our apostolic authority and decree that these, like the
other privileges of the Hospital, are and remain suspended.

Indeed, before the suspension, it was said in general by some of our brothers cardinals of the
holy Roman church, to many of the prelates assembled at the general council, that there
would be a suspension of the Hospital’s privileges until everything that was still uncertain
among the said prelates and other clergy, with regard to concord, lawsuits and disputes, had
been completely settled. We observed, however, that if it was necessary to await the end of
all these lawsuits and disputes, one little case might generate grave prejudice against the
Hospitallers, and great loss might result from the continuing suspension of their privileges.
We reflected that this might provide material for many misrepresentations. In the last session
of the council, therefore, wishing to obviate such greater dangers, we judged it fitting to make
known orally, clearly and openly, even for a third time, so that each and all might clearly
understand, that we wished the said suspension of the privileges of the order of the Hospital
to continue until we willed otherwise. We intend with the Lord’s help to consider what is
good for both sides and to make provision for both prelates and other clergy on the one hand,
and the Hospitallers on the other, so that neither will have reason for complaint but both will
receive due satisfaction. Let nobody therefore …

Given at Avignon on 18 December in the eighth year.

[7]. For an everlasting record. Not long ago, under the Lord’s providence, we held a general
council at Vienne, at which we suppressed the former order of the Knights Templar of
Jerusalem. We granted, attached and joined the Templar possessions, with the approval of the
sacred council, to the order of the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem, for the help of the holy
Land; with the exception, for certain reasons, of their property lying in the kingdoms and
lands of our beloved sons in Christ, the illustrious kings . . . of Castile, . . . of Aragon, . . . of
Portugal and . . . of Majorca, outside the kingdom of France, which we reserved for our
disposal and that of the apostolic see until we made other arrangements. Then, in the same
council, we made some sound provisions for furthering the cause of the holy Land and others
by which quarrels, scandals and discord might be prevented, and continuous peace and
concord be established, between prelates of churches and other clergy on the one hand and
the brothers of the Hospital on the other. We also made provision on other points relating to
the reform of the order of the Hospital.

233
Actually, business has pressed upon us. It is like an ocean pouring into the apostolic see. The
waters of care constantly harass our heart. We have not been permitted until now, and are still
not permitted, to put into execution the arrangements we desire. In order that the fruit of such
sound proposals may not perish through oblivion or pressure of business, but rather may be
gathered up, by the Lord’s will, at the opportune time, we have had the headings of these
projected decrees inserted into the present document. Their drift is as follows. We wish that
the transfer of property of the former order of the Temple to the order of the Hospital may, by
our provision, be of advantage to the holy Land. We also wish that quarrels, scandals and
discord be prevented between prelates and other clergy on the one hand and the brothers of
the order on the other; that lasting concord be established between them; and that the order
and its members be reformed, if and as this seems good. We have therefore made three
special provisions regarding the order of the Hospital.

The first has to do with the holy Land. We shall have an exact and careful enquiry made into
the past and present possessions of the order of the Hospital and their exact annual value. We
shall wish to know fully the annual value of each old and new house of the order, and how
much this represents each year in terms of assistance to the holy Land. On completion of this
valuation, and taking into account the necessary local expenditure, we shall oblige the order
to maintain continuously in the holy Land a certain number of brothers and knights. These
brothers and knights are to labour effectively and strive to win the holy Land and keep it, as
far as God grants. We shall arrange and provide that very few brothers of the order remain on
this side of the sea. These shall be only those required to govern the houses of the order and
those who are old, sick or unfit for war. The young and the strong, who are able to fight, shall
be required to go and stay overseas so that the holy Land may have its needs met. The order
will thus pursue the purpose for which it was instituted, as is only right and fitting. In this
way it will not reserve for itself great wealth or many persons of quality. Rather, the order
will lose all occasion for pride or the prosecution of idle enterprises, since the brothers and
knights who drag their feet on this side of the sea will be far fewer than before. The property
remaining behind will also be heavily and more than usually burdened as a result of our
above-mentioned provisions.

We cannot impose on our successors the continuation of the above policy. Yet, in order to
make this course of action possible and easier for them, we shall have the annual value of
each house registered exactly in the Roman curia, and also the service which it will be able to
provide each year for the holy Land, and the fixed number of brothers and knights required to
stay overseas. We shall arrange that the registered material be kept permanently with the
papal registers under our bull. Further, that there be no lack of carefulness or caution in this
matter, we shall send the registered material under our bull to all christian kings to be
permanently kept by them in order that if it should happen — though may it not — that this
ordinance is not observed by the Hospitallers, the kings themselves, being informed in the
above manner, may more quickly and fully know where the observance of this ordinance has
ceased. As a result, they will also be moved to take care that it is observed.

234
Secondly, in order to establish tranquility and peace, as was said above, between the churches
with their prelates and the order of the Hospital, we shall see that all the privileges of the
order are fully shown to us. And although we have no intention whatsoever of taking away its
exemption, if the order has such, or of granting exemption, if the order has none, we shall
altogether take away any privileges, if such there be, which are odious or provide matter for
quarrels, discord or scandals. If we happen to find areas of uncertainty which it is not
advisable to remove, we shall clarify. In addition, we shall delegate in each province two of
its prelates and one of our clerics or another cleric to provide more fully for concord, giving
them full and unrestricted powers, so that simply and easily, and without the din of a court of
law, they may hear and settle or make peace between the parties in all disputes and cases that
have arisen or might arise for any reason between the aforesaid order and the churches and
any ecclesiastics with regard to churches, tithes, first-fruits, procurations and any property or
rights whatsoever. This is to include questions concerning the property and rights of the
former order of the Temple. The parties may be summoned or not as they wish; charges may
be laid or not, as they please. Before or after the delegates’ decision there can be no appeal.
Whatever they do or decide shall altogether be regarded as done or decided by us.

We shall also grant to them the power of regulating the procurations owed by the order to the
bishops in different places so that, when and as seems good to them, they are converted into
an annual payment as money to be paid by the order to the bishops. The bishops, on receiving
such payments, are bound to visit at their own expense, at a time suitable for them, the places
making them. If this regulation does not seem useful, the bishops will receive on visitation
the procurations owed to them by the churches of the order, if these are able to pay them. If a
church cannot pay the full procuration, the above delegates will make an estimate of the
amount payable to the bishop as the procuration for that church. We shall also ordain that all
churches which have annexed to them the cure of souls and belonged to the order of the
Hospital on account of any right of the Temple, or even on account of any other rights which
belong or shall belong to the Hospital, shall be subject in all spiritual matters to their
diocesans, notwithstanding any privilege of exemption. Indeed, in order that everything
decreed above may be fulfilled more quickly and without evasion on the part of the order,
and that our good will may appear to everyone, we suspend entirely from now all the
privileges for long granted by the apostolic see to the order, except for the privilege of
exemption, if possessed, and we wish them to remain suspended at our pleasure.

Thirdly, concerning the order of the Hospital itself, we shall be making decrees regarding its
regulation and reform. We shall be seeing and examining carefully the rules, statutes, form of
government and progress of the order itself and of its members. We shall approve and
confirm what is good. We shall clarify doubtful points that we find in need of revision in the
order itself and in its personnel, both head and members. We shall restore the norm of truth,
justice and regular observance with the equilibrium of reason and equity, to the advantage
and welfare of the order and for the help of the holy Land. In this way the order itself will be
preserved from decay and kept in a healthy and prosperous condition.

235
The prelates of France, after the above intentions had been explained to them, petitioned that
we should take away the privilege of exemption, if the order of the Hospital possessed it, or
at least suspend such exemption, just as we have decreed the suspension of the order’s other
privileges. These prelates also declared that, as long as the unlettered and simple brothers of
the order remain under the care of their simple priests, and the prelates themselves are
unacquainted with the brothers’ deeds and consciences, they can be in grave danger of losing
their souls through having the privilege of exemption, if they do in fact possess it. Our reply
is that because of shortness of time we are unable here to formulate a full and determinate
decree. As soon as we can conveniently do so we shall with the Lord’s help decree and
provide in this matter. Also, as these prelates earnestly petitioned us, it is our will and decree
that just as individual catholic kings shall receive in writing the valuation of the order’s
revenues and the other relevant information, so each province ought to have and shall have
the same document.

Also, in accordance with the petition of these prelates, we decree and determine that the
compositions pending or made within the last ten years, which were extorted from churches
and ecclesiastics through fear of the order of the Hospital and the order of the former Temple,
do not disadvantage or harm the said churches and ecclesiastics in any way, and that if two
prelates and a non-prelate delegated by us cannot reach agreement, then whatever is decided
by one of the prelates and the non-prelate, or decreed by them by way of composition or
agreement, shall have effect and full validity. Also, we wish to be as gracious as possible to
the said prelates. Therefore we shall allow the two prelates delegated by us to raise in ready
money the procurations of their dioceses while absent, and we shall have the non-prelate
provided for in money from the property of the former order of the Temple. We shall also
decree in accordance with the petition of the prelates of France, that Hospitallers who
publicly receive excommunicated persons or those under interdict or notorious usurers for
ecclesiastical burial, or for solemnizing their marriages or having them solemnized or
permitting them to be solemnized in their churches against the law, or for administering the
sacraments to outside parishioners or permitting this in their churches, incur automatic
excommunication. And we strictly forbid the Hospitallers to trouble anyone unduly by use of
apostolic letters. We shall also decree, in accordance with the petition of the same prelates,
against the building of new churches or chapels, the erecting of bell-towers and the making of
cemeteries; we shall provide adequate laws on these subjects to be observed by the
Hospitallers.

Given at Avignon on 31 December in the eighth year of our pontificate {5}

[8]. For an everlasting record. Some time ago, in the general council held at Vienne under the
Lord’s inspiration, we suppressed the former order of the Temple for certain good reasons as
explained in the letter of suppression. After long and careful deliberations with our brothers
and the whole council, we bestowed on the order of the Hospital of saint John of Jerusalem,
on the Hospital itself and on our beloved sons, the master and brothers of the Hospital, in the
name of the Hospital and of the order of these men, who as the Lord’s athletes expose
themselves unfailingly to the danger of death in defence of the faith and have borne and still

236
bear heavy loss overseas, the house of the Knights Templar and their other houses, churches,
chapels, oratories, cities, castles, towns, lands, granges and all their other movable,
immovable and self-moving property, together with all the members and rights and all that
belongs to them, beyond and on this side of the sea and in all parts of the world, which the
former order and its master and brothers had and comprised at the time when the master
himself and some of the brothers were arrested as a body in the kingdom of France, namely in
October 1308.

The property includes that which the Templars had of themselves or through others, and
anything belonging to them in any way, with all their rights, privileges, indults, immunities,
liberties, honours and charges. We donated and united all this forever to the Hospital and
incorporated it into the Hospital, with the approval of the sacred council and from the fullness
of our apostolic power, for the help of the holy Land. However, whatever rights belonged to
kings, princes, prelates, barons, nobles and any other Catholics, before the arrest of the
master of the former order of the Temple and of some other brothers, were to remain. We
excepted from the said donation, union and incorporation the property of the former order of
the Temple in the kingdoms and lands of our beloved sons in Christ, the illustrious kings …
of Castile, … of Aragon, … of Portugal, and … of Majorca, lying outside the kingdom of
France, which we reserved with good reason for the disposal of the apostolic see.

In the letter of donation, union and incorporation, however, through the carelessness, neglect
or engagements of the scribe or secretary, mention was omitted of the non-violation of the
rights of kings, princes, prelates and other persons concerned. Lest therefore any doubt arises
in the future from such an omission concerning these charges and rights, and any prejudice be
generated against the said kings, princes, prelates, barons, nobles and other persons, we, who
desire that everyone retains his rights unimpaired, wishing to provide a suitable remedy in the
matter for the said kings, princes, prelates, barons, nobles and any other Catholics, declare
that we have made the above donation, union and incorporation to the order of the Hospital of
saint John of Jerusalem, and to the Hospital itself and its master and brothers, in the name of
the said Hospital and order, in the way expressed above. We determine and decree of our
certain knowledge that, without violation of the property of the former order of the Temple
donated to the order of the Hospital, together with all its privileges, indults, immunities,
liberties, rights, honours and charges, for the help of the holy Land, nevertheless whatever
rights belonged to kings, princes, prelates, barons, nobles and any other Catholics, at the time
of the said arrest of the master and some brothers of the Temple, remain intact, unimpaired
and exactly as they would be in everything as if they had been distinctly and expressly
mentioned in the said letter of donation, union and incorporation. Let nobody therefore . . .

Given at Avignon on 13 January in the eighth year.{6}

DECREES

[1]. Adhering firmly to the foundation of the catholic faith, other than which, as the Apostle
testifies, no one can lay, we openly profess with holy mother church that the only begotten

237
Son of God, subsisting eternally together with the Father in everything in which God the
Father exists, assumed in time in the womb of a virgin the parts of our nature united together,
from which he himself true God became true man: namely the human, passible body and the
intellectual or rational soul truly of itself and essentially informing the body. And that in this
assumed nature the Word of God willed for the salvation of all not only to be nailed to the
cross and to die on it, but also, having already breathed forth his spirit, permitted his side to
be pierced by a lance, so that from the outflowing water and blood there might be formed the
one, immaculate and holy virginal mother church, the bride of Christ, as from the side of the
first man in his sleep Eve was fashioned as his wife, in this way, to the determinate figure of
the first and old Adam, who according to the Apostle is a type of the one who was to come,
the truth might correspond in our last Adam, that is to say in Christ. This, we say, is the truth,
fortified by the witness of that huge eagle which the prophet Ezechiel saw flying over the
other gospel animals, namely blessed John the apostle and evangelist, who relating the event
and order of this sacrament, said in his gospel : But when they came to Jesus and saw that he
was already dead, they did not break his legs, but one of the soldiers pierced his side with a
spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness – his
testimony is true, and he knows that he tells the truth — that you also may believe.

We, therefore, directing our apostolic attention, to which alone it belongs to define these
things, to such splendid testimony and to the common opinion of the holy fathers and doctors,
declare with the approval of the sacred council that the said apostle and evangelist, John,
observed the right order of events in saying that when Christ was already dead one of the
soldiers opened his side with a spear. Moreover, with the approval of the said council, we
reject as erroneous and contrary to the truth of the catholic faith every doctrine or proposition
rashly asserting that the substance of the rational or intellectual soul is not of itself and
essentially the form of the human body, or casting doubt on this matter. In order that all may
know the truth of the faith in its purity and all error may be excluded, we define that anyone
who presumes henceforth to assert defend or hold stubbornly that the rational or intellectual
soul is not the form of the human body of itself and essentially, is to be considered a heretic.

All are faithfully to profess that there is one baptism which regenerates all those baptized in
Christ, just as there is one God and one faith’. We believe that when baptism is administered
in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit, it is a perfect means
of salvation for both adults and children. Yet because, as regards the effect of baptism in
children, we find that certain theologians have held contrary opinions, some saying that by
baptism guilt is indeed remitted in infants but grace is not conferred, others on the contrary
asserting that both guilt is remitted and the virtues and sanctifying grace are infused with
regard to habit though for the time being not with regard to use, we, considering the general
efficacy of Christ’s death, which through baptism is applied in like manner to all the baptised,
choose, with the approval of the sacred council, the second opinion, which says that
sanctifying grace and the virtues are conferred in baptism on both infants and adults, as more
probable and more in harmony with the words of the saints and of modern doctors of
theology.

238
[2]. Abbots and other religious holding any major ecclesiastical office may not, when it is a
question of priories or other places subject to them, bring an action against anyone on the
authority of letters of the apostolic see or its legates, except in such places and before such
persons as is permitted to the priors and other persons in charge of the priories and other
places. Nor is anything else of this kind permissible in the case of places belonging to the
table maintenance of these abbots and other religious, except when these places have special
officials in charge of them. If anyone presumes to molest someone in contravention of the
above, he is to be condemned by the judge of the case to pay the expenses and for any
damage. Any process contrary to this decree is null and void.

[3]. Although the chief official of a bishop, or a religious obtaining the office of conventual
prior (even though that office is not customarily elective), may be delegated by the apostolic
see or its legate, nevertheless we do not wish this to be observed in the cases of an official-
forane or of a religious who is the claustal prior of his monastery.

[4]. Since prelates of religious orders occasionally neglect to fill vacant priories, churches,
offices or other benefices pertaining to their disposition within the time prescribed by the
Lateran council, the local diocesan bishops shall supply for this negligence by their own
authority in the case of the non-exempt, and by apostolic authority in the case of the exempt.
Those which have customarily been governed by the secular clergy shall be conferred on
secular clerics, those which have usually been entrusted to or conferred on only religious
shall be conferred on the religious of the monasteries whose prelates were negligent. The
diocesan bishops, by the same authority, shall in no way permit the said prelates to apply
such priories, churches, offices or benefices to their table maintenance, to impose new
payments or to increase the old ones any new ones imposed or old ones increased shall be
paid back. By the said priories, churches, offices and benefices we mean those that are not for
the table maintenance of their prelates and customarily have their own priors, administrators
or rectors, even though these priors and administrators can be freely recalled, if necessary, to
the cloister.

In this matter we have decided to uphold the constitution of our predecessor pope Boniface
VIII, which prohibits the property of vacant benefices to be appropriated by prelates or
anyone else, as well as that other constitution of the same Boniface which forbids any
religious to have several priories or churches with the cure of souls, even though the cure is
exercised by someone other than himself and there is no danger to souls for the priories.

[5]. So that those who are obliged to divine office in cathedrals or secular collegiate churches,
or will be so obliged in the future, may be more readily moved to receive sacred orders, we
decree that nobody henceforth may have in such churches a voice in the chapter, even though
this is freely granted to him by the others, unless he has received at least the subdiaconate.
Moreover, those who now hold peacefully dignities, parsonages, offices or prebends to which
certain orders are annexed, or will hold them in future, shall have no voice in the chapter
unless, having no just impediment, they receive the corresponding orders within a year. They
shall receive only half the payment made to those who assist at certain hours, all customs and

239
statutes to the contrary notwithstanding. The penalties, moreover, which are decreed by law
against those refusing to be promoted to orders, are to remain in force.

[6]. We wish to check, in the cases mentioned below, the expensive prolongation of lawsuits
which, as experience teaches us, arises sometimes from overprecise observance of judicial
order. We therefore decree that in cases concerning elections, postulations, or provisions,
concerning dignities, parsonages, offices, canonries, prebends or any other church benefices,
concerning tithes, even when those obliged to pay them have been admonished and can be
corrected by ecclesiastical censure, and concerning matrimony or usury and anything
connected with it, that a simple, easy process shall be valid without the noise and rhetoric of a
court of justice. We wish this decree to apply not only to future business but also to the
present, and even to cases awaiting appeal.

[7].Although it is generally forbidden by the sacred canons for a bishop to exercise

jurisdiction in a diocese other than his own, we nevertheless make an exception for bishops
who have been driven from their sees by the insolence of the ungodly and do not dare, from
fear of their persecutors, to reside in their cities and dioceses or in any part of them, nor to
exercise their jurisdiction there directly or through others. Lest the wrong done to their
churches by their expulsions remains unpunished, we have considered it necessary to permit
that in other dioceses, from cities or other prominent places near their churches, where they
will be able to reside securely and to exercise freely their jurisdiction they may freely proceed
against their expellers and their counsellors and supporters, as justice shall advise. (The cities
and places must be such as are untroubled by these expellers and their counsellors and
supporters. They are to be cited personally or to the bishop’s house, if this can be done safely;
if not, they are to be cited publicly in the cathedral church of the place or of their domicile.) If
however the bishops have not dared to cite their expellers or their counsellors or supporters in
this way, or if these have maliciously frustrated their being cited, it is lawful for the bishops
to cite the expellers, counsellors and supporters, or to have them cited, on Sundays and
festivals when the people assemble for divine worship, so that the accused may be presumed
in all probability to have learned of the citation. This shall take place publicly in the churches
of the cities or other prominent places, and then the bishops shall proceed against their
persecutors, if they refuse to appear in the bishops’ presence within a suitable fixed time, just
as if the citation had been made legally elsewhere. We grant also to those bishops, lest justice
suffer, authority to exercise full jurisdiction over their subjects from the other dioceses in
which they have to stay, provided that they cannot or dare not do this, either directly or
through someone else, in their own dioceses. The subjects, however, excluding the expellers
or their counsellors and supporters, should not have to travel more than two days’ journey
from the boundary of their diocese. It is our will also that the bishops first seek permission
from the diocesans of their places of exile; if they are not able to obtain this, they may
nevertheless proceed as we have said. Of course if the said bishops have asserted that they
did not dare to cite the expellers or their counsellors and supporters, personally or to the
bishop’s house, or publicly in their cathedral church, as has been said, or that they
maliciously prevented the citation, or that the bishops cannot or dare not exercise jurisdiction
in their dioceses either directly or through someone else against these persecutors, then we

240
wish these assertions to be reliable, strictly enjoining the bishops, under threat of the divine
judgment, that they do not assert or invent anything false or deceptive. The neighbouring
bishops, when asked by the exiled bishops, should give notice or have notice given
throughout their dioceses of the verdicts and the legal processes which the exiled bishops
have judged necessary. No prejudice shall arise from the passage of time, or for any other
reason, to the local ordinaries or to anyone else having jurisdiction in these places where the
expelled bishops also exercise jurisdiction.

[8]. We strictly command local ordinaries to admonish by name three times clerics who
publicly and personally engage in the butcher’s trade or conduct taverns, that they cease to do
so within a reasonable time to be fixed by the ordinary and never resume such trades. If after
admonition they do not leave off or if they resume them at any time, then as long as they
persist in the above ways of life those who are married shall automatically lose all clerical
privileges, and those who are unmarried shall automatically lose their clerical privileges
relating to things, and if the latter go about in every way as laymen they shall also lose
automatically their personal privileges as clerics. As for other clerics who apply themselves
publicly to secular commerce and trade or any occupation inconsistent with the clerical state,
or who carry arms, the ordinaries are to be diligent in observing the canons, so that these
clerics may be restrained from such miscon duct and they themselves may not be guilty of
reprehensible negligence.

[9]. Since he who abandons the dress proper to his order, and puts on other clothes and wears
them in public, without a good reason, renders himself unworthy of the privileges of that
order, we ordain by the present constitution that any cleric wearing striped or variegated
clothes in public, without a good reason, is automatically suspended, if he is beneficed, from
receiving the revenues of his benefices for a period of six months. If however he does not
have a benefice but is in sacred orders below the priesthood, he becomes automatically
disqualified for the same period from obtaining an ecclesiastical benefice. The same penalty
applies to other clerics having the tonsure yet wearing such clothes in public. He who holds a
dignity, a parsonage or another benefice to which the cure of souls is annexed, as also any
other priests and religious, whose outward garb should reveal their inner integrity, who
without reasonable cause wear such clothing in public, or appear thus with a woollen band or
linen cap on their heads, are, if beneficed, automatically suspended for a year from receiving
the revenues of their benefices. Such other priests and religious are also disqualified for the
same period from obtaining any ecclesiastical benefices. These and any other clerics who
wear a gown or tabard which is furred to the edge and so short that the lower garment is
clearly seen, if they are secular clergy or religious with administrative posts, are obliged to
give the gown to the poor within a month. The other religious who do not have administrative
posts are obliged within the same period to consign the gown to their superiors, to be used for
some pious purpose. If this is not done, the above penalties, of suspension in the case of the
beneficed clergy and of disqualification in the case of the rest, are incurred for the above
period of time. To this penalty we add that clerics, especially those with benefices, may not
wear in public chequered, red or green boots.

241
[10]. The following decretal, published a little while ago by our predecessor pope Boniface
VIII, was revoked by our predecessor pope Benedict XI. Since, as results have proved, the
revocation did not bring with it the peace hoped for by its author, but rather stimulated the
discord which it was designed to allay, we annul it altogether and renew, with the insistence
and approval of the sacred council, the said decretal published by Boniface which runs as
follows.

“Boniface, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record.

“Having been placed by the divine clemency on the chair of pastoral preeminence, burdened
though we are by the many arduous affairs which flow like a torrent from all directions into
the Roman curia, summoned by many cares distracted by many proposals, we nevertheless
aim ardently and devote ourselves with ever-active solicitude so that, to the glory of the
divine name, the exaltation of the catholic faith and the profit of faithful souls, after the
thornbushes of disagreement have been rooted out and the intricacies of quarrels removed,
the tranquility of peace may thrive with the ardour of charity, and unity of heart and mind
may grow and persist, between the bishops charged with the care and rule of the Lord’s flock
and other persons in the clerical state. We know, and experience teaches us, that only in time
of peace is the author of peace duly worshipped, nor are we ignorant that dissensions and
scandals prepare the way to wicked acts, stir up rancour and hatred, and give boldness to evil
living. For a long time past there has existed between prelates and rectors or priests and
clerics of parish churches throughout the different provinces of the world on the one hand,
and the friars Preacher and Minor on the other, grave and dangerous discord, produced by
that enemy of peace, the sower of cockle, in the matters of preaching to the faithful, hearing
their confessions, enjoining penances, and burying the dead who choose to be buried in the
churches or lands of the friars.

“As an affectionate father rightly suffers with his children, we carefully considered and
turned over in our mind the great danger and loss that such discord brings, and how
detestable it is in the sight of the divine majesty. We therefore intend with all the energy of
fatherly care to eradicate and remove it wholly, so that with the Lord’s favour it may never
revive in the future. We desire greatly that this business, so close to our heart, may be
beneficially and speedily completed by apostolic sagacity. After careful deliberation with our
brothers, we decree and ordain, with the advice of our brothers and by our apostolic authority,
to the honour of God and the exaltation of the catholic faith and for the peaceful condition of
the aforesaid parties and the salvation of the souls of the faithful, that the friars of the said
orders may freely preach and explain the word of God to the clergy and the people in their
churches and other places as also in public places, except at that hour only when the local
prelates wish to preach or have someone to give a special sermon in their presence; at this
hour they shall not preach, except the prelates decide otherwise and give special permission.
In institutes of general studies, where it is customary to give a special sermon to the clergy on
certain days, at funerals, and on special feasts of the friars, they are at liberty to preach,
unless perhaps during the hour when it is customary to preach to the clergy in the above
places the bishop or a higher prelate should summon the clergy in general to his presence, or

242
for some urgent reason should assemble them. In parish churches, however, the said friars
may not preach or explain God’s word, unless invited or called to do so by the priests of the
parishes, and with their good will and assent, or having asked and obtained permission,
unless the bishop or higher prelate should through them commission a friar to preach.

“By the same authority we also decree and ordain that in each city and diocese in which the
friars have houses, or in neighbouring cities and dioceses where they have no houses, the
masters and priors provincial of the Preachers or their vicars, and the ministers general and
provincial and the guardians of the Minors, should gather in the presence of the prelates of
those places either personally or through friars whom they judge will be suitable delegates,
and humbly request that friars chosen for the purpose may freely hear the confessions of
those of the prelates’ subjects who wish to confess to them, may impose salutary penances as
they shall think right in God’s eyes, and may grant absolution to them, with the leave, favour
and good will of the prelates. The masters, priors, provincials and ministers of the orders are
then to choose diligently sufficient persons who are suitable, of approved life, discreet,
modest and skilled for such a salutary ministry and office. These they are to present or have
presented to the prelates that by their leave, favour and good will, they may hear the
confessions of those wishing to confess to them in the prelates’ cities and dioceses, impose
salutary penances and grant absolution, as has been said above. They are by no means to hear
confessions outside the cities and dioceses for which they were appointed. We want them to
be appointed for cities and dioceses, not for provinces. The number of persons to be chosen
for this ministry ought to be in proportion to that which the number of clergy and people
demands.

“If the prelates grant the permission requested for hearing confessions, the said masters,
ministers and others shall receive it with thanks, and the persons chosen should carry out the
duties entrusted to them. If the prelates do not accept one of the friars presented to them,
another may and should be presented in his place. But if the prelates issue a general refusal to
the friars chosen, we graciously grant, from the fullness of our apostolic power, that they may
freely and lawfully hear the confessions of those wishing to confess to them and impose
salutary penances, and then impart absolution. By this permission, however, we by no means
intend to give more ample power to such friars than is granted by law to the parish clergy,
unless perhaps the prelates of the churches think that such power should be given to them.

“To this decree and regulation of ours we add that the friars of the said orders may provide
free burial everywhere in their churches and cemeteries, that is they may receive for burial all
who have chosen these places for their burial. Yet, lest parish churches and their clergy,
whose office it is to administer the sacraments and to whom it belongs by law to preach
God’s word and to hear the confessions of the faithful, should be denied their due and
necessary benefits, since the labourer deserves his wages, we decree and ordain by the same
apostolic authority, that the friars are obliged to give the parish clergy a fourth part of all the
income from funerals and from everything left to them, expressly or not, for whatever
definite purpose, even from such bequests of which a fourth or canonical part is not claimed
by custom or by law, and also a fourth part of bequests made at the death or at the point of

243
death of the giver, whether directly or through a third party. We set and also limit this amount
to the fourth part by our apostolic authority. The friars are to see to it that bequests are not left
to others from whom this fourth part is not owed, to the advantage or interest of the friars
themselves, nor go in this way as gifts to these others; and that they do not arrange for that
which would be given at death or in illness to the friars, to be given to themselves while the
donors are healthy. We intend to prevent anything of this kind by binding the friars’
consciences, so that if, which God forbid, any deceit or fraud has been practised by the friars
themselves, contrary to their obligation to the said priests, rectors and pastors, a strict account
will be demanded at the last judgment. The rectors of parishes, pastors and prelates may not,
however, exact more than this portion, nor are the friars obliged to pay more, nor may they be
compelled by anyone to do so.

“In order that everything may go forward evenly and peacefully with the Lord’s favour, we
revoke, void, annul and invalidate completely all the privileges, favours and indults granted
orally or in writing, in any form or expression of words, by ourself or our predecessors as
Roman pontiffs to any of the said orders, and also customs, agreements and contracts, in so
far as these are contrary to the above provisions or any one of them. We declare all such
privileges to be null and void. Furthermore, by this present decree, we earnestly ask and
exhort, indeed we strictly command, all prelates of churches, of whatever pre-eminence,
status or dignity, and the parish priests, pastors and rectors, out of their reverence for God and
the apostolic see, to show friendliness to these orders and their members, not being difficult,
severe, hard or austere to the friars, but rather gracious, favourable and kind, showing them a
spirit of holy generosity. They should accept the friars as suitable fellow-workers in the office
of preaching and explaining God’s word and in everything else mentioned above, admitting
them with ready kindness and affection to a share in their labours, so as to increase their
reward of eternal happiness and the fruitful harvest of souls. Nor let them be unaware that if
perhaps they act otherwise, the kindness of the apostolic see, which honours these orders and
their members with great favour and holds them in its heart, will with good reason be roused
against them, nor can it tolerate with good will such behaviour without applying a suitable
remedy. The indignation, moreover, of the heavenly king, the just rewarder, whom the friars
serve with all earnestness, will not be lacking.”

[11]. There are religious who presume to usurp by cunning fraud, or under a feigned title,
tithes on newly tilled land or other tithes owing to churches, to which they have no legal
claim, or who do not permit or even forbid tithes to be paid to the churches on animals
belonging to their familiars and shepherds or others whose animals intermingle with their
flocks, or on animals which they buy in many places and then hand over to the keeping of
sellers or others, thus defrauding the churches, or on land the cultivation of which they have
entrusted to others. If such religious, after claim has been made by those whom it concerns,
do not desist within a month from the above practices, or if they do not make fitting
satisfaction to the defrauded churches within two months, they are and remain suspended
from their offices, administrative posts and benefices until they have desisted and made
satisfaction, as stated above. If these religious have no administrative posts or benefices, they
incur, in place of suspension, the sentence of excommunication, from which they cannot

244
receive absolution before making due satisfaction, notwithstanding privileges to the contrary.
We do not wish, however, this decree to apply where animals are held by oblates of the
religious, provided that these oblates have given themselves and their possessions to the
religious.

[12]. If a tithe on the benefices of anyone be granted for a time, the tithe can and should be
raised in accordance with the customary valuing of the tithe in the regions in which the grant
is made, and in the money generally current. We do not wish the chalices of churches, books
and other equipment destined for divine worship to be taken or received as security or
distraint by the collectors, raisers or exactors of the tithe, nor are such objects to be distrained
or seized in any way.

[13]. In order that those who profess poverty in any order may persevere more readily in the
vocation to which they have been called, and that those who have gone over to a non-
mendicant order may apply themselves to live there more peacefully the more the ambition
which produces discord and division is checked, we decree, with the approval of the sacred
council, that any mendicants, who even with apostolic authority shall go over to non-
mendicant orders in the future or have hitherto done so, even though they now hold the office
of prior or obedientiary or other offices, or have any care or government of souls in the non-
mendicant order, shall have no voice or place in the chapter, even though this be granted
freely to them by the others. They may not continue to hold the office of prior or obedientiary
or other offices previously held, even as vicar or minister or deputy, nor may they have the
care or government of souls either directly or on behalf of others. All actions contrary to this
decree shall be automatically null and void, notwithstanding any privilege whatsoever. We do
not however wish this constitution to extend to those mendicant orders which the apostolic
see has allowed to continue on condition that they admit no more persons to profession, and
to which it has granted a general permission for passing to other approved orders.

[14]. That nothing unbecoming or corrupt find its way into that field of the Lord, namely the
sacred order of the black monks, or anything grow into a ruinous crop, but rather that the
flowers of honour and integrity may there produce much fruit, we decree as follows.

We forbid the monks all excess or irregularity with regard to clothes, food, drink, bedding
and horses. We decree that the upper garment next to their habit should be black, brown or
white, according to the custom of the region in which they live. The quality of the cloth
should not exceed monastic moderation, nor should they seek what is expensive and fine, but
what is practical. The garment itself should be round and not slit, neither too long nor too
short; it should have broad sleeves extending to the hands, not sewn or buttoned in any way.
The monks should be content with an almuce of black cloth or fur in place of a hood together
with the hood of the habit which they wear, or by arrangement of the abbot they may wear
unpretentious hoods which are open over the shoulders. They should not wear silk in place of
fur. They may use large summer shoes or high boots for their footwear. None shall presume
to wear an ornate belt, knife or spurs, or ride a horse with the saddle highly ornamented with
nails or sumptuous in any other way, or with a decorative iron bridle.

245
In communities in which there are twelve monks or more, the abbot, prior or other superior
may wear within the monastery walls a frock of the cloth customarily used for the frocks and
cowls of the monastery; other monks in monasteries where frocks are customarily worn
should use them also. In other monasteries, however, and in houses and priories where there
is a smaller community, they should wear cowls which are closed and of becoming appear
ance. When the abbots, priors or other superiors and other monks set footoutside the
monastery, they should wear a frock or a cowl or a closed cloak; if they wear the cloak, they
should wear underneath it a cowl or, if they prefer, a scapular. When they put on albs or
sacred vestments in order to minister at the divine offices, or when they are engaged in work,
they may wear the scapular. Lest any uncertainty arises from the different meanings in
different regions of the world of the words cowl and frock, we declare that by cowl we
understand a long and full habit without sleeves, and by frock we understand a habit with
long full sleeves.

At least once every month, both inside and outside the monastery, each and all of the monks
must go to confession, and on the first Sunday of each month they should receive communion
in the monastery, except for some reason which they should make known to the abbot, prior
or confessor in the monastery; they should abide by his decision. When the rule is read in
chapter, it is to be explained in the vernacular by him who presides, or by someone else
appointed by him, for the sake of the younger monks. The novices shall have a competent
instructor in the divine offices and in regular observance.

All shall always abstain from hunting and fowling. They shall not be present at them, nor
presume to have hunting-dogs or birds of prey in their keeping or in that of others, nor permit
familiars living with them to keep them, unless the monastery has woods, game preserves or
warrens, or has the right to hunt on property belonging to others, in which there might be
rabbits or other wild animals. They are then permitted to keep such dogs and birds, as long as
they do not keep the hunting-dogs in the monastery or the houses in which they live or within
the cloister, and the monks themselves do not appear at the hunt.

If someone rashly violates the above regulations, he shall be subject to the regular discipline.
If he presumes to wear unlaced high shoes, or a hood not open as aforesaid, he is also
suspended from conferring benefices for a year, if he is an abbot or a prior who does not have
an abbot above him; if anyone else, he is suspended for a year from administrative office, if
he holds any. If he has no administrative office, he is automatically disqualified for a year
from holding such office or an ecclesiastical benefice. If any are deliberately present at rowdy
hunting or fowling or occupied in other ways with dogs and birds, they incur automatic
suspension and disqualification, according to the above distinction of persons, for two years.
If the abbot or prior has been suspended from conferring benefices, this devolves, with the
counsel and assent of the community or its greater part, on the claustral prior.

Some monks, as we hear, throw off the sweet yoke of regular observance and leave their
monasteries, feigning that they cannot securely remain there, or under some other pretext, to

246
wander about the courts of princes. Unless these monks’ superiors grant them the pension or
subsidy which they ask for, the monks conspire against their superiors, betray them or
otherwise oppress them, bring about their capture and imprisonment, have their own
monasteries burned, and occasionally even presume to seize in whole or in great part the
property of the monastery. We wish to counter such unprincipled audacity. We forbid, by this
perpetual edict, that monks and canons regular who are not administrators should presume,
without special leave of their superiors, to betake themselves to the courts of princes. If, in
order to do harm to their superiors or monasteries, they presume to go to such courts, we
determine that they incur automatic excommunication. We nevertheless strictly enjoin on
their superiors to restrain them with all diligence from visiting the said courts and from any
wandering about; they are to correct severely those who do not obey. We decree that monks
who keep arms inside their monastery, without leave of their abbot, incur the same sentence.

Following in the footsteps of our predecessors, we forbid by a perpetual edict that monks
presume to live alone in houses and priories of which they have charge. If the incomes of
such priories and houses do not suffice for the support of two, then, unless the abbots make
them sufficient, let the local ordinaries, with the advice and consent of the abbots, unite these
houses and priories with neighbouring places belonging to the monasteries, or with offices of
the monasteries, or with one another, as will be most convenient. The monks of the places
which will be united to others are first to be recalled to their monastery, and due provision is
to be made, from the incomes of the said places, for the clergy who are to serve there.
Furthermore, conventual priories cannot be conferred or entrusted to anyone under twenty-
five, and non-conventual priories having the care of souls, even if that care is exercised by
secular priests, to anyone under twenty. Those who hold priories of either kind are to have
themselves ordained priest within a year from the time of their collation or commission and
taking possession, or before the age of twenty-five if they are entrusted with or collated to
non-conventual priories when they are under that age. If they have not done this, and are
without reasonable excuse, they are deprived of the said priories, even without previous
admonition, and the priories may not be conferred on them again that time. Nobody may be
given or entrusted with a priory or an administrative post unless he has previously made
profession in a monastic order. Those appointed to priories or administrative posts outside the
monastery are not permitted to remain in the monastery and are obliged to reside where they
hold office, notwithstanding any contrary custom, unless they are excused for a time from
this residence for some reasonable cause, such as studies. In order to promote divine worship,
we decree that every monk, at the command of his abbot, should have himself raised to all the
sacred orders, unless there is some lawful excuse. Further, in order that the monks may not be
deprived of the opportunity to make progress in knowledge, there should be in each
monastery which has sufficient means a suitable master to instruct them carefully in the
primary branches of knowledge.

All the foregoing, and those things which our predecessor pope Innocent III of happy
memory decreed for greater religious observance in the monastic state, regarding clothing,
poverty, silence, the eating of meat, the triennial chapter, and anything else, we approve,
renew and expressly wish and decree to be strictly observed.

247
[15]. Considering that where discipline is despised, religion suffers shipwreck, we have
thought it especially necessary to provide that such contempt produces nothing discordant in
those who have dedicated themselves to Christ by vow, staining the good name of religious
life and offending the divine majesty. We therefore, with the approval of this sacred council,
have judged it wise to decree that every convent of nuns should be visited each year by their
ordinary as follows: exempt convents subject to the apostolic see alone, by the authority of
that see; non-exempt convents by the ordinary’s authority, and other exempt convents, by the
authority to whom they are subject. The visitors are to be very careful that the nuns — some
of whom, to our sorrow, we have heard are transgressors — do not wear silk, various furs or
sandals; do not wear their hair long in a horn-shaped style, nor make use of striped and
multicoloured caps, do not attend dances and the banquets of seculars, do not go walking
through the streets and towns by day or night; and do not lead a luxurious life in other ways.
They shall carefully withdraw the nuns from the excesses and allurements of this world and
persuade them to devote themselves in their convents to the cultivation of the virtues which is
due to the Lord. We order the visitors to compel the nuns to observe all this by suitable
measures, notwithstanding exemptions and privileges of any kind, without prejudice however
to these exemptions in other respects. We also decree that anyone chosen for the office of
abbess in those convents where it is customary for abbesses to be blessed, should receive that
blessing within a year from the time of her confirmation in office. If she does not, unless
there be reasonable cause, she has completely lost her right, and provision is to be made
canonically for the monastery to be provided with an abbess by those to whom this belongs.
We also order, by our apostolic authority, that those women who are commonly called
secular canonesses and who lead a life like that of secular canons, making no renunciation of
private property and no profession, should be visited by the local ordinaries, who are to visit
the non-exempt on their own authority and the exempt on the authority of the apostolic see.
By this, however, we are not intending to approve the status, rule or order of secular
canonesses. We command the visitors, in making their visitation, to be content with two
notaries and two persons from their own church and four other men of undoubted honour and
maturity. Those who presume to hinder the visitors in their task or any part of it, unless they
repent on being admonished, incur automatic excommunication, notwithstanding any
privileges, statutes and customs to the contrary. ‘

[16]. The women commonly known as Beguines, since they promise obedience to nobody,
nor renounce possessions, nor profess any approved rule are not religious at all, although they
wear the special dress of Beguines and attach themselves to certain religious to whom they
have a special attraction. We have heard from trustworthy sources that there are some
Beguines who seem to be led by a particular insanity. They argue and preach on the holy
Trinity and the divine essence, and express opinions contrary to the catholic faith with regard
to the articles of faith and the sacraments of the church. These Beguines thus ensnare many
simple people, leading them into various errors. They generate numerous other dangers to
souls under the cloak of sanctity. We have frequently received unfavourable reports of their
teaching and justly regard them with suspicion. With the approval of the sacred council, we
perpetually forbid their mode of life and remove it completely from the church of God. We

248
expressly enjoin on these and other women, under pain of excommunication to be incurred
automatically, that they no longer follow this way of life under any form, even if they
adopted it long ago, or take it up anew. We strictly forbid, under the same penalty, the
religious mentioned above, who are said to have favoured these women and persuaded them
to adopt the Beguinage way of life, to give in any way counsel, help or favour to women
already following this way of life or taking it up anew; no privilege is to avail against the
above. Of course we in no way intend by the foregoing to forbid any faithful women, whether
they promise chastity or not, from living uprightly in their hospices, wishing to live a life of
penance and serving the Lord of hosts in a spirit of humility. This they may do, as the Lord
inspires them.

[17]. It happens now and then that those in charge of hospices, leper-houses almshouses or
hospitals disregard the care of such places and fail to loosen the hold of those who have
usurped the goods, possessions and rights of these places. They indeed permit them to slip
and be lost completely and the buildings to fall into ruin. They have no care that these places
were founded and endowed by the faithful so that the poor and lepers might find a home and
be supported by the revenues. They have the barbarity to refuse this charity, criminally
turning the revenues to their own use, even though that which has been given by the faithful
for a certain purpose should, except by authority of the apostolic see, be applied to that
purpose and no other. Detesting such neglect and abuse, we decree, with the approval of the
sacred council, that they to whom the duty belongs by right or by statute laid down at the
foundation of these places, or by lawful custom, or by privilege of the apostolic see, should
strive to reform these places in all that has been referred to above. They are to restore what
has been seized, lost and alienated. They should compel the persons in charge to receive the
poor people and maintain them in accordance with the resources and revenues of the places.
If they are remiss in this, we enjoin on the local ordinaries, even if the institutions enjoy the
privilege of exemption, to fulfil each and all of the foregoing, either directly or through
others, and to compel the nonexempt rectors by their own authority and the exempt and
otherwise privileged rectors by the authority of the apostolic see. Those who object, of
whatever state or condition they may be, and those who give them counsel, help or favour,
are to be checked by ecclesiastical censure and other legal remedies. By this, however, we do
not impair the validity of exemptions or privileges in relation to other matters.

In order that the above may be more readily observed, none of these places shall be conferred
as benefices on secular clerics, even though this may have been observed as a custom (which
we utterly condemn), unless it was otherwise determined at the foundation or unless the post
is to be filled by election. But let these institutions be governed by prudent suitable men of
good repute, who have the knowledge, good will and ability to rule the institutions, to take
care of their property and defend their rights to advantage, to distribute their revenues
faithfully for the use of needy persons, and who are not likely to divert the property to other
uses. We lay these responsibilities on the consciences of those entrusted with these places,
calling on the witness of the divine judgment. Those who are entrusted with the government
or administration of such places shall also take an oath, after the manner of guardians, and
make inventories of the property belonging to the place, and give an account each year of

249
their administration to the ordinaries or others to whom these places are subject, or to their
representatives. If anyone attempts to act otherwise, we decree that the appointment,
provision or arrangement is null and void.

We do not wish, however, the foregoing to apply to the hospices of military or religious
orders. For these hospices we order those in charge of them, in virtue of holy obedience, to
provide in them for the poor in accordance with the institutes and ancient observances of their
orders, and to show themselves duly hospitable. They shall be compelled to do this by strict
disciplinary measures of their superiors, notwithstanding any statute or custom. Furthermore,
our intention is that, if there are hospices which have had from old times an altar or altars and
a cemetery, with priests who celebrate divine services and administer the sacra ments to the
poor, or if the parish priests have been accustomed to do this, theseancient customs are to be
retained.

[18]. We wish the constitution to be observed which forbids that anyone even at the
presentation of exempt religious, be admitted to some church, contrary custom
notwithstanding, unless a portion of the revenues of that church has been assigned to him in
the presence of the diocesan bishop, wherewith he may be able to meet his obligations to the
bishop and have a suitable means of livelihood. We are therefore taking care, with the
approval of the sacred council, to explain the constitution and to add certain considerations.
Thus we strictly forbid, adjuring the divine judgment, diocesan bishops to admit anyone
presented by any ecclesiastical person having the right of presentation to some church, unless
within a certain suitable period, set beforehand by the bishop for the presenter, the one
presented is assigned, in the bishop’s presence, a suitable portion of the revenues. If the one
presenting neglects to assign this within the period, we decree, lest this neglect harm the
presentee, that the bishop should then admit him, unless there is some other canonical
obstacle, and the power of assigning is to devolve on the bishop as a penalty against the
presenter. We admonish however the diocesan bishops, adjuring the divine judgment, and we
lay it on their consciences, that they act justly in assigning this portion, nor are they to be
knowingly swayed by hatred or favour or in any other way to assign more or less than what is
due. Of course in the churches of priories or of other places, regular as well as secular, in
which religious or others, to whom the revenues belong, have been accustomed to carry the
burdens mentioned above the above instructions are not to be observed; but the said religious
and others are obliged to undertake all the burdens which would lie upon the permanent
priests or vicars if the portion had been assigned to them, to treat the priests and vicars
correctly, and to provide them with adequate and fitting sustenance. We wish the diocesan
bishops to compel the religious and others by ecclesiastical censure to full observance of all
this, including the assignation of a just portion by the bishop if the religious and others fail to
do this themselves, notwithstanding any exemptions, privileges, customs or statutes, which
we wish to be of no avail to the religious and others with regard to the above.

[19]. Since it is only reasonable that those who enjoy advantages should not refuse the
burdens connected with them, we decree by the following inviolable constitution that any
religious who have in any way obtained monasteries or churches, should take care to pay the

250
procurations of legates of the apostolic see and the obligations to bishops and others which
were in force before they took possession, unless they are excused by privilege of the
apostolic see, exemption or other lawful cause. We do not wish, however, that such privileges
or exemptions should be extended to monasteries or churches which they may happen to
acquire in the future.

[20]. We have heard with sorrow that prelates visiting the monasteries of the Cistercian order,
although charitably received and courteously served with all that is needful, are nevertheless
not content with the food prescribed by the monastic rule. Contrary to the privileges of the
said order they demand meat and if it is not served to them, they obtain it by force. Although
they receive suitable alms in these monasteries, the prelates procure more for themselves
against the will of the religious, sometimes even in places where neither custom nor law
provide a title to procurations. They demand and extort money for their horses to be shoed,
even when this is unnecessary, and their cooks demand and extort money by reason of their
office; nor do they observe the arrangements made between the prelates and the monks
concerning procurations.

In receiving the procurations they are so oppressive that in one short hour they consume what
would last the community for a long time. They have with them, while they are receiving the
procurations, their hunting-dogs, falcons and hawks. Unless their demands are met, the doors
of monasteries or churches are often violently broken and the ornaments of the church are
carried off. Without any privilege from the apostolic see they receive several procurations in
one day occasionally paid in money, even without making a visitation; and on the occasion of
these procurations they often demand from the monks what these are not obliged to pay them,
laying on the monks an intolerable burden. There are also some prelates who impose on
exempt and other religious the greater part of procurations due to nuncios of the apostolic see
and other extraordinary burdens, in order to free themselves and secular priests, without any
consultation with the religious about dividing the load. In many other ways the said prelates
oppress exempt monasteries and churches which are subject to these monasteries in both civil
and canon law, in receiving their procurations and in imposing unaccustomed burdens.

We wish therefore to provide a suitable remedy for this state of affairs. We decree, with the
approval of the sacred council, that if the bishops come to the said monasteries not for
visitation but for hospitality, they should receive graciously the refreshment offered in charity
to them. But if the bishops come to these monasteries and receive the procurations due to
them by common law custom, privilege or any other law, they may if they wish be served
with meat on days when it is permitted, in the houses of the monasteries if these are available,
but outside the monastic precincts, notwithstanding any privilege to the contrary; if the
houses are not available, they may be served within the monastic precincts but not inside the
religious door, as it is called. Nor do we consider it unbecoming if the fragments which are
collected from the tables of the bishops and the members of their households are collected up
and given by the bishops’ almoners to the poor of the area. The prelates are carefully to
refrain from all the other oppressions mentioned above, if they wish to avoid the indignation
of God and of the apostolic see.

251
[21]. By the present constitution we order local ordinaries, when the matter becomes known
to them, to publish or have published by their subjects the sentences of excommunication and
interdict pronounced by law against those who, either on their own initiative or at the
command of others, exact or extort tolls or imposts, to the danger of their own souls and the
disadvantage of those they oppress, from churches or ecclesiastical persons for goods that are
their own, which they are not carrying or having carried or sending for the purposes of trade.
They shall continue to publish such sentences until restitution is made for the exactions and
fitting satisfaction is given.

[22]. We are gravely disturbed that, owing to the negligence of some rectors, their subjects
fear no punishment and so are encouraged in bad behaviour. Many ministers of churches
have cast aside clerical modesty. They ought to offer to God a sacrifice of praise, the fruit of
their lips, in purity of conscience and devotion of mind. Instead they presume to say or chant
the canonical hours in a hurried manner, omitting parts, mingling with them conversation
which is mostly vain, profane and unbecoming. They come late to choir, or often leave the
church without good reason before the end of the office, occasionally carrying birds or
having them carried and bringing hunting-dogs with them. As if regardless of their clerical
obligations, they presume to celebrate or be present at office, even though tonsured and
vested, with an utter lack of devotion. There are some, both clergy and laity, especially on the
vigil of certain feasts when they ought to be in church persevering in prayer, who are not
afraid to hold licentious dances in the cemeteries of the churches and occasionally to sing
ballads and perpetrate many excesses. From this sometimes there follows the violation of
churches and cemeteries, disgraceful conduct and various crimes; and the liturgical office is
greatly disturbed, to the offence of the divine majesty and the scandal of the people nearby. In
many churches also the vessels, vestments and other articles necessary for divine worship are,
considering the churches’ means, unworthy.

We do not wish these transgressions to increase and become a bad example to others. We
therefore, with the approval of the sacred council, forbid these practices. We decree that those
whose duty it is — namely the local ordinaries for the non-exempt and the superiors for the
exempt and otherwise privileged-must exercise watchful, care to get rid of all negligence and
carelessness, to reform the above-mentioned things and to correct each of them. Also, the day
and night office is to be devoutly chanted at the proper hours in cathedrals and in regular and
collegiate churches, and in other churches it is to be fittingly and duly celebrated, if
ordinaries and superiors wish to avoid the indignation of God and of the apostolic see. They
are to curb, if they have jurisdiction, those who oppose correction, by ecclesiastical censure
and other suitable remedies. In this and other matters which concern the worship of God and
the reform of morals, and also the honourable reputation of churches and cemeteries, they are
to see to it, as far as duty binds them, that the sacred canons are inviolably observed, and they
shall take care to be well acquainted with these canons.’

[23]. We think it altogether right and fitting that clerics, both religious and others, who
belong to the household of a cardinal of the holy Roman church or of any bishop in

252
communion with the apostolic see, should join with them in the divine office. We therefore
concede, with the approval of the sacred council, that these clerics may lawfully say the same
office as the cardinal or bishop, nor are they obliged to say any other.

[24]. Among the cares lying heavily on us there is one on which we reflect constantly: how
we may lead the erring into the way of truth and win them for God with the help of his grace.
This is what we seek earnestly and longingly, to this we direct our mind with great zeal, to
this we are alert with an ever-attentive enthusiasm. We are in no doubt that to attain our
desire, the word of God should be fittingly explained and preached to great advantage. Nor
are we unaware that the word of God is learned in vain and returns empty to the speaker if it
is directed to the ears of those ignorant of the speaker’s language. We are therefore following
the example of him whom we, though unworthy, represent on earth. He wished that his
apostles, going through the whole world to evangelize, should have a knowledge of every
tongue. We desire earnestly that holy church should be well supplied with catholic scholars
acquainted with the languages most in use by unbelievers. These scholars should know how
to train unbelievers in the christian way of life, and to make them members of the christian
body through instruction in the faith and reception of sacred baptism.

In order, then, that skill in these languages be attained by suitable instruction, we have
stipulated, with the approval of the sacred council, that schools be established for the
following languages wherever the Roman curia happens to reside and also at Paris, Oxford,
Bologna and Salamanca: that is, we decree that in each of these places there should be
catholic scholars with adequate knowledge of Hebrew, Arabic and Chaldaic. There are to be
two experts for each language in each place. They shall direct the schools, make faithful
translations of books from these languages into Latin, and teach others those languages with
all earnestness, passing on a skilful use of the language, so that after such instruction these
others may, God inspiring, produce the harvest hoped for, propagating the saving faith among
the heathen peoples. The salaries and expenses of these lecturers in the Roman curia will be
provided by the apostolic see, those at Paris by the king of France, and those at Oxford,
Bologna and Salamanca by the prelates, monasteries, chapters, convents, exempt and
nonexempt colleges, and rectors of churches, of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales, of
Italy, and of Spain respectively. The burden of contributing shall be imposed on each in
accordance with the needs of the faculties, notwithstanding any contrary privileges and
exemptions, which however we do not wish to be impaired in other respects.

[25]. It is an insult to the holy name and a disgrace to the christian faith that in certain parts of
the world subject to christian princes where Saracens live, sometimes apart, sometimes
intermingled with Christians, the Saracen priests commonly called Zabazala, in their temples
or mosques, in which the Saracens meet to adore the infidel Mahomet, loudly invoke and
extol his name each day at certain hours from a high place, in the hearing of both Christians
and Saracens and there make public declarations in his honour. There is a place, moreover,
where once was buried a certain Saracen whom other Saracens venerate as a saint. A great
number of Saracens flock there quite openly from far and near. This brings disrepute on our
faith and gives great scandal to the faithful. These practices cannot be tolerated any further

253
without displeasing the divine majesty. We therefore, with the sacred council’s approval,
strictly forbid such practices henceforth in christian lands. We enjoin on catholic princes, one
and all, who hold sovereignty over the said Saracens and in whose territory these practices
occur, and we lay on them a pressing obligation under the divine judgment that, as true
Catholics and zealous for the christian faith, they give consideration to the disgrace heaped
on both them and other Christians. They are to remove this offence altogether from their
territories and take care that their subjects remove it, so that they may thereby attain the
reward of eternal happiness. They are to forbid expressly the public invocation of the
sacrilegious name of Mahomet. They shall also forbid anyone in their dominions to attempt
in future the said pilgrimage or in any way give countenance to it. Those who presume to act
otherwise are to be so chastised by the princes for their irreverence, that others may be
deterred from such boldness.

[26]. The apostolic see has received many complaints that some inquisitors, appointed by it to
suppress heresy, have overstepped the limits of the power given to them. They occasionally
so enlarge their authority that what has been wisely provided by the apostolic see for the
growth of the faith, oppresses the innocent under pretext of piety and results in harm to the
faithful. The work of the inquisition will be the more successful the more solemnly, diligently
and cautiously its investigations are prosecuted. We decree therefore, for the glory of God
and the increase of the faith, that this work will be done by both diocesan bishops and by
inquisitors appointed by the apostolic see. All worldly affection hatred and fear shall be put
aside, as also any seeking of temporal advantage. We decree that the bishops and the
inquisitors may act independently of one another. They may summon, arrest or hold for sake-
keeping, even securing those arrested hand and foot if it seems necessary. For this we hold
them responsible. They may also inquire about those concerning whom inquiry seems right
before God and just. The bishop, however, without the inquisitor, or the inquisitor without the
diocesan bishop or his officer or the delegate of the chapter when the see is vacant, may not
commit to harsh or close imprisonment, which seems more like punishment than custody, or
subject anyone to torture or pronounce sentence on anyone, if they can have access to each
other within eight days after seeking it; any contravention of this has no legal validity. If
nevertheless the bishop, or the delegate of the chapter when the see is vacant, cannot or will
not personally meet the inquisitor, or if the inquisitor cannot or will not personally meet
either of the other two, the matter may be entrusted to their proxies or settled by counsel and
consent through letters.

In regard to the custody of prisons for heretics, commonly called walls in certain regions, we
have realized that much deceit has been practised of late, and we wish to obviate this. We
decree that any such prison or wall, which we wish for the future to be for the joint use of
bishop and inquisitor, shall have two principal guards, discreet, diligent and trustworthy, one
to be appointed and provided for by the bishop, the other by the inquisitor. Each of these
guards may have a loyal and trustworthy assistant. For each room of the prison there will be
two different keys, one held by each guard. He may entrust or subdelegate his key to his
assistant for the purpose of ministering to the prisoners. Furthermore, the guards, before they
assume office, shall, in the presence of both the bishop, or the chapter while the see is vacant,

254
and the inquisitor, or their substitutes, take an oath on the holy gospels, which they shall
touch, that they will use all diligence and care in their duty of guarding those placed or to be
placed in their custody on account of the crime of heresy; that one guard shall say nothing in
secret to a prisoner out of hearing of the other guard; that they will administer faithfully and
without any deduction the provisions which the prisoners receive from the administration and
those that they may be offered by relatives, friends or other trustworthy persons, unless there
is an order to the contrary from the bishop and the inquisitor or their deputies, and that in this
matter there will be no fraud. The assistants of the guards shall take the same oath in the
presence of the same persons before exercising their office. And since it often happens that
bishops have their own prisons, not shared with inquisitors, we wish and strictly command
that the guards appointed by the bishop, or by the chapter while the see is vacant, and their
assistants, shall take a similar oath before the inquisitors or their substitutes. Notaries of the
inquisition shall also swear in the presence of the bishop and the inquisitor or their
substitutes, to exercise the office of notary faithfully. The same shall hold good of other
persons necessary for the carrying out of this duty.

While it is a grave offence not to work for the extermination of heresy when this monstrous
infection requires action, it is also a grave offence and deserving of severe punishment to
impute maliciously such wickedness to the innocent. We therefore order bishops, inquisitors
and their substitutes, in virtue of holy obedience and under threat of eternal damnation, that
they proceed discreetly and promptly against those suspected of heresy, while not imputing
maliciously or deceitfully such a disgraceful crime to an innocent person, or accusing him of
hindering them in the execution of their office. If they fail, because of hatred, favour,
affection, money or temporal advantage, to proceed against someone when they ought,
against justice and their conscience, then the bishop or superior is suspended from office for
three years and others incur automatic excommunication, in addition to other punishments
imposed in accordance with the gravity of the offence. The same penalties apply if they
presume for the same reasons to disturb someone with the imputation that he is a heretic or
has hindered them in their duties. They shall obtain absolution from this excommunication
only from the Roman pontiff, except at the hour of death, and then after making satisfaction.
No privilege shall avail in this matter. We wish of course, with the approval of the sacred
council, that any other rulings made by our predecessors concerning the office of the
inquisition and not in conflict with the above are to remain in full force.

[27]. We do not wish the splendour of the faith to be obscured, as it were by a dark shadow,
by the indiscreet and wicked acts of any inquisitors of heresy. We therefore decree, with the
approval of this sacred council, that nobody below the age of forty may be entrusted with the
office of inquisitor. We enjoin very strictly on all commissaries of inquisitors or of bishops
or, in vacant sees, of chapters that they do not, under pretext of the office of the inquisition,
extort money by any unlawful means from anyone, or knowingly attempt to apply the
property of churches, on account of the offences of clerics, even to the treasury of a church. If
the commissaries disobey, we place them automatically under sentence of excommunication.
They cannot be absolved, except at the moment of death, until they have made full
satisfaction to those from whom they have extorted the money; all privileges, pacts and

255
remissions are of no avail. Notaries and officials of the inquisition, as also the brethren and
associates of the inquisitors and commissaries, who have secret knowledge that the
inquisitors and commissaries have committed such extortions, if they wish to avoid the
indignation of God and of the apostolic see as well as offence to both, shall strive to correct
the culprits severely in secret. If they have such knowledge as to be able to offer proof if need
be, they should earnestly report the matter to the relevant superiors of the inquisitors and
commissaries, and these superiors are obliged to remove from office those found guilty and
then duly to punish or correct them in other ways. Superiors of inquisitors who fail to do this
are to be informed of this decree by the local ordinaries, whom we strictly order in virtue of
holy obedience to make known these affairs to the apostolic see. Furthermore, we strictly
forbid the inquisitors themselves to abuse in any way the concession to carry arms, or to have
any but the necessary officials for accomplishing the duties of their office.

[28]. We entertain in our heart a deep longing that the catholic faith prosper in our time and
that the perverseness of heresy be rooted out of christian soil. We have therefore heard with
great displeasure that an abominable sect of wicked men, commonly called Beghards, and of
faithless women, commonly called Beguines, has sprung up in the realm of Germany. This
sect, planted by the sower of evil deeds, holds and asserts in its sacrilegious and perverse
doctrine the following errors.

First, that a person in this present life can acquire a degree of perfection which renders him
utterly impeccable and unable to make further progress in grace. For, as they say, if someone
could always make further progress, he could become more perfect than Christ.
Secondly, that it is not necessary to fast or pray after gaining this degree of perfection, for
then the sensitive appetite has been so perfectly subjected to the spirit and to reason that one
may freely grant the body whatever pleases it.
Thirdly, that those who have reached the said degree of perfection and spirit of liberty, are
not subject to human obedience nor obliged to any commandments of the church, for, as they
say, where the spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
Fourthly, that a person can gain in this life final beatitude in every degree of perfection that
he will obtain in the life of the blessed.
Fifthly, that any intellectual nature in itself is naturally blessed, and that the soul does not
need the light of glory to elevate it to see God and enjoy him blissfully.
Sixthly, that the practice of the virtues belongs to the state of imperfection and the perfect
soul is free from virtues.
Seventhly, that to kiss a woman is a mortal sin since nature does not incline one to it, but
the act of intercourse is not a sin, especially in time of temptation, since it is an inclination of
nature.
Eighthly, that at the elevation of the body of Jesus Christ, they ought not to rise or show
reverence to it; it would be an imperfection for them to come down from the purity and
height of their contemplation so far as to think about the ministry or sacrament of the
eucharist, or about the passion of Christ as man.

256
With the counterfeit appearance of sanctity they say and do other things also that offend the
eyes of the divine majesty’ and constitute a grave danger to souls. Since the duty of the office
committed to us obliges us to exstirpate from the catholic church this detestable sect and the
above execrable errors, lest they be further propagated and corrupt the hearts of the faithful,
we condemn and utterly reject, with the approval of the sacred council, the sect itself and the
errors described above, and we strictly forbid anyone henceforth to hold, approve or defend
the errors. We decree that those who act otherwise are to be punished with canonical censure.
The diocesans and the inquisitors of heresy for the regions where these Beghards and
Beguines live, are to exercise their office with special care concerning them, making inquiries
about their life and behaviour and about their beliefs in relation to the articles of faith and the
sacraments of the church. They are to impose due punishment on those whom they find
guilty, unless there is voluntary abjuration of the above errors and repentance with fitting
satisfaction.

[29]. Serious suggestions have been made to us that communities in certain places, to the
divine displeasure and injury of the neighbour, in violation of both divine and human law,
approve of usury. By their statutes, sometimes confirmed by oath, they not only grant that
usury may be demanded and paid, but deliberately compel debtors to pay it. By these statutes
they impose heavy burdens on those claiming the return of usurious payments, employing
also various pretexts and ingenious frauds to hinder the return. We, therefore, wishing to get
rid of these pernicious practices, decree with the approval of the sacred council that all the
magistrates, captains, rulers, consuls, judges, counsellors or any other officials of these
communities who presume in the future to make, write or dictate such statutes, or knowingly
decide that usury be paid or, if paid, that it be not fully and freely restored when claimed,
incur the sentence of excommunication. They shall also incur the same sentence unless within
three months they delete from the books of their communities, if they have the power,
statutes of this kind hitherto published, or if they presume to observe in any way these
statutes or customs. Furthermore, since money-lenders for the most part enter into usurious
contracts so frequently with secrecy and guile that they can be convicted only with difficulty,
we decree that they be compelled by ecclesiastical censure to open their account books, when
there is question of usury. If indeed someone has fallen into the error of presuming to affirm
pertinaciously that the practice of usury is not sinful, we decree that he is to be punished as a
heretic; and we strictly enjoin on local ordinaries and inquisitors of heresy to proceed against
those they find suspect of such error as they would against those suspected of heresy.

[30]. Complaints, loud, frequent and incessant come to us from certain religious that very
many prelates — bishops, their superiors and others-unjustly disturb in many ways the peace
of the religious. Some of them seize and imprison exempt religious when the law does not
permit this. Some, by threat of severe penalties, hinder those who owe tithes or revenues to

257
exempt religious from paying and prevent people from hearing their masses. They suspend,
interdict and excommunicate without reasonable cause the millers of the religious, their
cooks, servants, vassals, and members of household, and anyone who has any relation with
them, occasionally also seizing unlawfully their goods. They in no way submit to the appeals
which the said exempt religious sometimes make with good reason, because of the foregoing
or other oppressions. They now and then seize the appellants on the occasion of these
appeals, or they have them seized and thrown into prison.

There are some prelates, moreover, who without lawful cause do not permit chaplains to
celebrate nor to administer the sacraments to the parishioners in churches belonging fully and
lawfully to the exempt religious. There are even some prelates who with indiscreet haste
unjustly suspend, excommunicate, seize and imprison exempt abbots, monks and laybrothers,
as also clerics legally subject to them, and lay under interdict their churches and houses, if
they do not obey even in matters where there is no obligation. In addition, the prelates exceed
all measure in claiming charitable aid from the exempt religious themselves and from those
subject to them. Contrary to law they make demands which are unjust and unusual. They lay
new taxes and unfair burdens on parish churches in which exempt religious have the right of
patronage. They do not permit legal actions and decisions justly made in favour of the exempt
religious, by delegates of the apostolic see or by conservators, to be made public or to be put
into execution by their subjects. They restrain public notaries from drawing up instruments,
judges from administering justice, and lawyers from giving counsel or aid in the suits or legal
business of the exempt religious.

The prelates also refuse to admit to orders or benefices those presented by exempt religious
who have the right of presentation, unless the presenters profess obedience in the greeting of
the letter of presentation. Furthermore, these prelates, when the churches for which
monasteries have the right of patronage become vacant, turn away the suitable persons
presented to them and appoint people who are incompetent and unworthy. Certain prelates
confer churches, which have the cure of souls and belong to the table maintenance of abbots,
and the revenues of which they sometimes hand over for a rent to secular clerics, on their
own clergy at the death of those secular clerics, even though the churches because of this are
not truly vacant. Some prelates appropriate unjustly for themselves the rights of monks in
churches belonging to monasteries, and so regulate the disposal of the revenues that not
enough remains for the livelihood of the rectors.

Some prelates, armed and with standards hoisted, destroy the mills and other property of
exempt religious, disregarding all justice, even when the religious have been in possession
from time immemorial. Prelates also often send their relatives and nephews to the
monasteries in their cities and dioceses, occasionally with their animals and herdsmen, with
the demand that they be provided for. Often also prelates compel abbots and priors of
monasteries to grant the possessions of their monasteries or priories to their kindred and
nephews either perpetually or for a period; these grants or pensions we wish to be of no
consequence in law. They also compel the abbots and priors to present to them for vacant
churches in which the monks have the right of patronage, and occasionally to receive into

258
their order, their friends, kindred and nephews. Frequently also they permit and tacitly
consent to the seizure, in the prelates’ temporal domains, of movable and immovable
property of the monasteries in cases not permitted by law, by the prelates’ soldiers, vassals
and secular officials. They also outrage in various other ways both the clerical and lay
persons of the monasteries.

Besides, the prelates occasionally deprive unjustly of their benefices abbots, priors and
others, so that if they can take the revenues of the benefices in the first year, under pretext of
a privilege which they claim to have, then they may be able to receive the first year’s
revenues of vacant benefices for a certain time. Not content with this, they seize unlawfully
horses, cattle, treasure and other property of monasteries and vacant benefices which should
be reserved for posterity. Some prelates sell for a time to knights and other powerful persons
the revenues and incomes of their dignities, in order to oppress the neighbouring exempt
religious more heavily by means of these people. Some even destroy monasteries without just
cause. Others often seize houses, hospitals and other property of the monasteries, both
movable and immovable, and retain what they have seized. Many times also, without just
cause, they prevent exempt religious from repairing their houses. Certain prelates enact
statutes derogatory to the privileges of the exempt religious. And in general, very many
prelates unjustly inflict grave injury and loss on religious, especially on those who are exempt
and have privileges: on their persons, property and rights, both spiritual and temporal.

Since however there is for both regulars and seculars, for superiors and subjects, for exempt
and non-exempt, one universal church, outside of which there is no salvation, for all of whom
there is one Lord, one faith and one baptism, it is right that all who are of the same body
should be of one will, and as brethren bound to one another by the bond of charity. It is right
therefore that both prelates and others, exempt and non-exempt, should be content with their
rights and abstain from inflicting injury or loss on one another. We therefore strictly
command, by the present decree, all prelates of churches that they desist altogether from the
oppression described above, and see to it that their subjects do likewise. They are to treat
religious men, whether exempt or having privileges or non-exempt, both mendicant and non-
mendicant, with charity, and they are to encourage them. They are to respect their rights and
privileges as inviolable. And since what is specially forbidden is feared more than what is
forbidden merely in general, we forbid most strictly that prelates presume to hinder in any
way abbots, priors and other religious from going to their general or provincial chapters.

[31 ]. Religious who presume to administer the sacrament of extreme unction or the eucharist
to clerics or lay people or to solemnise marriages, without the special leave of the parish
priest, or to absolve those excommunicated by canon law, except in cases expressed in law or
granted to them by privilege of the apostolic see, or those excommunicated by sentences
promulgated by provincial or synodal statutes, or (to use their own words) to absolve anyone
from punishment and guilt, incur automatic excommunication. They are to be absolved only
by the apostolic see. The local ordinaries are to announce publicly that they are
excommunicated, once this is established, until notified of their absolution. The religious can
make no valid appeal in this matter to any exemption or privilege. We also strictly forbid

259
religious, in virtue of holy obedience and under threat of eternal malediction, to disparage
prelates in their sermons or to draw the laity away from their churches, to publish false
indulgences, to restrain testators, when present at the making of their wills, from making due
restitutions or legacies to their mother churches, or to bring about that money legacies, or
money owed or perhaps unjustly taken, should come or be bequeathed to themselves or to
other individuals of their order, or to their houses, to the detriment of other people. Nor are
they to absolve anyone in cases reserved to the apostolic see or to the local ordinaries. They
are not to annoy unreasonably ecclesiastical persons who prosecute justice against them,
especially before judges delegated by us, nor are they to bring them to court in more than one
place, especially if these places are distant.

Those who presume to act contrary to this decree are subject for two months to the penalties
usually imposed by their rule or statutes on those who commit grave crimes or faults.
Dispensation shall not be granted without manifest necessity. Their superiors, besides, unless
after these excesses they make full satisfaction within a month to the churches or
ecclesiastical persons harmed or offended, after being required to do so, incur automatic
suspension until they have made due satisfaction, notwithstanding statutes or privileges of
whatever tenor. Of course the religious who have been granted permission by the aposto lic
see to administer the sacraments to members of their household or to the poorin their
hospices, are not affected by this decree.

[32]. With the approval of the sacred council, we grant by this present constitution to an
archbishop passing through, or perhaps turning aside, to exempt localities of his diocese to
have the cross carried openly before him, to bless the people, to hear the divine offices there
privately or publicly, also to celebrate them in pontificals and to have them celebrated in his
presence without pontificals, notwithstanding any contrary privilege. In like manner we grant
to a bishop that in exempt localities of his diocese he may bless the people, hear the divine
offices and celebrate them there, as also have them celebrated in his presence. Under pretext
of this concession, however, the archbishop or bishop may exercise no other jurisdiction in
the exempt or privileged localities. He is not to annoy the exempt or privileged persons, there
should be no cause for complaint and nothing prejudicial to the exemption or privileges of the
religious. The archbishop or bishop does not acquire by this decree any other right.

[33]. If anyone at the instigation of the devil has committed the sacrilege of wrongfully and
rashly striking a bishop, or of seizing or banishing him, or has ordered these things to be
done, or approved them when done by others, or been an accomplice, or given advice or
shown favour, or knowingly defended the guilty, and has not incurred excommunication by
canons already published, he is excommunicated by this our present constitution,
notwithstanding any custom to the contrary. Indeed, with the approval of the sacred council,
we consider such a custom to be a corruption, and the culprit may be absolved by the
supreme pontiff only, except at the moment of death. In addition, he shall lose all fiefs,
leases, offices and benefices, whether spiritual or temporal, which he holds from the church
over which the offended bishop presides. All these shall revert freely to that church. The
offender’s descendants in the male line to the second generation shall be disqualified, without

260
hope of dispensation, from holding ecclesiastical benefices in the city and diocese of the
bishop. The offender’s estates also, when within one diocese, shall lie under interdict until he
has made due satisfaction. The place where the captured bishop is detained shall likewise be
under interdict for as long as he remains detained. If the criminal’s estates include two or
more dioceses, then the diocese of his principal domicile and the diocese where the crime was
committed, if the land is his, and two other dioceses which belong to his territory and are
nearest to the place of the crime, shall he under the same interdict.

Since his confusion will increase the more his offence is known, his excommunication will be
announced in public, with the ringing of bells and candles burning, until he has made due
satisfaction, in all the places where the crime was committed, as also in the churches of the
neighbouring cities and dioceses, on all Sundays and feast days. And when he is to receive
absolution, let him be well prepared to undergo the punishment imposed and, with the help of
God, to perform the penance enjoined on him. The city, moreover, that has committed any of
the crimes described above against its bishop, shall be placed under the above-mentioned
interdict until it has made satisfaction. The authorities, counsellors, bailiffs, magistrates,
advocates, consuls, governors and officials of any description who are at fault in this affair,
are likewise subject to excommunication from which they can be absolved only in the manner
stated above. All these instructions shall be observed all the more strictly in dealing with
those who kill bishops, since they should be punished more severely than the offenders
already mentioned and merit greater indignation.

Let nobody be surprised that we do not inflict heavier punishment on those who perpetrate
the above crimes. Alas! shameful to relate, these crimes are of frequent occurrence, and for
the many men of violence an example is needed. The punishment of the offender ought to be
in proportion to the dignity of the person wronged. Bishops are called most holy, are Christ’s
ambassadors, spiritual fathers, our brothers and fellow bishops, the acknowledged pillars of
the church. The punishment, then, ought to be heavy, proportionate to the guilt of one who
violates the dignity of such an eminent person. However, we wish to mitigate the severity of
the punishment for the present, being prepared to impose other penalties if we see that the
offenders’ insolence demands such action. If of course anyone involved in the above cases
has been absolved at the moment of death from excommunication, he shall incur
automatically the same sentence if after recovery he does not, as soon as conveniently
possible, present himself before the Roman pontiff in order to receive humbly his commands,
as justice shall advise. Although this has been fully enough provided for elsewhere in the law,
we thought it well to make this addition, lest someone from ignorance of the law should busy
himself to find excuses.

[34]. Many serious complaints have reached us that some who hold temporal power do not
hesitate to capture ecclesiastics frequently and detain them with sacrilegious audacity until
they resign their benefices, nor to prevent those summoned to the apostolic see by someone
or by law from going there, for the most part seizing them as they depart. In view of the great
offence to our honour and that of the apostolic see, as also to the peace and welfare of
ecclesiastical persons, not to speak of the damnable scandal, we, with the approval of the

261
sacred council, decree that, in addition to the penalty attached by the canon to such deeds,
those who bring them about, if prelates, are suspended for three years from receiving the
revenues of their churches. If they are lower clergy, they are automatically deprived of their
benefices. Those who have brought about their own capture by the secular power — this, we
have heard, sometimes occurs — as a pretext for not obeying a summons to the apostolic see,
are to incur the same penalty. Resignations of benefices extorted in the above manner,
although accepted and ratified by the prelates of those who resign, have no validity whatever.
We enjoin on local ordinaries that, after learning that subjects of theirs have incurred these
penalties, they do not delay in publishing them and, as far as it concerns them, they put the
penalties into execution.

[35]. Desiring to restrain those whom the rewards of virtue do not induce to observe the law,
by the addition of new penalties and by fear of those to be added, we decree that transgressors
of the constitution which forbids mendicant religious to acquire houses or places of any kind,
or to exchange those already acquired or transfer them to others under any title of alienation,
are automatically subject to excommunication.

The same sentence of excommunication is incurred by those religious who presume in their
sermons or otherwise to restrain their hearers from due payment of tithes to churches. And
since it is not enough to abstain from evil unless good is done, we enjoin on all religious,
invoking the divine judgment and under threat of eternal malediction, that whenever they
preach to the people on the first, fourth and last Sundays of Lent, and on the feasts of the
Ascension of the Lord, Pentecost, the Birthday of blessed John the Baptist, the Assumption
and the Birthday of the most blessed virgin Mary, the mother of God, they take care to exhort
their hearers expressly, if required by the rectors or vicars of the churches or those taking
their place, and also to inform the consciences of their penitents in confession, that they have
the obligation to pay tithes. If the religious knowingly evade this duty in their sermons on the
above-mentioned days, they are to receive a severe rebuke from their superiors. We also
strictly command the superiors, in virtue of holy obedience, to enact laws in accordance with
which they may so severely punish transgressors that their punishment may be an example
for others. The constitution of our predecessor of happy memory pope Gregory IX, dealing
with this matter, is to remain in full force. Those who knowingly have neglected to inform the
consciences of penitents with regard to payment of these tithes, are automatically to remain
suspended from preaching until they inform the consciences of their penitents, if they can
conveniently do this. They are to incur automatic excommunication if they presume to preach
without atoning for their neglect as above. We do not however wish this to apply to the
religious of monasteries, or the rectors of churches, who are in receipt of tithes.

Rash violators of the constitution which forbids religious and secular clerics to induce anyone
to vow, swear, pledge or otherwise promise that they will choose a burial place beside their
churches or, having made this choice, that they will not alter it, incur automatically the same
sentence of excommunication (the penalty in the said constitution is to remain in force); they
are not to be absolved except by the apostolic see, except at the moment of death,
notwithstanding any privileges or statutes of whatever tenor.

262
[36]. Grave complaint has been made to us by prelates that certain nobles and temporal lords,
when their territory has been laid under ecclesiastical interdict, have masses and other divine
offices celebrated publicly and solemnly not only in the chapels of their houses, but also in
collegiate churches and other churches of prominent places. They invite and, what is worse,
sometimes compel now these, now those, to celebrate the offices. Not content with these
excesses, they have people summoned, even those under interdict, by the ringing of bells and
by the public crier, to hear these masses. Some of the lords and nobles are not afraid to order
people, for the most part their own subjects, although they are publicly under
excommunication and interdict, not to leave the churches while mass is being celebrated,
even though the celebrants urge their departure. It therefore happens frequently that mass is
left unfinished to the offence of God and the scandal of clergy and people. In order, then, that
excesses so grave may not be imitated because the transgressors are left unpunished, we
excommunicate, with the approval of the sacred council, all those who shall presume to
compel anyone in any way in places under interdict to celebrate the divine offices, or to
summon people in the above way to hear them, especially those under excommunication or
interdict. The same penalty is imposed on those who forbid persons publicly
excommunicated or under interdict to leave the church during mass when warned to do so by
the celebrant, also on those publicly excommunicated and those under interdict who presume
to remain in church when named by the celebrant and warned that they must leave. The
excommunications can be remitted only by the apostolic see.

[37]. The friars Minor receive into their churches to hear the divine offices in time of interdict
brothers and sisters of the third order, instituted by blessed Francis; they are called continent
or of penance. Since this practice generates scandal in the minds of others who are excluded,
thus debasing ecclesiastical censure and weakening the force of an interdict, we strictly forbid
the friars Minor to admit henceforth in any way to their churches for the divine offices in
time of interdict any of the above-mentioned persons, even if they or the friars have
privileges of any kind in this matter; we in no way favour such privileges. If the friars
infringe this decree, they lie under automatic excommunication, from which they can only be
absolved by the Roman pontiff or, if they have made satisfaction, by the local bishops, whom
we wish to act in this matter by our authority.

[38]. I came out of paradise, I said: I will water my garden of plants. Thus speaks the
heavenly cultivator, who is truly the source of wisdom, God’s Word, begotten by the Father
from eternity, yet remaining in the Father. In these last days, made flesh in the womb of a
virgin by the operation of the holy Spirit, he went forth to the arduous work of redeeming the
human race, giving himself to humanity as the model of a heavenly life. But because so often
people, overcome by the anxieties of this mortal life, turned their mental gaze away from
such a model, our true Solomon has made in the realm of the church militant, among other
gardens, a garden of delight, far from the stormy waves of the world, in which people might
devote themselves with greater peace and security to contemplating and imitating the works
of the exemplar, and he himself entered this world that he might refresh it with the fertile
waters of his spiritual grace and teaching.

263
This garden is the holy religion of the friars Minor which, enclosed within the firm walls of
regular observance, is content with God alone and is constantly enriched with fresh shoots,
her sons. Entering this garden, the beloved Son of God gathers the myrrh and spices of
mortification and penance which by their marvellous fragrance diffuse to everyone the
perfume of an attractive sanctity. This is that form and rule of the heavenly life sketched by
that eminent confessor of Christ, saint Francis, who taught his sons its observance by both
word and example. The observers of that holy rule, men of zeal and devotion, as both pupils
and true sons of so great a father, aspired and still ardently aspire to observe that rule
faithfully in all its purity and fullness. They perceived certain particulars of which the
interpretation was doubtful, and they prudently had recourse to the apostolic see for
clarification. Receiving assurance from that see, to which their very rule proclaims
allegiance, they were able to serve the Lord, free from all doubt, in the fullness of charity.
Several Roman pontiffs, our predecessors, rightfully heeded their pious and just requests;
they defined doubtful points, promulgating certain interpretations and making some
concessions, as they thought good for the consciences of the friars and the purity of religious
observance. But because there are devout consciences which very often fear sin where it does
not exist, and dread any turning in the way of God, the previous clarifications have not fully
quietened the consciences of all the friars. There are still some points belonging to their rule
and state of life where doubts arise, as many have often told us in public and private
consistories. For this reason the friars themselves have humbly entreated us to clarify
opportunely the doubts which have arisen and those which may arise in the future, thus
applying a remedy by the kindness of the apostolic see.

We have from a tender age had a warm devotion to those who profess this rule and to the
whole order. Now that, though unworthy, we bear the office of universal pastor, we are the
more roused to cherish them and to honour them more kindly and attentively, the more often
we consider and reflect on the plentiful harvest reaped continually from their exemplary lives
and wholesome teaching for the good of the universal church. Moved by the pious intentions
of the petitioners, we have directed our efforts to carry out diligently what they ask. We have
had a careful examination made of these doubts by several archbishops, bishops, masters in
theology and other learned, prudent and discreet men.

At the beginning of the rule it is said: “The rule and life of the friars Minor is this, to observe
the gospel of our lord Jesus Christ, by living in obedience without property and in chastity”2.
Also, further down: “Having completed a year of probation, let them be received to
obedience, promising always to observe this life and rule”3. Also, towards the end of the rule:
“Let us observe poverty, humility and the gospel of our lord Jesus Christ, which we have
firmly promised”4. There was uncertainty whether the friars of the order were obliged to all
the precepts and counsels of the gospel by profession of their rule. Some said they were
obliged to all. Others, however, asserted that they were obliged to three only, namely “to live
in obedience, in chastity and without property”, and to what was stated as obligatory in the
rule. With regard to this article we follow in the footsteps of our predecessors and, giving this
article further clarification, we answer the doubt as follows. Since every determinate vow

264
must have a defined object, he who vows to follow the rule cannot be considered obliged by
his vow to those evangelical counsels which are not mentioned in the rule. And indeed this is
shown to have been the intention of blessed Francis the founder, from the fact that he laid
down certain counsels in the rule but omitted others. For if by those words, “The rule and life
of the friars Minor is this” etc. he had intended to oblige them to all the evangelical counsels,
it would have been superfluous and futile to include some of them and not others.

However, since the nature of a restrictive term demands the exclusion of everything foreign
to it but includes everything belonging to it, we declare that the friars are bound by the
profession of their rule not only to those three vows simply and solely, but also to everything
related to them expressed in the rule itself. For if the friars were obliged to observe the three
vows precisely and no more, in their promise to observe the rule by living in “obedience,
chastity and without property”, and not also to observe everything contained in the rule that is
relevant to those vows, then the words “I promise to observe always this rule” would be
useless, as implying no obligation. We must not think, however, that blessed Francis intended
to impose on those who profess this rule the same obligation regarding everything in the rule
relating to the three vows, or anything else contained in the rule. Rather, he made a clear
distinction: in some matters his words imply that transgression is a mortal sin, in others not,
since he applies to some the word “precept” or its equivalent, while elsewhere he is content to
use other expressions.

Besides those things laid down in the rule expressly in words of precept or exhortation or
admonition, there are some things in the imperative mood in either a negative or an
affirmative form. Concerning these, there has been up to now some doubt as to whether they
are of precept. This doubt is not made less but rather increased by the declaration of our
predecessor pope Nicholas III’ of happy memory, that the friars are obliged by rule to those
evangelical counsels which the rule expresses in form of precept or prohibition or equivalent
words and, in addition, to the observance of everything that the rule imposes in words of
obligation. The friars therefore begged that we would, for their peace of conscience,
graciously define which of these matters should be considered equivalent to precepts and
obligatory. We therefore, delighted by their sincerity of conscience, observing that in matters
affecting salvation the safer path is to be taken in order to avoid grave remorse of conscience,
say that, although the friars are not obliged to observe everything expressed by the rule in the
imperative mood in the way that they are obliged to observe matters which are explicitly or
equivalently of precept, it is right for them, if they are to observe the rule strictly in its purity,
to acknowledge that they are bound to observe in this way the injunctions noted below.

In order to summarise these things which appear equivalent to precepts, in virtue of the words
or at least of the subject-matter, or of both, we declare the following to be of obligation for
the friars, as expressed in the rule: not having more tunics than one “with a hood, and one
without a hood”2, not wearing shoes, and not riding a horse except in case of necessity; that
the friars “wear cheap clothes”5; that they fast “from the feast of all saints to Christmas”6 and
on Fridays; that “clerics recite the divine office according to the rite of the holy Roman
church”7; that ministers and guardians take great care “of the needs of the sick and of the

265
friars’ clothing”8, that, “if a friar falls ill, the other friars are to wait on him”9; that “the friars
are not to preach in the diocese of a bishop when he has forbidden them this”; that “nobody
ventures at all to preach to the people unless he has been examined, approved and appointed
for this by the minister general” or by others having authority according to the aforesaid
declaration; that “friars who know that they cannot observe the rule in detail, may and should
have recourse to their ministers”3; and everything laid down in the rule regarding the form of
the habit of both novices and professed friars, the manner of reception, and profession, except
for the habit of novices with regard to those admitting them (here the rule which says
“according to God it may seem otherwise”4 may be followed). The order generally has
judged, holds and has held from of old that wherever in the rule there occurs the words “they
shall be bound”, there is a precept and the friars ought to act as bound by precept.

The confessor of Christ, when prescribing the practice of the friars and their ministers in
relation to the reception of those entering the order, said in the rule: “The friars and their
ministers shall take care not to be solicitous about their temporal goods, but leave them free
to do with them whatever the Lord inspires them to do; the ministers may have leave,
however, to send them to some God-fearing men, if counsel be needed, who may advise them
how to give their goods to the poor”5. Many of the friars were uncertain, and still are,
whether they may receive anything from those who enter, if it is given; whether they may
without fault persuade them to give to individuals and friaries; and whether the ministers
themselves or the friars ought to give advice concerning the disposal of property, when there
are other suitable advisers to whom the entrants can be sent. We observe attentively that saint
Francis intended to banish from his disciples, whose rule he had based on a very strict
poverty, all affection for the temporal goods of those entering the order, especially in using
the above words in order that, on the part of the friars, reception into the order might appear
holy and pure. They should be seen to have no eye to their temporal goods, but only to
deliver the novices up to the divine service. We say that both ministers and friars ought to
abstain from persuasion to give them the property, and also from advice as to its distribution.
They should send those who seek counsel to God-fearing men of another state, not to friars.
In this way all will see them truly as zealous and perfect observers of their father’s sound
tradition. Since however the rule itself wishes those entering to be free to do as the Lord
inspires concerning their property, it does not seem unlawful for the friars to receive
something, in view of their needs and in accordance with the aforesaid declaration, if the
entrant freely wishes to give it, as he would to other poor people by way of alms. The friars
however do well to take care, in accepting such offerings, that they do not create an
unfavourable impression by the amount they receive.

The rule says that “those who have promised obedience should have one tunic with a hood,
and another without a hood, those who wish to have it”; also, that “all the friars should wear
cheap clothes”‘ . We have declared that the said words are equivalent to precepts. In order to
express this more clearly, however, we say that it is not lawful to have more tunics, except
when this is necessary in accordance with the rule, as our said predecessor has more fully
explained. As for the poverty of the clothes, both of the habit and of the inner clothing, it is to
be judged in relation to the customs and observances of the country, as to the colour of the

266
cloth and the price. There cannot be one standard for every region. We think that this poverty
in dress should be entrusted to the judgment of the ministers and guardians; they must form
their own consciences, but see to it that poverty in dress is maintained. In the same way we
leave it to the judgment of the ministers and guardians as to when the friars have need to wear
shoes.

The rule refers to two periods: “from the feast of all saints until Christmas”, and especially in
Lent, when the friars are obliged to fast. We find inserted in the rule: “at other times they are
not obliged to fast, with the exception of Fridays”3. From these statements some have
concluded that the friars are not obliged to observe any other fasts except from propriety. We
declare that they are not obliged to fast at other times except at the times established by the
church. For it is not probable that either he who instituted the rule or he who confirmed it
intended to dispense the friars from observing the fasting days to which the general law of the
church obliges other Christians.

When St Francis, wishing his friars to be completely detached from money, commanded
“firmly all the friars not to accept money in any manner, either directly or through some other
person”4, this same predecessor of ours, in his interpretation, defined the cases and the ways
in which the friars cannot and ought not to be called receivers of money against the rule and
sincerity of their order. We declare that the friars must take the greatest care that they have no
recourse to those who give money or their agents in ways other than those defined by our said
predecessor, lest they deservedly be called transgressors of the precept and rule. For when
there is a general prohibition, anything not expressly granted is understood to be refused. For
this reason, all collection of money and acceptance of offerings in church or elsewhere, boxes
for storing offerings or gifts of money, and any other recourse to money or those who have it
which is not allowed by the said declaration, is, we say, completely and absolutely forbidden.
Recourse to special friends is expressly allowed in only two cases, according to the rule.
These are “the needs of the sick and the clothing of the friars”‘. Our said predecessor kindly
and wisely extended this permission, in view of their needy life, to other wants of the friars
which can occur or even be pressing when there are no alms. The friars however are to
observe that for no other reasons except the above or those of a similar kind, may they have
recourse to such friends, either on the road or elsewhere, whether their friends themselves
give the money or their representatives, messengers or trustees, whatever name they are
given, even if the ways granted by the above declaration are entirely observed.

The confessor of Christ wished above all that those who professed his rule should be
completely detached from love and desire of earthly things, and in particular from money and
its use, as is proved by his constantly repeating in the rule the prohibition of accepting
money. When, therefore, the friars need, for the reasons mentioned above, to have recourse to
those who have money, destined for their needs, whether they are their principal benefactors
or their envoys, these friars should so behave in the eyes of all as to show that they are
completely unconcerned as regards money, as indeed it does not belong to them. Therefore
such actions as to order that the money be spent and in what way, to exact an account, to ask
for the return of the money in any way, to put it away or have it put away, and to carry a

267
money-box or its key, are unlawful for the friars. These actions belong properly to the owners
who gave the money and to their agents.

When the saint expressed the manner of the friars’ poverty in the rule, he said: “The friars
should make nothing their own, neither house nor land nor anything, but go confidently to
seek alms as pilgrims and strangers serving the Lord in poverty and humility”2. This is also
the renunciation defined by certain of our predecessors as Roman pontiffs, to be understood
both specifically and in general. These pontiffs have therefore accepted for themselves and
for the Roman church the absolute ownership of everything granted, offered or given to the
friars, leaving them simply the right of use. Yet we have been asked to examine certain
practices that are said to go on in the order and seem repugnant to the vow of poverty and the
sincerity of the order.

The following are the practices which we believe are in need of remedy. The friars not only
allow themselves to inherit, but even bring this about. They sometimes accept annual
revenues so high that the friaries concerned can live completely on them. When their affairs,
even of a temporal kind, are debated in the courts, they assist the advocates and procurators;
in order to encourage them, they present themselves in person. They accept the office of
executor of wills and carry it out. They sometimes meddle with settlements involving usury
or unjust acquisition and the restitution to be made. Sometimes they have not only extensive
gardens but also large vineyards, from which they collect great quantities of vegetables and
wine to sell. At the time of harvest they collect so much corn and wine by begging or buying,
storing them in their cellars and granaries, that they can live off them without begging for the
rest of the year. They build churches or other edifices, or have them built, of such size, style
and costliness that they seem to be the abodes of the wealthy not of the poor. The friars in
very many places have so many church ornaments and so obviously precious ones as to
surpass in this the great cathedrals. They also accept indiscriminately horses and arms offered
to them at funerals.

Yet the community of friars, and in particular the rulers of the order, asserted that the above
abuses, or most of them, did not exist in the order and any friars found guilty in such matters
are punished rigorously. Moreover, very strict laws were passed long ago in the order to
prevent such abuses. Wishing, therefore, to provide for the consciences of the friars and to
remove, as far as we can, all doubt from their hearts, we give the following replies.

For a way of life to be authentic, outward actions must correspond to the interior attitude of
mind. The friars, therefore, who have torn themselves away from temporal possessions by so
great a renunciation, must abstain from all that is or may seem to be contrary to that
renunciation. Now, heirs acquire not only use of their inheritance but, in time, ownership
also, and the friars cannot acquire anything for themselves in particular or for their order in
general. We therefore declare that the absoluteness of their vow renders the friars altogether
incapable of such inheritance, which of its nature extends both to money and to other
movable and immovable goods. Nor may they allow themselves to be left or accept as a

268
legacy the value of such inheritance, or a great part of it, so that it could be presumed that this
was done by deceit; indeed, we absolutely forbid this.

Since annual revenues are considered by law as immovable goods, and are contrary to
poverty and mendicancy, there is no doubt that the friars may not accept or have revenues of
any kind, given their state of life, just as they may not have possessions or even their use,
since this use is not granted to them.

Further, not only what is known to be evil, but also everything which has the appearance of
evil, should be specially avoided by perfect men. Now, to be present in court and urge their
case, when the law is concerned with matters of advantage to them, leads people to believe
from external appearances that the friars present are seeking something as their own. In no
way, therefore, ought the friars who profess this rule and vow, to meddle in legal processes in
such courts. By abstention they will be thought well of by outsiders, and they will live up to
the purity of their vow and avoid scandal to their neighbour. Indeed, the friars are to be
complete strangers not only to the acceptance, possession, ownership or use of money, but
even to any handling of it, as our said predecessor has repeatedly and clearly said in his
interpretation of the rule. Also, the members of this order cannot go to law for any temporal
thing. The friars may therefore not lend themselves to such legal processes, but rather
consider them forbidden by the purity of their state, because these activities cannot be
concluded without litigation and the management or administration of money. Nevertheless
they do not act in a manner contrary to their state if they give advice for the execution of
these affairs, since this advice does not confer upon them any jurisdiction or legal authority or
administration with regard to temporal goods.

Certainly it is not only lawful but very reasonable that the friars who devote themselves to the
spiritual works of prayer and study should have gardens and open spaces for recollection and
recreation, and sometimes in order to provide a bodily distraction after their spiritual labours,
as also to cultivate vegetables for their needs. To keep gardens, however, in order to cultivate
vegetables and other garden produce for sale, and vines likewise, is inconsistent with the rule
and purity of their order. Our said predecessor has declared and also ordained that if, for this
kind of use, someone were to leave a field or a vineyard or something of this nature to the
friars, they should refrain absolutely from accepting it, since to have such things in order to
receive the price of the produce in season is similar to having an income.

Again, saint Francis has shown, both by the example of his life and by the words of his rule,
that he wishes his brothers and sons, relying on divine providence, to cast their burden on the
Lord, who feeds the birds of the air, which neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns. It is not
likely, then, that he would have wished them to have granaries or wine-cellars, when they
hope to live by daily begging. And for that reason they should not lay by provisions from
some slight fear, but only when it is very probable from experience that they will not
otherwise find the necessities of life. We therefore consider that the decision should be left to
the consciences of the ministers and guardians, both as a body and separately in their offices

269
and guardianships, acting with the advice and consent of the guardian and two discreet older
priests from a house of the order in the area.

The saint wished to establish his friars in the greatest poverty and humility, both in
inclination and in fact, as practically the whole rule proclaims. It is only right, then, that they
should in no way build, or allow to be built, churches or edifices of any kind which, in
relation to the numbers of friars living there, might be considered excessive in number or in
size. We therefore wish that, everywhere in the order, the friars should be satisfied with
buildings which are modest and humble, lest outward appearances, which strike the eye,
should contradict the great poverty promised by the heart.

Although church ornaments and vessels are ordained to the honour of God’s name, for which
purpose God created everything, yet he who discerns what is secret looks chiefly at the heart
of those who serve him, not at their hands. He does not wish to be served through things
which jar with the professed life-style of his servants. The friars should therefore be content
with vessels and church ornaments which are seemly in appearance and sufficient in size and
number. Excess, costliness or over-elaboration in these or in anything else does not become
the friars’ profession or state of life. Everything which smacks of treasure and abundance
detracts, in the eyes of people, from the profession of such great poverty. We therefore wish
and command the friars to observe what we have said.

As for the presents of horses and arms, we decree that everywhere and in everything the
aforesaid declaration concerning alms of money be observed.

From the above matters, however, there has arisen among the friars an uneasy question,
namely, whether their rule obliges them to a strict and meagre use of things. Some of the
friars believe and say that, just as they are vowed to a very strict renunciation of ownership,
they are also enjoined the greatest restraint in the use of things. Other friars on the contrary
assert that by their profession they are not obliged to any restrained use that is not expressed
in the rule; they are however obliged to a temperate use, in the same way as other Christians
and even more fittingly. Wishing, then, to give peace to the friars’ consciences and to put an
end to these disputes, we declare that the friars Minor in professing their rule are obliged
specially to the strict and restrained use expressed in the rule. To say, however, as some are
said to assert, that it is heretical to hold that a restricted use of things is or is not included in
the vow of evangelical poverty, this we judge to be presumptuous and rash.

Finally, when the rule states by whom and where the minister general should be elected, it
makes no mention at all of the election or appointment of provincial ministers. There can
arise some uncertainty among the friars on this point. We wish them to be able to go forward
with clarity and security in all they do. We therefore declare, decree and ordain in this
constitution of perpetual validity, that when a province is to be provided with a minister, his
election belongs to the provincial chapter. It shall hold the election the day after assembling.
The confirmation of the election belongs to the minister general. If this election is made by
ballot, and the votes are divided in such a way that several ballots are made without

270
agreement, then the choice made by the numerical majority of the chapter (leaving aside
considerations of zeal or merit), notwithstanding objections of any kind from the other side, is
to be confirmed or invalidated by the minister general. Having first given careful
consideration to the matter, in accordance with his office, he shall take counsel with discreet
members of the order, so that a decision is made which is pleasing to God. If the minister
general invalidates the election, the provincial chapter shall vote again. If the chapter does not
elect its minister on the day mentioned, the minister general shall freely provide a provincial
minister. There are, however, certain provinces — Ireland, Greece and Rome — which are
said to have had until now, for just reasons, another way of providing the provincial minister.
In these cases, if the minister general and the general chapter judge, with good reason, that
the provincial minister should be appointed by the minister general, with the advice of good
religious of the order, rather than by the election of the provincial chapter, this shall be done
without dispute for the provinces of Ireland, Rome and Greece when the previous provincial
minister dies or is relieved of office on this side of the sea; there shall be no deceit, partiality
or fraud, the burden resting on the consciences of those who decide the appointment. As for
the dismissal of provincial ministers, we wish the order to retain the procedure which has
been customary up to now. For the rest, if the friars are without a minister general, his duties
shall be carried out by the vicar of the order until there is a new minister general. Further, if
there be any attempted violation of this decree concerning the provincial minister, such action
shall be automatically null and void.

Let nobody therefore … If anyone however …’

271
Council of Constance 1414-18
Council Fathers - 1414-1418 A.D.
INTRODUCTION 1

[This is the introduction given by Tanner in Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils]

This council was summoned by John XXIII, the Pisan pope [1 ] , with the support of Emperor
Sigismund. It began on 5 November 1414 in the cathedral of Constance, with many bishops
from all parts of Europe. Business in the council was transacted in a way that was largely new
for an ecumenical council, namely votes were cast not by Individual persons but by nations.

The council, from the very beginning, proposed the following three topics:

1. To bring unity back to the church and to make an end to the schism which had divided the
church since 1378 and which the council held at Pisa in 1409 had not healed but rather
aggravated when it elected Alexander V as a third pope. When the council of Constance
opened, Christians owed obedience to three different popes: some owed obedience to
Gregory XII of the Roman party others to Benedict XIII of the Avignon party, and others to
John XXIII, who had been elected after the death of Alexander V. John XXIII and Benedict
XIII were deposed by the council, Gregory XII voluntarily resigned. Then Martin V was
elected pope on 11 November 1417 and he was regarded as the legitimate pontiff by the
church as a whole.

2. To eradicate heresies, especially those spread by John Wyclif in Britain and by John Hus
and Jerome of Prague in Bohemia.

3. To reform the corrupt morals of the church. This, however, was only partly accomplished
in the final sessions of the council.

With regard to the ecumenical nature of the sessions, there is dispute about those before the
election of Martin V and also about the significance and force of the approval which he gave
to the matters transacted by the council. The decrees notably those of sessions 3-5 and the
decree Frequens (session 39), appear to proceed from the council’s teaching. Objection has
been made to them on the grounds of the primacy of the Roman pontiff. There is no doubt,
however, that in enacting these decrees there was solicitude and care to choose the true and
sure way ahead in order to heal the schism, and this could only be done by the authority of a
council.

The acts of the council of Constance were first published by Jerome of Croaria at Hagenau in
1500 (Acta scitu dignissima docteque concinnata Constantiensis concilii celebratissimi =

272
Asd), from the epitome of the acts which the council of Basel had ordered to be compiled and
publicly accepted in 1442. This edition of the Basel epitome was followed by all general
collections of the councils (including Editio Romana, IV 127-300, even though it ignores the
council of Basel). These collections, down to Mansi (27, 529-1240), added various
appendices. H. von der Hardt, in his great collection of the sources of the council of
Constance, made an edition of the acts and decrees of the council according to the earliest
trustworthy documents (Magnum oecumenicum Constantiense concilium, in six tomes,
Frankfurt-Leipzig 1696-1700; tome IV, Corpus actorum et decretorum magni Constantiensis
concilii de Ecclesiae refor matione, unione ac fide = Hardt). We have followed von der
Hardt’s edition throughout and have noted only the principle variants provided by Asd. We
indicate only, and do not print, the decrees pertaining to the internal administration of the
council and of the church and to judicial acts.
Second Introduction

[By the e-text editor]

I have given the conventional session numbers for “the” Council of Constance so as to make
cross referencing with other editions easier. However it is very misleading to do so. One
should not speak of “the” Council of Constance, but of the councils of Constance. There was
a council of bishops [and others] beginning 16 November 1414 which styled itself
ecumenical, but which the true pope of the day did notrecognize as such. There was another
council [even if its members were those of the first] which he convoked, by proxy, on 4 July
1415 and did recognize as ecumenical. The ratification of “the” council by Martin the fifth,
given in a footnote to session 45, was a ratification of everything determined “in a conciliar
way … by this present council of Constance”, i.e. of the one convoked on 4 July 1415. The
intent of the words “in a conciliar way” is, on my reading, to distinguish the true
[ecumenical] council from the false one.

The matter is crucial to the possibility of the catholic doctrine of the infallibility of
ecumenical councils, since the teachings of Vatican 1 on papal primacy are inconsistent with
those of the first [non-ecumenical] Council of Constance [in particular the famous session 5,
Haec Sancta, which taught conciliarism] , but not with those of the second [ecumenical] one

Crucial to my claim is the question of who the true pope was and when a genuinely
ecumenical council came into existence. I shall quote from Phillip Hughes (the footnotes here
included are from Hughes’ text) :

“Just five weeks after Baldassare Cossa so meekly accepted the council’s sentence, the
fathers met to receive the solemn abdication of Gregory XII. He was in fact, and to the end he
claimed to be in law, the canonically elected representative of the line that went back to
Urban VI, the last pope to be acknowledged as pope by Catholics everywhere [2 ] . The
abdication was arranged and executed with a care to safeguard all that Gregory claimed to be;
and this merits – and indeed, requires – much more detailed consideration than it usually
receives. [3 ]

273
Gregory XII sent to Constance as his representatives his protector Carlo Malatesta, the Lord
of Rimini, and the Dominican cardinal, John Domenici — to Constance indeed, but not to the
General Council assembled there by the authority, and in the name, of John XXIII. The
envoys’ commission was to the emperor Sigismund, presiding over the various bishops and
prelates whom his zeal to restore peace to the Church had brought together. To these envoys
— and to Malatesta in the first place-Gregory gave authority to convoke as a General Council
— to convoke and not to recognise — these assembled bishops and prelates ; [4 ] and by a
second bull [5 ] he empowered Malatesta to resign to this General Council in his name.

The emperor, the bishops and prelates consented and accepted the role Gregory assigned.
And so, on July 4, 1415. Sigismund, clad in the royal robes, left the throne he had occupied in
the previous sessions for a throne placed before the altar, as for the president of the assembly.
Gregory’s two legates sat by his side facing the bishops. The bull was read commissioning
Malatesta and Domenici to convoke the council and to authorise whatever it should do for the
restoration of unity and the extirpation of the schism — with Gregory’s explicit condition that
there should be no mention of Baldassare Cossa, [6 ] with his reminder that from his very
election he had pledged himself to resign if by so doing he could truly advance the good work
of unity, and his assertion that the papal dignity is truly his as the canonically elected
successor of Urban VI.

Malatesta then delegated his fellow envoy, the cardinal John Domenici, to pronounce the
formal operative words of convocation [7 ] ; and the assembly — but in its own way —
accepted to be thus convoked, authorised and confirmed in the name “of that lord who in his
own obedience is called Gregory XII” [8 ] . The council next declared that all canonical
censures imposed by reason of the schism were lifted, and the bull was read by which
Gregory authorised Malatesta to make the act of abdication [9 ] and promised to consider as
ratum gratum et firmum, and forever irrevocable, whatever Malatesta, as his proxy, should
perform. The envoy asked the council whether they would prefer the resignation
immediately, or that it should be delayed until Peter de Luna’s decision was known. The
council preferred the present moment. It ratified all Gregory XII’s acts, received his cardinals
as cardinals, promised that his officers should keep their posts and declared that if Gregory
was barred from re-election as pope, this was only for the peace of the Church, and not from
any personal unworthiness. Then the great renunciation was made [10 ] , ” . . . renuncio et
cedo . . . et resigno . . . in hac sacrosancta synodo et universali concilio, sanctam Romanam et
universalem eccleciam repraesentante”and the council accepted it [11 ] , but again as made
“on the part of that lord who in his own obedience was called Gregory XII”. The Te Deum
was sung and a new summons drawn up calling upon Peter de Luna to yield to the council’s
authority.

The work of Pisa was now almost undone, and by this council which, in origin, was a
continuation of Pisa. It had suppressed the Pisan pope whom Pisa, with biting words, had
rejected as a schismatic and no pope.”

274
Phillip Hughes A History of the Church, p289-291
SESSION 1 – 16 November 1414

[On the matters to be treated in the council, in which order and by which officials [12 ]]

John, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for future record. Wishing to carry out those
things which were decreed at the council of Pisa [13 ] by our predecessor of happy memory,
pope [14 ] Alexander V, regarding the summoning of a new general council, we earlier
convoked this present council by letters of ours, the contents of which we have ordered to be
inserted here:

John, bishop … [15 ]

We have therefore come together with our venerable brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman
church, and our court to this city of Constance at the appointed time. Being present here by
the grace of God, we now wish, with the advice of this sacred synod, to attend to the peace,
exaltation and reform of the church and to the quiet of the christian people.

In such an arduous matter it is not right to rely on one’s own strength, but rather trust should
be placed in the help of God. Therefore, in order to begin with divine worship, we decreed,
with the approval of this sacred council, that a special mass for this purpose should be said
today. This mass has now been duly celebrated, by the grace of God. We now decree that
such a mass shall be celebrated collegially in this and every other collegiate church of this
city whether secular or regular, once a week, namely each Friday, for the duration of this
sacred council. Moreover, in order that the faithful may devote themselves to this holy
celebration most fervently, whereby they will feel themselves refreshed by a more abundant
gift of grace, we relax, mercifully in the Lord, the following amounts of enjoined penance to
each and every one of them who is truly penitent and has confessed: for each mass, one year
to the celebrating priest and forty days to those present at it. Furthermore, we exhort our
venerable brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church, as well as patriarchs, archbishops
and bishops, and our beloved chosen sons, abbots and others in the priesthood, devoutly to
celebrate this mass once every week, in order that the aforesaid divine aid may be implored;
and we grant the same indulgences to the celebrant and to those present at the mass. We
exhort in the Lord, moreover, each and all who glory in the name of Christ, in order that the
desired outcome to so great a matter may be obtained, to give themselves diligently to prayer,
fasting, almsgiving and other pious works, so that God may be placated by our and their
humility, and so deign to grant a happy outcome to this sacred gathering.

Considering, moreover, that a council should specially treat of those matters which concern
the catholic faith, according to the praiseworthy practices of the early councils, and aware
that such things demand diligence, sufficient time and study, on account of their difficulty,
we therefore exhort all those who are well versed in the sacred scriptures to ponder and to
treat, both within themselves and with others, about those things which seem to them useful
and opportune in this matter. Let them bring such things to our notice and to that of this

275
sacred synod, as soon as they conveniently can, so that at a suitable time there may be
decided what things, it seems, should be held and what repudiated for the profit and increase
of the same catholic faith.

Let them especially ponder on the various errors which are said to have sprouted in certain
places at various times, especially on those which are said to have arisen from a certain John
called Wyclif.

We exhort, moreover, all Catholics assembled here and others who will come to this sacred
synod that they should seek to think on, to follow up and to bring to us, and to this same
sacred synod, those matters by which the body of Catholics may be led, if God is willing, to a
proper reformation and to the desired peace. For it is our intention and will that all who are
assembled for this purpose may say, consult about and do, with complete freedom, each and
all of the things that they think pertain to the above.

In order, however, that a rule may be observed in the procedure of this sacred synod with
regard to what things are to be said and decided, the action to be taken and the regulating of
customs, we think that recourse should be had to the practices of the ancient fathers, which
are best learned from a canon of the council of Toledo, the contents of which we have
decided to insert here [16 ] :

Nobody should shout at or in any way disturb the Lord’s priests when they sit in the place of
blessing. Nobody should cause disturbance by telling idle stories or jokes or, what is even
worse, by stubborn disputes. As the apostle says, if anyone thinks himself religious and does
not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, then his religion is vain. For, justice loses its
reverence when the silence of the court is disturbed by a crowd of turbulent people. As the
prophet says, the reverence due to justice shall be silence. Therefore whatever is being
debated by the participants, or is being proposed by persons making an accusation, should be
stated in quiet tones so that the hearers’ senses are not disturbed by contentious voices and
they do not weaken the authority of the court by their tumult. Whoever thinks that the
aforesaid things should not be observed while the council is meeting, and disturbs it with
noise or dissensions or jests, contrary to the things forbidden here, shall leave the assembly,
dishonourably stripped of the right to attend, according to the precept of the divine law
(whereby it is commanded: drive out the scoffer, and strife will go out with him), and he shall
be under sentence of excommunication for three days.

Since it may happen that some of the participants will not be in their rightful seats, we decree,
with this sacred council’s approval, that no prejudice shall arise to any church or person as a
result of this seating arrangement.

Since certain ministers and officials are required in order that this council may proceed, we
therefore depute, with this sacred council’s approval, those named below, namely our
beloved sons… [17 ]
SESSION 2 – 2 March 1415

276
[John XXIII publicly offers to resign the papacy]
SESSION 3 – 26 March 1415

[Decrees on the integrity and authority of the council, after the pope s flight [18 ]]

For the honour, praise and glory of the most holy Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit, and
to obtain on earth, for people of good will, the peace that was divinely promised in God’s
church, this holy synod, called the sacred general council of Constance, duly assembled here
in the holy Spirit for the purpose of bringing union and reform to the said church in its head
and members, discerns declares, defines and ordains as follows.

First, that this synod was and is rightly and properly summoned to this city of Constance, and
likewise has been rightly and properly begun and held.

Next, that this sacred council has not been dissolved by the departure of our lord pope from
Constance, or even by the departure of other prelates or any other persons, but continues in its
integrity and authority, even if decrees to the contrary have been made or shall be made in the
future.

Next, that this sacred council should not and may not be dissolved until the present schism
has been entirely removed and until the church has been reformed in faith and morals, in head
and members.

Next, that this sacred council may not be transferred to another place, except for a reasonable
cause, which is to be debated and decided on by this sacred council.

Next, that prelates and other persons who should be present at this council may not depart
from this place before it has ended, except for a reasonable cause which is to be examined by
persons who have been, or will be, deputed by this sacred council. When the reason has been
examined and approved, they may depart with the permission of the person or persons in
authority. When the individual departs, he is bound to give his power to others who stay,
under penalty of the law, as well as to others appointed by this sacred council, and those who
act to the contrary are to be prosecuted.
SESSION 4 – 30 March 1415

[Decrees of the council on its authority and integrity, in the abbreviated form read out by
cardinal Zabarella]

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit Amen. This
holy synod of Constance, which is a general council, for the eradication of the present schism
and for bringing unity and reform to God’s church in head and members, legitimately
assembled in the holy Spirit to the praise of almighty God, ordains, defines, decrees, discerns

277
and declares as follows, in order that this union and reform of God’s church may be obtained
the more easily, securely, fruitfully and freely.

First, that this synod, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, constituting a general council,
representing the catholic church militant, has power immediately from Christ, and that
everyone of whatever state or dignity, even papal, is bound to obey it in those matters which
pertain to the faith and the eradication of the said schism. [19 ]

Next, that our most holy lord pope John XXIII may not move or transfer the Roman curia and
its public offices, or its or their officials, from this city to another place, nor directly or
indirectly compel the persons of the said offices to follow him, without the deliberation and
consent of the same holy synod; this refers to those officials or offices by whose absence the
council would probably be dissolved or harmed. If he has acted to the contrary in the past, or
shall in the future, or if he has in the past, is now or shall in the future fulminate any
processes or mandates or ecclesiastical censures or any other penalties against the said
officials or any other adherents of this council, to the effect that they should follow him then
all is null and void and in no way are the said processes, censures and penalties to be obeyed,
inasmuch as they are null and void, and they are invalid. The said officials are rather to
exercise their offices in the said city of Constance, and to carry them out freely as before, as
long as this holy synod is being held in the said city.

Next, that all translations of prelates, and depositions of the same, or of any other beneficed
persons, revocations of commendams and gifts, admonitions, ecclesiastical censures,
processes, sentences, acts and whatever has been or will be done or accomplished by our
aforesaid lord and his officials or commissaries, from the time of his departure, to the injury
of the council or its adherents, against the supporters or participants of this sacred council, or
to the prejudice of them or any one of them, in whatever way they may have been or shall be
made or done, against the will of the persons concerned, are in virtue of the law itself null,
quashed, invalid and void, and of no effect or moment, and the council by its authority
quashes, invalidates and annuls them.

[Next, it was declared and decided that three persons should be chosen from each nation who
know both the reasons of those wishing to depart and the punishments that ought to be
inflicted on those departing without permission. [20 ]]

Next, that for the sake of unity new cardinals should not be created. Moreover, lest for
reasons of deceit or fraud some persons may be said to have been made cardinals recently,
this sacred council declares that those persons are not to be regarded as cardinals who were
not publicly recognised and held to be such at the time of our lord pope’s departure from the
city of Constance.
SESSION 5 – 6 April 1415

The famous Haec Sancta decree contradicting Vatican 1 on papal primacy/infallibility.

278
[Decrees of the council, concerning its authority and integrity, which had been abbreviated by
cardinal Zabarella at the preceding session, against the wishes of the nations, and which are
now restored, repeated and confirmed by a public decree]

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit. Amen. This
holy synod of Constance, which is a general council, for the eradication of the present schism
and for bringing unity and reform to God’s church in head and members, legitimately
assembled in the holy Spirit to the praise of almighty God, ordains, defines, decrees, discerns
and declares as follows, in order that this union and reform of God’s church may be obtained
the more easily, securely, fruitfully and freely.

First it declares that, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, constituting a general council
and representing the catholic church militant, it has power immediately from Christ; and that
everyone of whatever state or dignity, even papal, is bound to obey it in those matters which
pertain to the faith, the eradication of the said schism and the general reform of the said
church of God in head and members.

Next, it declares that anyone of whatever condition, state or dignity, even papal, who
contumaciously refuses to obey the past or future mandates, statutes, ordinances or precepts
of this sacred council or of any other legitimately assembled general council, regarding the
aforesaid things or matters pertaining to them, shall be subjected to well-deserved penance,
unless he repents, and shall be duly punished, even by having recourse, if necessary, to other
supports of the law.

Next, the said holy synod defines and ordains that the lord pope John XXIII may not move or
transfer the Roman curia and its public offices, or its or their officials, from the city of
Constance to another place, nor directly or indirectly compel the said officials to follow him,
without the deliberation and consent of the same holy synod. If he has acted to the contrary in
the past, or shall in the future, or if he has in the past, is now or shall in the future fulminate
any processes or mandates or ecclesiastical censures or any other penalties, against the said
officials or any other adherents of this sacred council, to the effect that they should follow
him, then all is null and void and in no way are the said processes, censures and penalties to
be obeyed, inasmuch as they are null and void. The said officials are rather to exercise their
offices in the said city of Constance, and to carry them out freely as before, as long as this
holy synod h being held in the said City.

Next, that all translations of prelates, or depositions of the same, or of any other beneficed
persons, officials and administrators, revocations of commendams and gifts, admonitions,
ecclesiastical censures, processes, sentences and whatever has been or will be done or
accomplished by the aforesaid lord pope John or his officials or commissaries, since the
beginning of this council, to the injury of the said council or its adherents, against the
supporters or participants of this sacred council, or to the prejudice of them or of any one of
them, in whatever way they may have been or shall be made or done, against the will of the
persons concerned, are by this very fact, on the authority of this sacred council, null, quashed,

279
invalid and void, and of no effect or moment, and the council by its authority quashes,
invalidates and annuls them.

Next, it declares that the lord pope John XXIII and all the prelates and other persons
summoned to this sacred council, and other participants in the same synod, have enjoyed and
do now enjoy full freedom, as has been apparent in the said sacred council, and the opposite
has not been brought to the notice of the said summoned persons or of the said council. The
said sacred council testifies to this before God and people. [21 ]

SESSION 6 – 17 April 1415

[At this session there were, among other minor deliberations, decrees about admitting the
office of proctor in the matter of pope John XXIII’s renunciation of the papacy and about the
citing of Jerome of Prague.]

SESSION 7 – 2 May 1415

[At this session it was decreed that pope John should be publicly summoned and that the
summons of Jerome of Prague, now charged with contumacy, should be repeated.]

SESSION 8 – 4 May 1415

This most holy synod of Constance, which is a general council and represents the catholic
church and is legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, for the eradication of the present
schism and the elimination of the errors and heresies which are sprouting beneath its shade
and for the reform of the church, make this perpetual record of its acts.

[Sentence condemning various articles of John Wyclif]

We learn from the writings and deeds of the holy fathers that the catholic faith without which
(as the Apostle says) it is impossible to please God , has often been attacked by false
followers of the same faith, or rather by perverse assailants, and by those who, desirous of the
world’s glory, are led on by proud curiosity to know more than they should; and that it has
been defended against such persons by the church’s faithful spiritual knights armed with the
shield of faith. Indeed these kinds of wars were prefigured in the physical wars of the Israelite
people against idolatrous nations. Therefore in these spiritual wars the holy catholic church,
illuminated in the truth of faith by the rays of light from above and remaining ever spotless
through the Lord’s providence and with the help of the patronage of the saints, has triumphed
most gloriously over the darkness of error as over profligate enemies. In our times, however,
that old and jealous foe has stirred up new conflicts so that the approved ones of this age may
be made manifest. Their leader and prince was that pseudo-christian John Wyclif. He
stubbornly asserted and taught many articles against the christian religion and the catholic
faith while he was alive. We have decided that forty-five of the articles should be set out on
this page as follows.

280
1. The material substance of bread, and similarly the material substance of wine, remain in
the sacrament of the altar.

2. The accidents of bread do not remain without their subject in the said sacrament.

3. Christ is not identically and really present in the said sacrament in his own bodily persona.

4. If a bishop or a priest is in mortal sin, he does not ordain or confect or consecrate or

baptise.

5. That Christ instituted the mass has no basis in the gospel.

6. God ought to obey the devil.

7. If a person is duly contrite, all exterior confession is superfluous and useless for him.

8. If a pope is foreknown as damned and is evil, and is therefore a limb of the devil, he does
not have authority over the faithful given to him by anyone, except perhaps by the emperor.

9. Nobody should be considered as pope after Urban VI. Rather, people should live like the
Greeks, under their own laws.

10. It is against sacred scripture for ecclesiastics to have possessions.

11. No prelate should excommunicate anyone unless he first knows that the person has been
excommunicated by God; he who does so thereby becomes a heretic and an excommunicated
person.

12. A prelate excommunicating a cleric who has appealed to the king or the king’s council is
thereby a traitor to the king and the kingdom.

13. Those who stop preaching or hearing the word of God on account of an excommunication
issued by men are themselves excommunicated and will be regarded as traitors of Christ on
the day of judgment.

14. It is lawful for any deacon or priest to preach the word of God without authorisation from
the apostolic see or from a catholic bishop.

15. Nobody is a civil lord or a prelate or a bishop while he is in mortal sin.

16. Secular lords can confiscate temporal goods from the church at their discretion when
those who possess them are sinning habitually, that is to say sinning from habit and not just in
particular acts.

281
17. The people can correct sinful lords at their discretion.

18. Tithes are purely alms, and parishioners can withhold them at will on account of their
prelates’ sins.

19. Special prayers applied by prelates or religious to a particular person avail him or her no
more than general prayers, if other things are equal.

20. Whoever gives alms to friars is thereby excommunicated.

21. Whoever enters any religious order whatsoever, whether it be of the possessioners or the
mendicants, makes himself less apt and suitable for the observance of God’s commands.

22. Saints who have founded religious orders have sinned in so doing.

23. Members of religious orders are not members of the christian religion.

24. Friars are bound to obtain their food by manual work and not by begging. [22 ]

25. All are simoniacs who bind themselves to pray for people who help them in temporal
matters.

26. The prayer of someone foreknown as damned profits nobody.

27. All things happen from absolute necessity.

28. Confirming the young, ordaining clerics and consecrating places have been reserved to
the pope and bishops because of their greed for temporal gain and honour.

29. Universities, places of study, colleges, degrees and academic exercises in these
institutions were introduced by a vain pagan spirit and benefit the church as little as does the
devil.

30. Excommunication by a pope or any prelate is not to be feared since it is a censure of

antichrist.

31. Those who found religious houses sin, and those who enter them belong to the devil.

32. It is against Christ’s command to enrich the clergy.

33. Pope Silvester and the emperor Constantine erred in endowing the church.

282
34. All the members of mendicant orders are heretics, and those who give them alms are
excommunicated.

35. Those who enter a religious or other order thereby become incapable of observing God’s
commands, and consequently of reaching the kingdom of heaven, unless they leave them.

36. The pope with all his clerics who have property are heretics, for the very reason that they
have property; and so are all who abet them, namely all secular lords and other laity.

37. The Roman church is Satan’s synagogue; and the pope is not the immediate and
proximate vicar of Christ and the apostles.

38. The decretal letters are apocryphal and seduce people from Christ’s faith, and clerics who
study them are fools.

39. The emperor and secular lords were seduced by the devil to endow the church with
temporal goods.

40. The election of a pope by the cardinals was introduced by the devil.

41. It is not necessary for salvation to believe that the Roman church is supreme among the
other churches. [23 ]

42. It is ridiculous to believe in the indulgences of popes and bishops.

43. Oaths taken to confirm civil commerce and contracts between people are unlawful.

44. Augustine, Benedict and Bernard are damned, unless they repented of having owned
property and of having founded and entered religious orders; and thus they are all heretics
from the pope down to the lowest religious.

45. All religious orders alike were introduced by the devil.

[Condemnation of Wyclif’s books]

This same John Wyclif wrote books called by him Dialogus and Trialogus and many other
treatises, works and pamphlets in which he included and taught the above and many other
damnable articles. He issued the books for public reading, in order to publish his perverse
doctrine, and from them have followed many scandals, losses and dangers to souls in various
regions, especially in the kingdoms of England and Bohemia. Masters and doctors of the
universities and houses of study at Oxford and Prague, opposing with God’s strength these
articles and books, later refuted the above articles in scholastic form. They were condemned,
moreover, by the most reverend fathers who were then the archbishops and bishops of
Canterbury, York and Prague, legates of the apostolic see in the kingdoms of England and of
Bohemia. The said archbishop of Prague, commissary of the apostolic see in this matter, also

283
judicially decreed that the books of the same John Wyclif were to be burnt and he forbade the
reading of those that survived.

After these things had again been brought to the notice of the apostolic see and a general
council, the Roman pontiff condemned the said books, treatises and pamphlets at the lately
held council of Rome [24 ] , ordering them to be publicly burnt and strictly forbidding
anyone called a Christian to dare to read, expound, hold or make any use of any one or more
of the said books, volumes, treatises and pamphlets, or even to cite them publicly or
privately, except in order to refute them. In order that this dangerous and most foul doctrine
might be eliminated from the church’s midst, he ordered, by his apostolic authority and under
pain of ecclesiastical censure, that all such books, treatises, volumes and pamphlets should be
diligently sought out by the local ordinaries and should then be publicly burnt; and he added
that if necessary those who do not obey should be proceeded against as if they were
promoters of heresy.

This sacred synod has had the aforesaid forty-five articles examined and frequently
considered by many most reverend fathers, cardinals of the Roman church, bishops, abbots,
masters of theology, doctors in both laws and many notable persons. After the articles had
been examined it was found, as indeed is the case, that some of them, indeed many, were and
are notoriously heretical and have already been condemned by holy fathers, others are not
catholic but erroneous, others scandalous and blasphemous, some offensive to the ears of the
devout and some rash and seditious. It was also found that his books contain many other
similar articles and introduce into God’s church teaching that is unsound and hostile to faith
and morals. This holy synod, therefore, in the name of our lord Jesus Christ, in ratifying and
approving the sentences of the aforesaid archbishops and of the council of Rome, repudiates
and condemns for ever, by this decree, the aforesaid articles and each one of them in
particular, and the books of John Wyclif called by him Dialogus and Trialogus, and the same
author’s other books, volumes, treatises and pamphlets (no matter what name these may go
under, and for which purpose this description is to be regarded as an adequate listing of
them). It forbids the reading, teaching, expounding and citing of the said books or of any one
of them in particular, unless it is for the purpose of refuting them. It forbids each and every
Catholic henceforth, under pain of anathema, to preach, teach or affirm in public the said
articles or any one of them in particular, or to teach, approve or hold the said books, or to
refer to them in any way, unless this is done, as has been said, for the purpose of refuting
them. It orders, moreover, that the aforesaid books, treatises, volumes and pamphlets are to
be burnt in public, in accordance with the decree of the synod of Rome, as stated above. This
holy synod orders local ordinaries to attend with vigilance to the execution and due
observance of these things, insofar as each one is responsible, in accordance with the law and
canonical sanctions.

[Condemnation of 260 other articles of Wyclif] [25 ]

284
When the doctors and masters of the university of Oxford examined the aforesaid written
works, they found 260 articles in addition to the 45 articles that have been mentioned. Some
of them coincide in meaning with the 45 articles, even if not in the forms of words used.
Some of them, as has been said, were and are heretical, some seditious, some erroneous,
others rash, some scandalous, others unsound, and almost all of them contrary to good morals
and the catholic truth. They were therefore condemned by the said university in correct and
scholastic form. This most holy synod, therefore, after deliberating as mentioned above,
repudiates and condemns the said articles and each one of them in particular; and it forbids,
commands and decrees in the same way as for the other 45 articles. We order the contents of
these 260 articles to be included below [26 ] .

[The council pronounces John Wyclif a heretic, condemns his memory and orders his bones
to be exhumed]

Furthermore, a process was begun, on the authority or by decree of the Roman council, and at
the command of the church and of the apostolic see, after a due interval of time, for the
condemnation of the said Wyclif and his memory. Invitations and proclamations were issued
summoning those who wished to defend him and his memory, if any still existed. However,
nobody appeared who was willing to defend him or his memory. Witnesses were examined
by commissaries appointed by the reigning lord pope John and by this sacred council,
regarding the said Wyclif’s final impenitence and obstinacy. Legal proof was thus provided,
in accordance with all due observances, as the order of law demands in a matter of this kind,
regarding his impenitence and final obstinacy. This was proved by clear indications from
legitimate witnesses. This holy synod, therefore, at the instance of the procurator-fiscal and
since a decree was issued to the effect that sentence should be heard on this day, declares,
defines and decrees that the said John Wyclif was a notorious and obstinate heretic who died
in heresy, and it anathematises him and condemns his memory. It decrees and orders that his
body and bones are to be exhumed, if they can be identified among the corpses of the faithful,
and to be scattered far from a burial place of the church, in accordance with canonical and
lawful sanctions.

SESSION 9 – 13 May 1415

[Pope John is publicly summoned for the second time and an inquiry against him is decreed.]

SESSION 10 – 14 May 1415

[John XXIII is summoned for the third time, he is accused of contumacy and is suspended
from the papacy.]

SESSION 11 – 25 May 1415

[Pope John XXIII is publicly charged and forty-four articles against him are produced.]

285
SESSION 12 – 29 May 1415
[Decree stating that the process for electing a pope, if the see happens to be vacant, may not
begin without the council’s express consent [27 ] ]

This most holy general synod of Constance, representing the catholic church, legitimately
assembled in the holy Spirit, for the eradication of the present schism and errors, for bringing
about the reform of the church in head and members, and in order that the unity of the church
may be obtained more easily, quickly and freely, pronounces, determines, decrees and
ordains that if it happens that the apostolic see becomes vacant, by whatever means this may
happen, then the process of electing the next supreme pontiff may not begin without the
deliberation and consent of this sacred general council. If the contrary is done then it is by
this very fact, by the authority of the said sacred council, null and void. Nobody may accept
anyone elected to the papacy in defiance of this decree, nor in any way adhere to or obey him
as pope, under pain of eternal damnation and of becoming a supporter of the said schism.
Those who make the election in such a case, as well as the person elected, if he consents, and
those who adhere to him, are to be punished in the forms prescribed by this sacred council.
The said holy synod, moreover, for the good of the church’s unity, suspends all positive laws,
even those promulgated in general councils, and their statutes, ordinances, customs and
privileges, by whomsoever they may have been granted, and penalties promulgated against
any persons, insofar as these may in any way impede the effect of this decree.

[Sentence deposing pope John XXIII]

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit Amen. This
most holy general synod of Constance, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, having
invoked Christ’s name and holding God alone before its eyes, having seen the articles drawn
up and presented in this case against the lord pope John XXIII, the proofs brought forward,
his spontaneous submission and the whole process of the case, and having deliberated
maturely on them, pronounces, decrees and declares by this definitive sentence which it
commits to writing: that the departure of the aforesaid lord pope John XXIII from this city of
Constance and from this sacred general council, secretly and at a suspicious hour of the night,
in disguised and indecent dress, was and is unlawful, notoriously scandalous to God’s church
and to this council, disturbing and damaging for the church’s peace and unity, supportive of
this long-standing schism, and at variance with the vow, promise and oath made by the said
lord pope John to God, to the church and to this sacred council; that the said lord pope John
has been and is a notorious simoniac, a notorious destroyer of the goods and rights not only
of the Roman church but also of other churches and of many pious places, and an evil
administrator and dispenser of the church’s spiritualities and temporalities; that he has
notoriously scandalised God’s church and the christian people by his detestable and dishonest
life and morals, both before his promotion to the papacy and afterwards until the present
time, that by the above he has scandalised and is scandalising in a notorious fashion God’s
church and the christian people; that after due and charitable warnings, frequently reiterated
to him, he obstinately persevered in the aforesaid evils and thereby rendered himself

286
notoriously incorrigible; and that on account of the above and other crimes drawn from and
contained in the said process against him, he should be deprived of and deposed from, as an
unworthy, useless and damnable person, the papacy and all its spiritual and temporal
administration. The said holy synod does now remove, deprive and depose him. It declares
each and every Christian, of whatever state, dignity or condition, to be absolved from
obedience, fidelity and oaths to him. It forbids all Christians henceforth to recognise him as
pope, now that as mentioned he has been deposed from the papacy, or to call him pope, or to
adhere to or in any way to obey him as pope. The said holy synod, moreover, from certain
knowledge and its fullness of power, supplies for all and singular defects that may have
occurred in the above-mentioned procedures or in any one of them. It condemns the said
person, by this same sentence, to stay and remain in a good and suitable place, in the name of
this sacred general council, in the safe custody of the most serene prince lord Sigismund, king
of the Romans and of Hungary, etc., and most devoted advocate and defender of the universal
church, as long as it seems to the said general council to be for the good of the unity of God’s
church that he should be so condemned. The said council reserves the right to declare and
inflict other punishments that should be imposed for the said crimes and faults in accordance
with canonical sanctions, according as the rigour of justice or the counsel of mercy may
advise.

[Decree to the effect that none of the three contenders for the papacy may be re-elected as
pope]

The said holy synod decrees, determines and ordains for the good of unity in God’s church
that neither the lord Baldassare de Cossa, recently John XXIII, nor Angelo Correr nor Peter
de Luna, called Gregory XII and Benedict XIII by their respective obediences, shall ever be
re-elected as pope. If the contrary happens, it is by this very fact null and void. Nobody, of
whatever dignity or pre-eminence even if he be emperor, king, cardinal or pontiff, may ever
adhere to or obey them or any one of them, contrary to this decree, under pain of eternal
damnation and of being a supporter of the said schism. Let those who presume to the
contrary, if there are any in the future, also be firmly proceeded against in other ways, even
by invoking the secular arm. [28 ]
SESSION 13 – 15 June 1415

[Condemnation of communion under both kinds, recently revived among the Bohemians by
Jakoubek of Stribro]

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit, Amen. Certain
people, in some parts of the world, have rashly dared to assert that the christian people ought
to receive the holy sacrament of the eucharist under the forms of both bread and wine. They
communicate the laity everywhere not only under the form of bread but also under that of
wine, and they stubbornly assert that they should communicate even after a meal, or else
without the need of a fast, contrary to the church’s custom which has been laudably and
sensibly approved, from the church’s head downwards, but which they damnably try to
repudiate as sacrilegious. Therefore this present general council of Constance, legitimately

287
assembled in the holy Spirit, wishing to provide for the safety of the faithful against this
error, after long deliberation by many persons learned in divine and human law, declares,
decrees and defines that, although Christ instituted this venerable sacrament after a meal and
ministered it to his apostles under the forms of both bread and wine, nevertheless and
notwithstanding this, the praiseworthy authority of the sacred canons and the approved
custom of the church have and do retain that this sacrament ought not to be celebrated after a
meal nor received by the faithful without fasting, except in cases of sickness or some other
necessity as permitted by law or by the church. Moreover, just as this custom was sensibly
introduced in order to avoid various dangers and scandals, so with similar or even greater
reason was it possible to introduce and sensibly observe the custom that, although this
sacrament was received by the faithful under both kinds in the early church, nevertheless later
it was received under both kinds only by those confecting it, and by the laity only under the
form of bread. For it should be very firmly believed, and in no way doubted, that the whole
body and blood of Christ are truly contained under both the form of bread and the form of
wine. Therefore, since this custom was introduced for good reasons by the church and holy
fathers, and has been observed for a very long time, it should be held as a law which nobody
may repudiate or alter at will without the church’s permission. To say that the observance of
this custom or law is sacrilegious or illicit must be regarded as erroneous. Those who
stubbornly assert the opposite of the aforesaid are to be confined as heretics and severely
punished by the local bishops or their officials or the inquisitors of heresy in the kingdoms or
provinces in which anything is attempted or presumed against this decree, according to the
canonical and legitimate sanctions that have been wisely established in favour of the catholic
faith against heretics and their supporters.

[That no priest, under pain of excommunication, may communicate the people under the
forms of both bread and wine]

This holy synod also decrees and declares, regarding this matter, that instructions are to be
sent to the most reverend fathers and lords in Christ, patriarchs, primates, archbishops,
bishops, and their vicars in spirituals, wherever they may be, in which they are to be
commissioned and ordered on the authority of this sacred council and under pain of
excommunication, to punish effectively those who err against this decree. They may receive
back into the church’s fold those who have gone astray by communicating the people under
the forms of both bread and wine, and have taught this, provided they repent and after a
salutary penance, in accordance with the measure of their fault, has been enjoined upon them.
They are to repress as heretics, however, by means of the church’s censures and even if
necessary by calling in the help of the secular arm, those of them whose hearts have become
hardened and who are unwilling to return to penance.

==================================================================
========================

From this point on the council becomes a duly convened ecumenical council, all previous
sessions being ultra-vires.

288
SESSION 14 – 4 July 1415
[Uniting of the followers of XII and of the former pope John XXIII, now that both men
have abdicated]

In order that the reunion of the church may be possible and that a beginning may be made
which is fitting and pleasing to God, since the most important part of any matter is its
beginning, and in order that the two obediences–namely the one claiming that the lord John
XXIII was formerly pope and the other claiming that the lord Gregory XII is pope–may be
united together under Christ as head, this most holy general synod of Constance, legitimately
assembled in the holy Spirit and representing the catholic church, accepts in all matters the
convoking, authorising, approving and confirming that is now being made in the name of the
lord who is called Gregory XII by those obedient to him, insofar as it seems to pertain to him
to do this, since the certainty obtained by taking a precaution harms nobody and benefits all,
and it decrees and declares that the aforesaid two obediences are joined and united in the one
body of our lord Jesus Christ and of this sacred universal general council, in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit.

[Decree stating that the election of the Roman pontiff is to be made in the manner and form to
be laid down by the sacred council, and that the council shall not be dissolved until the
election of the next Roman pontiff has been made]

The most holy general synod of Constance, etc., enacts, pronounces, ordains and decrees, in
order that God’s holy church may be provided for better, more genuinely and more securely,
that the next election of the future Roman pontiff is to be made in the manner, form, place,
time and way that shall be decided upon by the sacred council; that the same council can and
may henceforth declare fit, accept and designate, in the manner and form that then seems
suitable, any persons for the purposes of this election, whether by active or by passive voice,
of whatever state or obedience they are or may have been, and any other ecclesiastical acts
and all other suitable things, notwithstanding any proceedings, penalties or sentences; and
that the sacred council shall not be dissolved until the said election has been held. The said
holy synod therefore exhorts and requires the most victorious prince lord Sigismund, king of
the Romans and of Hungary, as the church’s devoted advocate and as the sacred council’s
defender and protector, to direct all his efforts to this end and to promise on his royal word
that he wishes to do this and to order letters of his majesty to be made out for this purpose.

[The council approves Gregory XII’s resignation]

The most holy general synod of Constance, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit,
representing the universal catholic church, accepts, approves and commends, in the name of
the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit, the cession renunciation and resignation made on
behalf of the lord who was called Gregory XII in his obedience, by the magnificent and

289
powerful lord Charles Malatesta. here present, his irrevocable procurator for this business, of
the right, title and possession that he had, or may have had, in regard to the papacy. [30 ]

SESSION 15 – 6 July 1415

[Sentence condemning 260 articles Wyclif] [31 ]

The books and pamphlets of John Wyclif, of cursed memory, were carefully examined by the
doctors and masters of Oxford university. They collected 260 unacceptable articles from
these books and pamphlets and condemned them in scholastic form. This most holy general
synod of Constance, representing the catholic church, legitimately assembled in the holy
Spirit for the purpose of extirpating schism, errors and heresies, has had all these articles
examined many times by many most reverend fathers, cardinals of the Roman church,
bishops, abbots, masters of theology, doctors of both laws, and very many other notable
persons from various universities. It was found that some, indeed many, of the articles thus
examined were and are notoriously heretical and have already been condemned by holy
fathers, some are offensive to the ears of the devout and some are rash and seditious. This
holy synod, therefore, in the name of our lord Jesus Christ, repudiates and condemns, by this
perpetual decree, the aforesaid articles and each one of them in particular; and it forbids each
and every Catholic henceforth, under pain of anathema, to preach, teach, or hold the said
articles or any one of them. The said holy synod orders local ordinaries and inquisitors of
heresy to be vigilant in carrying out these things and duly observing them, insofar as each one
is responsible, in accordance with the law and canonical sanctions. Let anyone who rashly
violates the aforesaid decrees and sentences of this sacred council be punished, after due
warning, by the local ordinaries on the authority of this sacred council, notwithstanding any
privilege. [32 ]

[Articles of John Wyclif selected from the 260]

1. Just as Christ is God and man at the same time, so the consecrated host is at the same time
the body of Christ and true bread. For it is Christ’s body at least in figure and true bread in
nature; or, which comes to the same thing, it is true bread naturally and Christ’s body
figuratively.

2. Since heretical falsehood about the consecrated host is the most important point in
individual heresies, I therefore declare to modern heretics, in order that this falsehood may be
eradicated from the church, that they cannot explain or understand an accident without a
subject. And therefore all these heretical sects belong to the number of those who ignore the
fourth chapter of John: We worship what we know.

3. I boldly foretell to all these sects and their accomplices that even by the time Christ and all
the church triumphant come at the final judgment riding at the trumpet blast of the angel
Gabriel, they shall still not have proved to the faithful that the sacrament is an accident
without a subject.

290
4. Just as John was Elias in a figurative sense and not in person, so the bread on the altar is
Christ’s body in a figurative sense. And the words, This is my body, are unambiguously
figurative, just like the statement “John is Elias”.

5. The fruit of this madness whereby it is pretended that there can be an accident without a
subject is to blaspheme against God, to scandalise the saints and to deceive the church by
means of false doctrines about accidents.

6. Those who claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will
not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.

7. The slight and short confirmation by bishops, with whatever extra solemnised rites, was
introduced at the devil’s suggestion so that the people might be deluded in the church’s faith
and the solemnity and necessity of bishops might be believed in the more.

8. As for the oil with which bishops anoint boys and the linen cloth which goes around the
head, it seems that this is a trivial rite which is unfounded in scripture; and that this
confirmation, which was introduced after the apostles, blasphemes against God.

9. Oral confession to a priest, introduced by Innocent [33 ] , is not as necessary to people as

he claimed. For if anyone offends his brother in thought, word or deed, then it suffices to
repent in thought, word or deed.

10. It is a grave and unsupported practice for a priest to hear the confessions of the people in
the way that the Latins use.

11. In these words, You are clean, but not all are, the devil has laid a snare of the unfaithful
ones in order to catch the Christian’s foot. For he introduced private confession, which cannot
be justified, and after the person’s malice has been revealed to the confessor, as he decreed in
the law, it is not revealed to the people.

12. It is a probable conjecture that a person who lives rightly is a deacon or a priest. For just
as I infer that this person is John, so I recognise by a probable conjecture that this person, by
his holy life, has been placed by God in such an office or state.

13. The probable evidence for such a state is to be taken from proof provided by the person’s
deeds and not from the testimony of the person ordaining him. For God can place someone in
such a state without the need of an instrument of this kind, no matter whether the instrument
is worthy or unworthy. There is no more probable evidence than the person’s life. Therefore
if there is present a holy life and catholic doctrine, this suffices for the church militant. (Error
at the beginning and at the end.)

291
14. The bad life of a prelate means that his subjects do not receive orders and the other
sacraments. They can receive them from such persons, however, when there is urgent need, if
they devoutly beseech God to supply on behalf of his diabolical ministers the actions and
purpose of the office to which they have bound themselves by oath.

15. People of former times would copulate with each other out of desire for temporal gain or
for mutual help or to relieve concupiscence, even when they had no hope of offspring; for
they were truly copulating as married persons. [34 ]

16. The words, I will take you as wife, are more suitable for the marriage contract than, I take
you as wife. And the first words ought not to be annulled by the second words about the
present, when someone contracts with one wife in the words referring to the future and
afterwards with another wife in those referring to the present.

17. The pope, who falsely calls himself the servant of God’s servants, has no status in the
work of the gospel but only in the work of the world. If he has any rank, it is in the order of
demons, of those who serve God rather in a blameworthy way.

18. The pope does not dispense from simony or from a rash vow, since he is the chief
simoniac who rashly vows to preserve, to his damnation, his status here on the way. (Error at
the end.)

19. That the pope is supreme pontiff is ridiculous. Christ approved such a dignity neither in
Peter nor in anyone else.

20. The pope is antichrist made manifest. Not only this particular person but also the
multitude of popes, from the time of the endowment of the church, of cardinals, of bishops
and of their other accomplices, make up the composite, monstrous person of antichrist. This
is not altered by the fact that Gregory and other popes, who did many good and fruitful things
in their lives, finally repented.

21. Peter and Clement, together with the other helpers in the faith, were not popes but God’s
helpers in the work of building up the church of our lord Jesus Christ.

22. To say that papal pre-eminence originated with the faith of the gospel is as false as to say
that every error arose from the original truth.

23. There are twelve procurators and disciples of antichrist: the pope, cardinals, patriarchs,
archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, officials, deans, monks, canons with their two-peaked
hats, the recently introduced pseudo-friars, and pardoners.

24. It is clear that whoever is the humbler, of greater service to the church, and the more
fervent in Christ’s love towards his church, is the greater in the church militant and to be
reckoned the most immediate vicar of Christ.

292
25. Whoever holds any of God’s goods unjustly, is taking the things of others by rapine, theft
or robbery.

26. Neither the depositions of witnesses, nor a judge’s sentence, nor physical possession, nor
inheritance, nor an exchange between persons, nor a gift, nor all such things taken together,
confer dominion or a right to anything upon a person without grace. (An error, if it is
understood as referring to sanctifying grace.)

27. Unless the interior law of charity is present, nobody has more or less authority or
righteousness on account of charters or bulls. We ought not to lend or give anything to a
sinner so long as we know that he is such, for thus we would be assisting a traitor of our God.

28. Just as a prince or a lord does not keep the title of his office while he is in mortal sin,
except in name and equivocally, so it is with a pope, bishop or priest while he has fallen into
mortal sin.

29. Everyone habitually in mortal sin lacks dominion of any kind and the licit use of an
action, even if it be good in its kind.

30. It is known from the principles of the faith that a person in mortal sin, sins mortally in
every action.

31. In order to have true secular dominion, the lord must be in a state of righteousness.
Therefore nobody in mortal sin is lord of anything.

32. All modern religious necessarily become marked as hypocrites. For their profession
demands that they fast, act and clothe themselves in a particular way, and thus they observe
everything differently from other people.

33. All private religion as such savours of imperfection and sin whereby a person is
indisposed to serve God freely.

34. A private religious order or rule savours of a blasphemous and arrogant presumption
towards God. And the religious of such orders dare to exalt themselves above the apostles by
the hypocrisy of defending their religion.

35. Christ does not teach in scripture about any kind of religious order in antichrist’s chapter.
Therefore it is not his good pleasure that there should be such orders. The chapter is
composed, however, of the following twelve types: the pope, cardinals, patriarchs,
archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, officials, deans, monks, canons, friars of the four orders,
and pardoners.

293
36. I infer as evident from the faith and works of the four sects–which are the caesarean
clergy, the various monks, the various canons, and the friars-that nobody belonging to them is
a member of Christ in the catalogue of the saints, unless he forsakes in the end the sect which
he stupidly embraced.

37. Paul was once a pharisee but abandoned the sect for the better sect of Christ, with his
permission. This is the reason why cloistered persons, of whatever sect or rule, or by
whatever stupid vow they may be bound, ought freely to cast off these chains, at Christ’s
command, and freely join the sect of Christ.

38. It is sufficient for the laity that at some times they give tithes of their produce to God’s
servants. In this way they are always giving to the church, even if not always to the caesarean
clergy deputed by the pope or by his dependents.

39. The powers that are claimed by the pope and the other four new sects are pretended and
were diabolically introduced in order to seduce subjects; such are excommunications by
caesarean prelates, citations, imprisoning, and the sale of money rents.

40. Many simple priests surpass prelates in such power. Indeed, it appears to the faithful that
greatness of spiritual power belongs more to a son who imitates Christ in his way of life than
to a prelate who has been elected by cardinals and similar apostates.

41. The people may withhold tithes, offerings and other private alms from unworthy disciples
of Christ, since God’s law requires this. The curse or censure imposed by antichrist’s
disciples is not to be feared but rather is to be received with joy. The lord pope and bishops
and all religious or simple clerics, with titles to perpetual possession, ought to renounce them
into the hands of the secular arm. If they stubbornly refuse, they ought to be compelled to do
so by the secular lords.

42. There is no greater heretic or antichrist than the cleric who teaches that it is lawful for
priests and levites of the law of grace to be endowed with temporal possessions. The clerics
who teach this are heretics or blasphemers if ever there were any.

43. Temporal lords not only can take away goods of fortune from a church that is habitually
sinning, nor is it only lawful for them to do so, but indeed they are obliged to do so under
pain of eternal damnation.

44. God does not approve that anyone be judged or condemned by civil law.

45. If an objection is made against those who oppose endowments for the church, by pointing
to Benedict, Gregory and Bernard, who possessed few temporal goods in poverty, it may be
said in reply that they repented at the end. If you object further that I merely pretend that

294
these saints finally repented of their falling away from God’s law in this way, then you may
teach that they are saints and I will teach that they repented at the end.

46. If we ought to believe in sacred scripture and in reason, it is clear that Christ’s disciples
do not have the authority to exact temporal goods by means of censures, and those who
attempt this are sons of Eli and of Belial.

47. Each essence has one suppositum, following which another suppositum, equal to the first,
is produced. This is the most perfect immanent action possible to nature.

48. Each essence, whether corporeal or incorporeal, is common to three supposita; and the
properties, the accidents and the operations inhere in common in all of them.

49. God cannot annihilate anything, nor increase or diminish the world, but he can create
souls up to a certain number, and not beyond it.

50. It is impossible for two corporeal substances to be co-extensive, the one continuously at
rest in a place and the other continuously penetrating the body of Christ at rest.

51. Any continuous mathematical line is composed of two, three or four contiguous points, or
of only a simply finite number of points; and time is, was and will be composed of
contiguous instants. It is not possible that time and a line, if they exist, are composed of in
this way. (The first part is a philosophical error, the last part is an error with regard to God’s
power.)

52. It must be supposed that one corporeal substance was formed at its beginning as
composed of indivisibles, and that it occupies every possible place.

53. Every person is God.

54. Every creature is God.

55. Every being is everywhere, since every being is God.

56. All things that happen, happen from absolute necessity.

57. A baptised child foreknown as damned will necessarily live long enough to sin in the holy
Spirit, wherefore it will merit to be condemned for ever. Thus no fire can burn the child until
that time or instant.

58. I assert as a matter of faith that everything that will happen, will happen of necessity.
Thus if Paul is foreknown as damned, he cannot truly repent; that is, he cannot cancel the sin
of final impenitence by contrition, or be under the obligation not to have the sin.

295
[Sentence against John Hus]

The most holy general council of Constance, divinely assembled and representing the
catholic church, for an everlasting record. Since a bad tree is wont to bear bad fruit, as truth
itself testifies, so it is that John Wyclif, of cursed memory, by his deadly teaching, like a
poisonous root, has brought forth many noxious sons, not in Christ Jesus through the gospel,
as once the holy fathers brought forth faithful sons, but rather contrary to the saving faith of
Christ, and he has left these sons as successors to his perverse teaching. This holy synod of
Constance is compelled to act against these men as against spurious and illegitimate sons, and
to cut away their errors from the Lord’s field as if they were harmful briars, by means of
vigilant care and the knife of ecclesiastical authority, lest they spread as a cancer to destroy
others. Although, therefore, it was decreed at the sacred general council recently held at
Rome [35 ] that the teaching of John Wyclif, of cursed memory, should be condemned and
the books of his containing this teaching should be burnt as heretical; although his teaching
was in fact condemned and his books burnt as containing false and dangerous doctrine; and
although a decree of this kind was approved by the authority of this present sacred council
[36 ] ; nevertheless a certain John Hus, here present in person at this sacred council, who is a
disciple not of Christ but rather of the heresiarch John Wyclif, boldly and rashly contravening
the condemnation and the decree after their enactment, has taught, asserted and preached
many errors and heresies of John Wyclif which have been condemned both by God’s church
and by other reverend fathers in Christ, lord archbishops and bishops of various kingdoms,
and masters in theology at many places of study. He has done this especially by publicly
resisting in the schools and in sermons, together with his accomplices, the condemnation in
scholastic form of the said articles of John Wyclif which has been made many times at the
university of Prague, and he has declared the said John Wyclif to be a catholic man and an
evangelical doctor, thus supporting his teaching, before a multitude of clergy and people. He
has asserted and published certain articles listed below and many others, which are
condemned and which are, as is well known, contained in the books and pamphlets of the
said John Hus. Full information has been obtained about the aforesaid matters, and there has
been careful deliberation by the most reverend fathers in Christ, lord cardinals of the holy
Roman church, patriarchs archbishops, bishops and other prelates and doctors of holy
scripture and of both laws, in large numbers. This most holy synod of Constance therefore
declares and defines that the articles listed below, which have been found on examination, by
many masters in sacred scripture, to be contained in his books and pamphlets written in his
own hand, and which the same John Hus at a public hearing, before the fathers and prelates
of this sacred council, has confessed to be contained in his books and pamphlets, are not
catholic and should not be taught to be such but rather many of them are erroneous, others
scandalous, others offensive to the ears of the devout, many of them are rash and seditious,
and some of them are notoriously heretical and have long ago been rejected and condemned
by holy fathers and by general councils, and it strictly forbids them to be preached, taught or
in any way approved. Moreover, since the articles listed below are explicitly contained in his
books or treatises, namely in the book entitled De ecclesia and in his other pamphlets, this
most holy synod therefore reproves and condemns the aforesaid books and his teaching, as
well as the other treatises and pamphlets written by him in Latin or in Czech, or translated by

296
one or more other persons into any other language, and it decrees and determines that they
should be publicly and solemnly burnt in the presence of the clergy and people in the city of
Constance and elsewhere. On account of the above, moreover, all his teaching is and shall be
deservedly suspect regarding the faith and is to be avoided by all of Christ’s faithful. In order
that this pernicious teaching may be eliminated from the midst of the church, this holy synod
also orders that local ordinaries make careful inquiry about treatises and pamphlets of this
kind, using the church’s censures and even if necessary the punishment due for supporting
heresy, and that they be publicly burnt when they have been found. This same holy synod
decrees that local ordinaries and inquisitors of heresy are to proceed against any who violate
or defy this sentence and decree as if they were persons suspected of heresy.

[Sentence of degradation against J. Hus]

Moreover, the acts and deliberations of the inquiry into heresy against the aforesaid John Hus
have been examined. There was first a faithful and full account made by the commissioners
deputed for the case and by other masters of theology and doctors of both laws, concerning
the acts and deliberations and the depositions of very many trustworthy witnesses. These
depositions were openly and publicly read out to the said John Hus before the fathers and
prelates of this sacred council. It is very clearly established from the depositions of these
witnesses that the said John has taught many evil, scandalous and seditious things, and
dangerous heresies, and has publicly preached them during many years. This most holy synod
of Constance, invoking Christ’s name and having God alone before its eyes, therefore
pronounces, decrees and defines by this definitive sentence, which is here written down, that
the said John Hus was and is a true and manifest heretic and has taught and publicly
preached, to the great offence of the divine Majesty, to the scandal of the universal church
and to the detriment of the catholic faith, errors and heresies that have long ago been
condemned by God’s church and many things that are scandalous, offensive to the ears of the
devout, rash and seditious, and that he has even despised the keys of the church and
ecclesiastical censures. He has persisted in these things for many years with a hardened heart.
He has greatly scandalised Christ’s faithful by his obstinacy since, bypassing the church’s
intermediaries, he has made appeal directly to our lord Jesus Christ, as to the supreme judge,
in which he has introduced many false, harmful and scandalous things to the contempt of the
apostolic see, ecclesiastical censures and the keys. This holy synod therefore pronounces the
said John Hus, on account of the aforesaid and many other matters, to have been a heretic and
it judges him to be considered and condemned as a heretic, and it hereby condemns him. It
rejects the said appeal of his as harmful and scandalous and offensive to the church’s
jurisdiction. It declares that the said John Hus seduced the christian people, especially in the
kingdom of Bohemia, in his public sermons and in his writings; and that he was not a true
preacher of Christ’s gospel to the same christian people, according to the exposition of the
holy doctors, but rather was a seducer. Since this most holy synod has learnt from what it has
seen and heard, that the said John Hus is obstinate and incorrigible and as such does not
desire to return to the bosom of holy mother the church, and is unwilling to abjure the
heresies and errors which he has publicly defended and preached, this holy synod of
Constance therefore declares and decrees that the same John Hus is to be deposed and

297
degraded from the order of the priesthood and from the other orders held by him. It charges
the reverend fathers in Christ, the archbishop of Milan and the bishops of Feltre Asti,
Alessandria, Bangor and Lavour with duly carrying out the degradation in the presence of
this most holy synod, in accordance with the procedure required by law.

[Sentence condemning J. Hus to the stake]

This holy synod of Constance, seeing that God’s church has nothing more that it can do,
relinquishes John Hus to the judgment of the secular authority and decrees that he is to be
relinquished to the secular court.

[Condemned articles of J. Hus]

1. There is only one holy universal church, which is the total number of those predestined to
salvation. It therefore follows that the universal holy church is only one, inasmuch as there is
only one number of all those who are predestined to salvation.

2. Paul was never a member of the devil, even though he did certain acts which are similar to
the acts of the church’s enemies.

3. Those foreknown as damned are not parts of the church, for no part of the church can
finally fall away from it, since the predestinating love that binds the church together does not
fail.

4. The two natures, the divinity and the humanity, are one Christ.

5. A person foreknown to damnation is never part of the holy church, even if he is in a state
of grace according to present justice; a person predestined to salvation always remains a
member of the church, even though he may fall away for a time from adventitious grace, for
he keeps the grace of predestination.

6. The church is an article of faith in the following sense: to regard it as the convocation of
those predestined to salvation, whether or not it be in a state of grace according to present
justice.

7. Peter neither was nor is the head of the holy catholic church.

8. Priests who live in vice in any way pollute the power of the priesthood, and like unfaithful
sons are untrustworthy in their thinking about the church’s seven sacraments, about the keys,
offices, censures, customs, ceremonies and sacred things of the church, about the veneration
of relics, and about indulgences and orders.

9. The papal dignity originated with the emperor, and the primacy and institution of the pope
emanated from imperial power.

298
10. Nobody would reasonably assert of himself or of another, without revelation, that he was
the head of a particular holy church; nor is the Roman pontiff the head of the Roman church.

11. It is not necessary to believe that any particular Roman pontiff is the head of any
particular holy church, unless God has predestined him to salvation.

12. Nobody holds the place of Christ or of Peter unless he follows his way of life, since there
is no other discipleship that is more appropriate nor is there another way to receive delegated
power from God, since there is required for this office of vicar a similar way of life as well as
the authority of the one instituting.

13. The pope is not the manifest and true successor of the prince of the apostles, Peter, if he
lives in a way contrary to Peter’s. If he seeks avarice, he is the vicar of Judas Iscariot.
Likewise, cardinals are not the manifest and true successors of the college of Christ’s other
apostles unless they live after the manner of the apostles, keeping the commandments and
counsels of our lord Jesus Christ.

14. Doctors who state that anybody subjected to ecclesiastical censure, if he refuses to be
corrected, should be handed over to the judgment of the secular authority, are undoubtedly
following in this the chief priests, the scribes and the pharisees who handed over to the
secular authority Christ himself, since he was unwilling to obey them in all things, saying, It
is not lawful for us to put any man to death; these gave him to the civil judge, so that such
men are even greater murderers than Pilate.

15. Ecclesiastical obedience was invented by the church’s priests, without the express
authority of scripture.

16. The immediate division of human actions is between those that are virtuous and those that
are wicked. Therefore, if a man is wicked and does something, he acts wickedly; if he is
virtuous and does something, he acts virtuously. For just as wickedness, which is called crime
or mortal sin, infects all the acts of a wicked man, so virtue gives life to all the acts of a
virtuous man.

17. A priest of Christ who lives according to his law, knows scripture and has a desire to
edify the people, ought to preach, notwithstanding a pretended excommunication. And further
on: if the pope or any superior orders a priest so disposed not to preach, the subordinate ought
not to obey.

18. Whoever enters the priesthood receives a binding duty to preach; and this mandate ought
to be carried out, notwithstanding a pretended excommunication.

19. By the church’s censures of excommunication, suspension and interdict the clergy subdue
the laity, for the sake of their own exaltation, multiply avarice protect wickedness and prepare

299
the way for antichrist. The clear sign of this is the fact that these censures come from
antichrist. In the legal proceedings of the clergy they are called fulminations, which are the
principal means whereby the clergy proceed against those who uncover antichrist’s
wickedness, which the clergy has for the most part usurped for itself.

20. If the pope is wicked, and especially if he is foreknown to damnation, then he is a devil
like Judas the apostle, a thief and a son of perdition and is not the head of the holy church
militant since he is not even a member of it.

21. The grace of predestination is the bond whereby the body of the church and each of its
members is indissolubly joined with the head.

22. The pope or a prelate who is wicked and foreknown to damnation is a pastor only in an
equivocal sense, and truly is a thief and a robber.

23. The pope ought not to be called “most holy” even by reason of his office, for otherwise
even a king ought to be called “most holy” by reason of his office and executioners and
heralds ought to be called “holy”, indeed even the devil would be called “holy” since he is an
official of God.

24. If a pope lives contrary to Christ, even if he has risen through a right and legitimate
election according to the established human constitution, he would have risen by a way other
than through Christ, even granted that he entered upon office by an election that had been
made principally by God. For, Judas Iscariot was rightly and legitimately elected to be an
apostle by Jesus Christ who is God, yet he climbed into the sheepfold by another way.

25. The condemnation of the forty-five articles of John Wyclif, decreed by the doctors, is
irrational and unjust and badly done and the reason alleged by them is feigned, namely that
none of them is catholic but each one is either heretical or erroneous or scandalous.

26. The viva voce agreement upon some person, made according to human custom by the
electors or by the greater part of them, does not mean by itself that the person has been
legitimately elected or that by this very fact he is the true and manifest successor or vicar of
the apostle Peter or of another apostle in an ecclesiastical office. For, it is to the works of the
one elected that we should look irrespective of whether the manner of the election was good
or bad. For, the more plentifully a person acts meritoriously towards building up the church,
the more copiously does he thereby have power from God for this.

27. There is not the least proof that there must be one head ruling the church in spiritual
matters who always lives with the church militant.

28. Christ would govern his church better by his true disciples scattered throughout the world,
without these monstrous heads.

300
29. The apostles and faithful priests of the Lord strenuously governed the church in matters
necessary for salvation before the office of pope was introduced, and they would continue to
do this until the day of judgment if–which is very possible–there is no pope.

30. Nobody is a civil lord, a prelate or a bishop while he is in mortal sin.

[Sentence condemning John Petit’s proposition, “Any tyrant-‘]

This most holy synod wishes to proceed with special care to the eradication of errors and
heresies which are growing in various parts of the world, as is its duty and the purpose for
which it has assembled. It has recently learnt that various propositions have been taught that
are erroneous both in the faith and as regards good morals, are scandalous in many ways and
threaten to subvert the constitution and order of every state. Among these propositions this
one has been reported: Any tyrant can and ought to be killed, licitly and meritoriously, by any
of his vassals or subjects, even by means of plots and blandishments or flattery,
notwithstanding any oath taken, or treaty made with the tyrant, and without waiting for a
sentence or a command from any judge. This holy synod, wishing to oppose this error and to
eradicate it completely, declares, decrees and defines, after mature deliberation, that this
doctrine is erroneous in the faith and with regard to morals, and it rejects and condemns the
doctrine as heretical, scandalous and seditious and as leading the way through perjury to
frauds, deceptions, lies and betrayals. It declares, decrees and defines, moreover, that those
who stubbornly assert this very pernicious doctrine are heretics and are to be punished as
such according to canonical and legitimate sanctions. [37 ]

SESSION 16 – 11 July 1415

[Deliberation about the council’s legates due to depart with the emperor Sigismund for Spain;
minor deliberations about the conduct of the council’s business.]

SESSION 17 – 15 July 1415

[The emperor’s imminent departure from the council is treated of; the council offers prayers
for his success.]

SESSION 18 – 17 August 1415

[Decrees about various matters to be decided by the council: power is given to judges to
make decisions, and for pairs of them to hear cases; that bulls of the council are to be obeyed;
that forgers of conciliar bulls are to be punished in the same way as forgers of apostolic
letters; that letters are to be despatched regarding the graces granted by the former pope John,
except expectative and exceptional graces; ambassadors to Italy are appointed.]

301
SESSION 19 – 23 September 1415

[Jerome of Prague finally abjures his faith publicly and solemnly. There is promulgated at
this session an Ordinance between the friars Minor of the strict observance and others of the
common life, to put an end to the discords which have arisen in certain provinces; another
Ordinance by which cases of heresy are committed to certain judges. It is also decreed that,
notwithstanding safe conducts of emperors and kings and others, a competent judge can
inquire into heresy; that the lord vice-chancellor shall expedite the Caroline constitution [38 ]
under a bull of the council; that those with benefices who are attending the council shall
receive the fruits of their benefices in their absence, that the letters regarding provisions to
patriarchal, metropolitan and other churches, which were granted by the former pope John
before his suspension, shall be despatched.]

SESSION 20 – 21 November 1415

[A warning is decreed against the duke of Austria, on behalf of the bishop of Trent.]

SESSION 21 – 30 May 1416

[Sentence condemning Jerome of Prague]

In the name of the Lord, Amen. Christ our God and saviour, the true vine whose Father is the
vine-dresser, said when teaching his disciples and other followers in these matters: If anyone
does not abide in me, he shall be cast forth as a branch and shall wither. This holy synod of
Constance is following the teaching and carrying out the commands of this sovereign teacher
and master in this case of inquiry into heresy which was started by the same holy synod. It
notes the public talk and loud outcry against the said master Jerome of Prague, master of arts,
layman. From the acts and proceedings of the case it is evident that the said Jerome has held,
asserted and taught various heretical and erroneous articles, which were long ago condemned
by holy fathers, some of which are blasphemous, others scandalous and others offensive to
the ears of the devout as well as rash and seditious. They were long ago asserted, preached
and taught by John Wyclif and John Hus, of cursed memory, and were included in various of
their books and pamphlets. These articles, doctrines and books of the aforesaid John Wyclif
and John Hus, as well as the memory of Wyclif, and finally the person of Hus, were
condemned and damned by this same holy synod and its sentence of heresy. The said Jerome
later, during the course of this inquiry, in this holy synod, approved and consented to this
sentence of condemnation and acknowledged and professed the true, catholic and apostolic
faith. He anathematised all heresy, especially that for which he had been defamed-and he
confessed himself defamed–and which John Wyclif and John Hus had taught and held in the
past in their works, sermons and pamphlets, and on account of which the said Wyclif and
Hus, together with their dogmas and errors, had been condemned as heretical by this same

302
holy synod, and their teaching likewise condemned. He professed acceptance of every
condemnation of the aforesaid things and swore that he would remain in the truth of the faith,
and that if he ever dared to think or preach anything to the contrary then he wished to submit
to the severity of canon law and to be bound to eternal punishment. He offered and gave this
profession of his, written in his own hand to this holy synod. Many days after his profession
and abjuration, however, like a dog returning to its vomit, he asked for a public hearing to be
granted to him in this same holy synod, in order that he might vomit forth in public the
deadly poison which lay hidden within his breast. The hearing was granted to him and he
asserted, said and professed in effect, at a public assembly of the same synod, that he had
wrongly consented to the aforesaid sentence condemning the said Wyclif and John Hus and
that he had lied in approving the sentence. He did not fear to state that he had lied. Indeed, he
revoked now and for eternity his confession, approval and profession regarding the
condemnation of the two men. He asserted that he had never read any heresy or error in the
books of the said Wyclif and John Hus, even though it was clearly proved, before his
profession to the sentence on the two men, that he had carefully studied, read and taught their
books and it is clear that many errors and heresies are contained in them. The said Jerome
professed, however, that he held and believed what the church holds and believes regarding
the sacrament of the altar and the transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ,
saying that he believed in Augustine and the other doctors of the church more than in Wyclif
and Hus. It is evident from the above that the said Jerome adhered to the condemned Wyclif
and Hus and their errors, and that he was and is a supporter of them. This holy synod has
therefore decreed and now declares that the said Jerome is to be cast away as a branch that is
rotten, withered and separated from the vine; and it pronounces, declares and condemns him
as a heretic who has relapsed into heresy and as an excommunicated and anathematised
person.

SESSION 22 – 15 October 1416

[The treaty of Narbonne, between the king of Aragon, the emperor and the envoys of the
council, is confirmed [39 ] : the king of Aragon withdraws obedience from Benedict XIII and
recognises the council of Constance through his envoys.]

SESSION 23 – 5 November 1416

[Beginning of the process against Peter de Luna, called Benedict XIII in his obedience.]

SESSION 24 – 28 November 1416

[A citation against Peter de Luna, called Benedict XIII in his obedience, is decreed.]

SESSION 25 – 14 December 1416

[The envoys of the Spanish count of Foix are united with the council in
accordance with the terms of the treaty of Narbonne.]

303
SESSION 26 – 24 December 1416
[The envoys of the king of Navarre are united with the council in accordance
with the terms of the treaty of Narbonne.]

SESSION 27 – 20 February 1417

[The dispute between Frederick, duke of Austria, and the bishop of Trent is discussed: a
report is made on the carrying out of the warning decreed in session 20.]

SESSION 28 – 3 March 1417

[The Trent dispute is concluded: Frederick, duke of Austria, is condemned.]

I The articles of Narbonne concerning the unity of the church, which were agreed between
the emperor Sigismund and the envoys of the council of Constance on the one side, and the
envoys of the kings and princes of Benedict XIII’s obedience on the other side, were
published by the council in a general assembly on 13 December 1415 (see Hardt 4,584). They
are printed in Hardt 2, 542-554.

SESSION 29 – 8 March 1417

[Peter de Luna is accused of contumacy.]

SESSION 30 – 10 March 1417

[The process against Peter de Luna continues.]

SESSION 31 – 31 March 1417

[A warning is decreed against Philip, count of Vertus, at the request of the bishop of Asti.
Other minor deliberations take place.]

SESSION 32 – 1 April 1417

[Peter de Luna is again accused of contumacy and an inquiry about him is established.]

SESSION 33 – 12 May 1417

[The process against Peter de Luna, who is deemed contumacious, continues.]

SESSION 34 – 5 June 1417

304
[Everything is made ready for the condemnation of Peter de Luna.]

SESSION 35 – 18 June 1417

[The envoys of the king of Castile are united with the council in accordance with the terms of
the treaty of Narbonne.]

SESSION 36 – 22 July 1417

[It is decreed that Peter de Luna is to be cited to hear the council’s sentence.]

SESSION 37 – 26 July 1417

[Definitive sentence whereby Peter de Luna, pope Benedict XIII, is divested of the papacy
and deprived of the faith.]

May this judgment come forth from the face of him who sits on the throne, and from his
mouth proceeds a double-edged sword, whose scales are just and weights are true, who will
come to judge the living and the dead, our lord Jesus Christ, Amen. The Lord is just and
loves just deeds, his face looks on righteousness. But the Lord looks on those who do evil so
as to cut off their remembrance from the earth. Let there perish, says the holy prophet, the
memory of him who did not remember to show mercy and who persecuted the poor and
needy. How much more should there perish the memory of Peter de Luna, called by some
Benedict XIII, who persecuted and disturbed all people and the universal church? For, how
greatly he has sinned against God’s church and the entire christian people, fostering,
nourishing and continuing the schism and division of God’s church How ardent and frequent
have been the devout and humble prayers, exhortations and requests of kings, princes and
prelates with which he has been warned in charity, in accordance with the teaching of the
gospel, to bring peace to the church, to heal its wounds and to reconstitute its divided parts
into one structure and one body, as he had sworn to do, and as for a long time it was within
his power to do ! He was unwilling, however, to listen to their charitable admonitions. How
many were the persons afterwards sent to attest to him! Because he did not listen at all even
to these, it has been necessary, in accordance with the aforesaid evangelical teaching of
Christ, to say to the church, since he has not listened even to her, that he should be treated as
a heathen and a publican. All these things have been clearly proved by the articles coming
from the inquiry into faith and the schism held before this present synod, regarding the above
and other matters brought against him, as well as by their truth and notoriety. The
proceedings have been correct and canonical, all the acts have been correctly and carefully
examined and there has been mature deliberation. Therefore this same holy general synod,
representing the universal church and sitting as a tribunal in the aforesaid inquiry,
pronounces, decrees and declares by this definitive sentence written here, that the same Peter
de Luna, called Benedict XIII as has been said, has been and is a perjurer, a cause of scandal
to the universal church, a promoter and breeder of the ancient schism, that long established
fission and division in God’s holy church, an obstructer of the peace and unity of the said

305
church, a schismatic disturber and a heretic, a deviator from the faith, a persistent violator of
the article of the faith One holy catholic church, incorrigible, notorious and manifest in his
scandal to God’s church, and that he has rendered himself unworthy of every title, rank,
honour and dignity, rejected and cut off by God, deprived by the law itself of every right in
any way belonging to him in the papacy or pertaining to the Roman pontiff and the Roman
church, and cut off from the catholic church like a withered member. This same holy synod,
moreover, as a precautionary measure, since according to himself he actually holds the
papacy, deprives, deposes and casts out the said Peter from the papacy and from being the
supreme pontiff of the Roman church and from every title, rank, honour, dignity, benefice
and office whatsoever. It forbids him to act henceforth as the pope or as the supreme and
Roman pontiff. It absolves and declares to be absolved all Christ’s faithful from obedience to
him, and from every duty of obedience to him and from oaths and obligations in any way
made to him. It forbids each and every one of Christ’s faithful to obey, respond to or attend
to, as if he were pope, the said Peter de Luna, who is a notorious, declared and deposed
schismatic and incorrigible heretic, or to sustain or harbour him in any way contrary to the
aforesaid, or to offer him help, advice or good will. This is forbidden under pain of the
offender being counted as a promoter of schism and heresy and of being deprived of all
benefices, dignities and ecclesiastical or secular honours, and under other penalties of the
law, even if the dignity is that of a bishop, a patriarch, a cardinal, a king or the emperor. If
they act contrary to this prohibition, they are by this very fact deprived of these things, on the
authority of this decree and sentence, and they incur the other penalties of the law. This holy
synod, moreover, declares and decrees that all and singular prohibitions and all processes,
sentences, constitu- tions, censures and any other things whatsoever that were issued by him
and might impede the aforesaid, are without effect; and it invalidates, revokes and annuls
them; saving always the other penalties which the law decrees for the above cases.

SESSION 38 – 28 July 1417

[Decree about the right to vote of the deputies of the kings of Castile and Aragon, concerning
which agreement had not been reached among the said deputies in the previous session;
decrees about other lesser matters.]

SESSION 39 – 9 October 1417

[On general councils]

The frequent holding of general councils is a pre-eminent means of cultivating the Lord’s
patrimony. It roots out the briars, thorns and thistles of heresies, errors and schisms, corrects

306
deviations, reforms what is deformed and produces a richly fertile crop for the Lord’s
vineyard. Neglect of councils, on the other hand, spreads and fosters the aforesaid evils. This
conclusion is brought before our eyes by the memory of past times and reflection on the
present situation. For this reason we establish, enact, decree and ordain, by a perpetual edict,
that general councils shall be held henceforth in the following way. The first shall follow in
five years immediately after the end of this council, the second in seven years immediately
after the end of the next council, and thereafter they are to be held every ten years for ever.
They are to be held in places which the supreme pontiff is bound to nominate and assign
within a month before the end of each preceding council, with the approval and consent of
the council, or which, in his default, the council itself is bound to nominate. Thus, by a
certain continuity, there will always be either a council in existence or one expected within a
given time. If perchance emergencies arise, the time may be shortened by the supreme
pontiff, acting on the advice of his brothers, the cardinals of the Roman church, but it may
never be prolonged. Moreover, he may not change the place assigned for the next council
without evident necessity. If an emergency arises whereby it seems necessary to change the
place–for example in the case of a siege, war, disease or the like–then the supreme pontiff
may, with the consent and written endorsement of his aforesaid brothers or of two-thirds of
them, substitute another place which is suitable and fairly near to the place previously
assigned. It must, however, be within the same nation unless the same or a similar
impediment exists throughout the nation. In the latter case he may summon the council to
another suitable place which is nearby but within another nation, and the prelates and other
persons who are customarily summoned to a council will be obliged to come to it as if it had
been the place originally assigned. The supreme pontiff is bound to announce and publish the
change of place or the shortening of time in a legal and solemn form within a year before the
date assigned, so that the aforesaid persons may be able to meet and hold the council at the
appointed time.

[Provision to guard against future schisms]

If it happens–though may it not!–that a schism arises in the future in such a way that two or
more persons claim to be supreme pontiffs, then the date of the council, if it is more than a
year off, is to be brought forward to one year ahead; calculating this from the day on which
two or more of them publicly assumed the insignia of their pontificates or on which they
began to govern. All prelates and others who are bound to attend a council shall assemble at
the council without the need for any summons, under pain of the law’s sanctions and of other
penalties which may be imposed by the council, and let the emperor and other kings and
princes attend either in person or through official deputies, as if they had been besought,
through the bowels of the mercy of our lord Jesus Christ, to put out a common fire. Each of
those claiming to be the Roman pontiff is bound to announce and proclaim the council as
taking place at the end of the year, as mentioned, in the previously assigned place; he is
bound to do this within a month after the day on which he came to know that one or more
other persons had assumed the insignia of the papacy or was administering the papacy; and
this is under pain of eternal damnation, of the automatic loss of any rights that he had
acquired in the papacy, and of being disqualified both actively and passively from all

307
dignities. He is also bound to make the council known by letter to his rival claimant or
claimants, challenging him or them to a judicial process, as well as to all prelates and princes,
insofar as this is possible. He shall go in person to the place of the council at the appointed
time, under pain of the aforesaid penalties, and shall not depart until the question of the
schism has been fully settled by the council. None of the contenders for the papacy, moreover
shall preside as pope at the council. Indeed, in order that the church may rejoice more freely
and quickly in one undisputed pastor, all the contenders for the papacy are suspended by law
as soon as the council has begun, on the authority of this holy synod, from all administration;
and let not obedience be given in any way by anyone to them, or to any one of them until the
question has been settled by the council.

If it happens in the future that the election of a Roman pontiff is brought about through fear,
which would weigh upon even a steadfast man, or through pressure, then we declare that it is
of no effect or moment and cannot be ratified or approved by subsequent consent even if the
state of fear ceases. The cardinals, however, may not proceed to another election until a
council has reached a decision about the election, unless the person elected resigns or dies. If
they do proceed to this second election, then it is null by law and both those making the
second election and the person elected, if he embarks upon his reign as pope, are deprived by
law of every dignity, honour and rank–even cardinalatial or pontifical–and are thereafter
ineligible for the same, even the papacy itself; and nobody may in any way obey as pope the
second person elected, under pain of being a fosterer of schism. In such a case the council is
to provide for the election of a pope. It is lawful, however, and indeed all the electors are
bound, or at least the greater part of them, to move to a safe locality and to make a statement
about the said fear. The statement is to be made in a prominent place before public notaries
and important persons as well as before a multitude of the people. They are to do this as
quickly as they can without danger to their persons, even if there is a threat of danger to all
their goods. They shall state in their allegation the nature and extent of the fear and shall
solemnly swear that the allegation is true that they believe they can prove it and that they are
not making it out of malice or calumny. Such an allegation of fear cannot be delayed in any
way until after the next council.

After they have moved and have alleged the fear in the above form, they are bound to
summon the person elected to a council. If a council is not due for more than a year after their
summons, then its date shall be brought forward by the law itself to only a year ahead, in the
way explained above. The elected person is bound under pain of the aforesaid penalties, and
the cardinals under pain of automatically losing the cardinalate and all their benefices, to
announce and proclaim the council within a month after the summons, in the way mentioned
above, and to make it known as soon as possible. The cardinals and other electors are bound
to come in person to the place of the council, at a suitable time, and to remain there until the
end of the affair.

The other prelates are bound to answer the cardinals’ summons, as mentioned above, if the
person elected fails to issue a summons. The latter will not preside at the council since he will
have been suspended by law from all government of the papacy from the time the council

308
begins, and he is not to be obeyed by anyone in any matter under pain of the offender
becoming a promoter of schism. If the aforesaid emergencies arise within a year before the
beginning of a council-namely that more than one person claim to be pope or that someone
has been elected through fear or pressure–then those who claim to be pope, or the one elected
through fear or pressure, as well as the cardinals, are deemed by law as having been
summoned to the council. They are bound, moreover, to appear in person at the council, to
explain their case and to await the council’s judgment. But if some emergency happens
during the above occurrences whereby it is necessary to change the place of the council–for
example a siege or war or disease or some such–then nevertheless all the aforesaid persons,
as well as all prelates and others who are obliged to attend a council, are bound to assemble at
a neighbouring place suitable for the council, as has been said above. Moreover, the greater
part of the prelates who have moved to a particular place within a month may specify it as the
place of the council to which they and others are bound to come, just as if it had been the
place first assigned. The council, after it has thus been summoned and has assembled and
become acquainted with the cause of the schism, shall bring a suit of contumacy against the
electors or those claiming to be pope or the cardinals, if perchance they fail to come. It shall
then pronounce judgment and shall punish, even beyond the aforesaid penalties and in such a
way that the fierceness of the punishment acts as an example to others, those who are to
blame–no matter of what state or rank or pre-eminence, whether ecclesiastical or secular,
they may be–in starting or fostering the schism, in their administering or obeying, in their
supporting those who governed or in making an election against the aforesaid prohibition, or
who lied m their allegations of fear.

The disturbance caused by fear or pressure at a papal election corrodes and divides, in a
lamentable way, the whole of Christianity. In order that it may be assiduously avoided, we
have decided to decree, in addition to what has been said above, that if anyone brings to bear
or causes, or procures to be brought about, fear or pressure or violence of this kind upon the
electors in a papal election, or upon any one of them, or has the matter ratified after it has
been done, or advises or acts in support of it, or knowingly receives or defends someone who
has done this, or is negligent in enforcing the penalties mentioned below–no matter of what
state or rank or pre-eminence the offender may be, even if it be imperial or regal or pontifical,
or any other ecclesiastical or secular dignity he may hold–then he automatically incurs the
penalties contained in pope Boniface VIII’s constitution which begins Felicis, and he shall be
effectively punished by them.

Any city–even if it be Rome itself, though may it not be!–or any other corporation that gives
aid, counsel or support to someone who does these things, or that does not have such an
offender punished within a month, insofar as the enormity of the crime demands and there
exists the possibility of inflicting the punishment, shall automatically be subject to
ecclesiastical interdict. Furthermore the city, apart from the one mentioned above, shall be
deprived of the episcopal dignity, notwithstanding any privileges to the contrary. We wish,
moreover, that this decree be solemnly published at the end of every general council and that
it be read out and publicly announced before the start of a conclave, wherever and whenever
the election of a Roman pontiff is about to take place.

309
[On the profession to be made by the pope]

Since the Roman pontiff exercises such great power among mortals, it is right that he be
bound all the more by the incontrovertible bonds of the faith and by the rites that are to be
observed regarding the church’s sacraments. We therefore decree and ordain, in order that the
fullness of the faith may shine in a future Roman pontiff with singular splendour from the
earliest moments of his becoming pope, that henceforth whoever is to be elected Roman
pontiff shall make the following confession and profession in public, in front of his electors,
before his election is published.

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit. Amen. In the
year of our Lord’s nativity one thousand etc., I, N., elected pope, with both heart and mouth
confess and profess to almighty God, whose church I undertake with his assistance to govern,
and to blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, that as long as I am in this fragile life I will firmly
believe and hold the catholic faith, according to the traditions of the apostles, of the general
councils and of other holy fathers, especially of the eight holy universal councils-namely the
first at

Nicaea, the second at

Constantinople, the third at

Ephesus, the fourth at

Chalcedon, the fifth and sixth at

Constantinople, the seventh at

Nicaea and the eighth at

Constantinople–as well as of the general councils at the

Lateran,

Lyons and

Vienne,

and I will preserve this faith unchanged to the last dot and will confirm, defend and preach it
to the point of death and the shedding of my blood, and likewise I will follow and observe in
every way the rite handed down of the ecclesiastical sacraments of the catholic church. This
my profession and confession, written at my orders by a notary of the holy Roman church, I

310
have signed below with my own hand. I sincerely offer it on this altar N. to you, almighty
God, with a pure mind and a devout conscience, in the presence of the following. Made etc.

[That prelates may not be translated without their consent]

When prelates are translated, there is commonly both spiritual and temporal loss and damage
of a grave nature for the churches from which they are transferred. The prelates, moreover,
sometimes do not maintain the rights and liberties of their churches as carefully as they
otherwise might, out of fear of being translated. The importunity of certain people who seek
their own good, not that of Jesus Christ, may mean that the Roman pontiff is deceived in such
a matter, as one ignorant of the facts, and so is easily led astray. We therefore determine and
ordain, by this present decree, that henceforth bishops and superiors ought not to be translated
unwillingly without a grave and reasonable cause which, after the person in question has been
summoned, is to be inquired into and decided upon with the advice of the cardinals of the
holy Roman church, or the greater part of them, and with their written endorsement. Lesser
prelates, such as abbots and others with perpetual benefices, ought not to be changed, moved
or deposed without a just and reasonable cause that has been inquired into.

We add, moreover, that for abbots to be changed the written endorsement of the cardinals is
necessary–just as it is necessary for bishops, as has been said-saving, however, the
constitutions and privileges of any churches, monasteries and orders.

[On spoils and procurations]

Papal reservations as well as the exacting and receiving of procurations which are due to
ordinaries and other lesser prelates, by reason of a visitation, and of spoils on deceased
prelates and other clerics, are seriously detrimental to churches, monasteries and other
benefices and to churchmen. We therefore declare, by this present edict, that it is reasonable
and in the public interest that reservations made by the pope, as well as exactions and
collections of this kind made by collectors and others appointed or to be appointed by
apostolic authority, are henceforth in no way to occur or to be attempted. Indeed,
procurations of this kind, as well as spoils and the goods of any prelates found at their deaths,
even if they are cardinals or members of the papal household or officials or any other clerics
whatsoever, in the Roman curia or outside it, no matter where or when they die, are to belong
to and to be received by, fully and freely, those persons to whom they would and ought to
belong with the ending of the aforesaid reservations, mandates and exactions. We forbid the
exaction of such spoils on prelates even inferior ones and others, which are outside and
contrary to the form of common law. However, the constitution of pope Boniface VIII of
happy memory, beginning Praesenti, which was published with this specially in mind, is to
remain in force.

SESSION 40 – 30 OCTOBER 1417

311
[Reforms to be made by the pope together with the council before it is dissolved]

The most holy synod of Constance [40 ] declares and decrees that the future supreme Roman
pontiff, who by God’s grace is to be elected very soon, together with this sacred council or
those to be deputed by the individual nations, is bound to reform the church in its head and in
the Roman curia, according to justice and the good government of the church, before this
council is dissolved, under the topics contained in the following articles, which were at
various times put forward by the nations by way of reforms.

1. First, the number, quality and nationality of the lord cardinals.

2. Next, reservations of the apostolic see.

3. Next, annates, common services and petty services.

4. Next, collations to benefices and expectative graces.

5. Next, the cases that are, or are not, to be heard at the Roman curia.

6. Next, appeals to the Roman curia.

7. Next, the offices of chancery and penitentiary.

8. Next, exemptions and incorporations made at the time of the schism.

9. Next, commendams.

10. Next, confirmation of elections. [41 ]

11. Next, intercalary fruits.

12. Next, not alienating goods of the Roman church and of other churches.

13. Next, for what reasons and how a pope can be corrected or deposed.

14. Next, the eradication of simony.

15. Next, dispensations.

16. Next, revenues of the pope and the cardinals.

17. Next, indulgences.

312
18. Next, tithes.

With this addition, that when the nations have deputed their representatives as

mentioned above, the others may freely return to their own countries with the

pope’s permission.

[That the election of the Roman pontiff may be begun, notwithstanding the absence of Peter
de Luna’s cardinals]

The most holy general synod of Constance notes what was previously agreed upon at
Narbonne concerning the church’s unity and the admission to this synod of the cardinals of
the obedience of Peter de Luna, called Benedict XIII in his obedience. It notes, too, that after
the notorious expulsion of the said Peter de Luna, the aforesaid cardinals who had been
summoned before the expulsion according to the terms of the agreement, did not come within
three months and more after the aforesaid expulsion. The synod therefore decrees and
declares that, notwithstanding their absence, it will proceed to the election of the Roman
pontiff on the authority of the said synod and according to what has been decided by the same
synod. It declares, however, that if they arrive before the election of the future supreme
pontiff has been completed, and if they adhere to the council, they are to be admitted to the
aforesaid election together with the other cardinals, according to the directives of the law and
what shall be decided by the council.

[On the manner and form of electing the pope]

For the praise, glory and honour of almighty God and for the peace and unity of the universal
church and of the whole christian people. The election of the future Roman and supreme
pontiff is soon to be held. We wish that it may be confirmed with greater authority and by the
assent of many persons and that, mindful as we are of the state of the church, no doubts or
scruples may later remain in people’s minds regarding the said election but rather that a
secure, true full and perfect union of the faithful may result from it. Therefore this most holy
general synod of Constance, mindful of the common good and with the special and express
consent and the united wish of the cardinals of the holy Roman church present at the same
synod, and of the college of cardinals and of all the nations at this present council, declares,
ordains and decrees that, for this time only, at the election of the Roman and supreme pontiff,
there shall be added to the cardinals six prelates or other honourable churchmen in holy
orders, from each of the nations currently present and named at the same synod, who are to
be chosen by each of the said nations within ten days. This same holy synod gives power to
all these people, insofar as it is necessary, to elect the Roman pontiff according to the form
here laid down. That is to say, the person is to be regarded as the Roman pontiff by the
universal church without exception who is elected and admitted by two-thirds of the cardinals
present at the conclave and by two-thirds of those from each nation who are to be and have

313
been added to the cardinals. Moreover, the election is not valid nor is the person elected to be
regarded as supreme pontiff unless two-thirds of the cardinals present at the conclave, and
two-thirds of those from each nation who should be and have been added to the same
cardinals, agree to elect him as Roman pontiff. The synod also declares, ordains and decrees
that the votes of any persons cast at the election are null unless, as has been said, two-thirds
of the cardinals, and two-thirds of those from each nation who should be and have been
added to them, agree, directly or by way of addition, upon one person. This must be added,
moreover, that the prelates and other persons who should be and have been added to the
cardinals for the election, are bound to observe all and singular apostolic constitutions, even
penal ones, which have been promulgated regarding the election of the Roman pontiff, just as
the cardinals themselves are bound to observe them, and they are bound to their observance.
The said electors, both cardinals and others, are also bound to swear, before they proceed to
the election, that in attending to the business of the election, they will proceed with pure and
sincere minds–since it is a question of creating the vicar Jesus Christ, the successor of the
blessed Peter, the governor of the universal church and the leader of the Lord’s flock–and that
they firmly believe it will benefit the public good of the universal church if they entirely
prescind from all affection for persons of any particular nation, or other inordinate affections,
as well as from hatred and graces or favours bestowed, in order that by their ministry a
beneficial and suitable pastor may be provided for the universal church. This same holy
synod, mindful of this notorious vacancy in the Roman church, fixes and assigns the next ten
days for all and singular cardinals of the holy Roman church, whether present here or absent,
and the other electors mentioned above, to enter into the conclave which is to be held in this
city of Constance, in the commune’s principal building which has already been allocated for
this purpose. The synod ordains, declares and decrees that within these next ten days the
aforesaid electors, both cardinals and others mentioned above, must enter into the conclave
for the purpose of holding the election and of doing and carrying out all the other matters
according as the laws ordain and decree in all things, besides those mentioned above
regarding the cardinals and other electors, concerning the election of a Roman pontiff. The
same holy synod wishes all these laws to remain in force after the above matters have been
observed. For this time, however, it approves, ordains, establishes and decrees this particular
form and manner of election. The same holy synod, in order to remove all scruples, makes
and declares fit for actively and passively carrying out all legitimate acts at the same synod,
insofar as this is necessary, all those who are present at the same synod as well as those who
will come and adhere to it, always saving the other decrees of this same sacred council, and it
will supply for any defects, if perchance any shall occur in the above, notwithstanding any
apostolic constitutions, even those published in general councils, and other constitutions to
the contrary.

SESSION 41 – 8 November 1417

314
[Everything is prepared for the start of the conclave to elect a pope. On 11 November
cardinal Oddo Colonna is elected pontiff as Martin V.]

SESSION 42 – 28 December 1417

[In this session a bull of Martin V was approved regarding Baldassare Cossa, formerly pope,
who was earlier deprived of his see and imprisoned by the council but who is now to be set
free]

SESSION 43 – 23 MARCH 1418

[Certain statutes promulgated on the reform of the church]

On exemptions

Martin, bishop and servant of the servants of God. We note that from the time of the death of
pope Gregory XI, our predecessor of happy memory, some Roman pontiffs, or those who
claimed to be and were reputed as such in their various obediences, either of their own will or
on account of the importunity of petitioners, have granted exemption from the jurisdiction of
their ordinaries to certain churches, monasteries, chapters, convents, priories, benefices,
places and persons, which were in no way exempt in the time of the said Gregory, to the great
detriment of the ordinaries in question. We wish to avoid damage of this kind. We therefore
revoke, with the approval of this sacred council, all exemptions that were first granted after
the said Gregory XI’s death, by any persons whomsoever claiming to be Roman pontiffs,
even if perchance we ourselves with full knowledge approved or renewed the exemptions,
without the party in question being heard, to any cathedral churches, monasteries (even those
that were exempt but were later made subject to a monastery of a different order or tradition),
chapters, convents, prelacies, benefices, places and persons whatsoever, if they had enjoyed
no exemption before they were exempted in this way, but were simply subject to ordinary
jurisdiction, and had no beginning before that time. We except, however, exemptions that
were made or granted either by way of confirmation, increase or addition, or concerning
which the matter was ordained by the competent authority, after the interested parties had
presented themselves and been heard, or to which the ordinaries consented, to a whole order
or to churches, monasteries, chapters, convents, benefices and places founded after the
aforesaid time by way of or on condition of exemption or with a new foundation in mind, or
to universities and colleges of scholars. We also revoke, with the approval of this sacred
council, all perpetual exemptions granted by the pope through inferior persons. We revoke
them even if unresolved suits about them are pending, and we end these suits. We return the

315
churches, monasteries and other aforesaid places to the former jurisdiction of their ordinaries.
We do not wish to prejudice by this in any way other exemptions held or granted before the
death of the said Gregory. In future, however, we do not intend to grant exemptions unless
the case has been examined and the interested parties have been summoned.

On unions and incorporations

Martin, etc. It is not possible to give a certain rule about unions and incorporations made or
granted after Gregory XI’s death. We shall therefore revoke them, with due regard to justice,
even though the authority of the apostolic see may have been involved, on the plea of the
interested parties, unless they were made for good and true reasons or unless the interested
persons themselves have obtained benefices united in this way.

On intercalary fruits

Martin, etc. Next, we leave the fruits and revenues coming from churches, monasteries and
benefices during a vacancy to be disposed of in accordance with the law and customs or
privileges. We forbid them to be applied to us or to the apostolic camera.

On simoniacs

Martin, etc. Many constitutions have been issued in the past against the evil of simony, but
they have not been able to eradicate the disease. We wish to attend carefully to this matter in
the future according as we are able to. We therefore declare, with the approval of this sacred
council, that persons ordained in a simoniacal fashion are automatically suspended from
exercising their orders. Simoniacal elections, postulations, confirmations and provisions that
are henceforth made to or in respect of any churches, monasteries, dignities, parsonages,
offices or ecclesiastical benefices are rendered null by the law itself and nobody acquires any
rights through them. Those who have been thus promoted, confirmed or provided may not
receive their fruits but are bound to restore them as though they had received things that had
been unjustly taken. We decree, moreover, that both those who give and those who receive
money in this matter of simony automatically incur the sentence of excommunication, even
though their rank be pontifical or cardinalatial.

On dispensations

Martin, etc. Since benefices are granted by reason of the duties attached to them, we consider
it absurd that those who obtain benefices refuse or neglect to carry out their duties. We
therefore revoke, with the approval of this sacred council, all dispensations, granted by any
persons whomsoever claiming to be Roman pontiffs, to any persons elected to, confirmed in
or provided to churches, monasteries, conventual priories, deaneries, archdeaconries or any
other benefices for which a particular order ought to be bestowed, or to which one is attached,
whereby the persons in question are dispensed from receiving the episcopal consecration or
the abbatial blessing or the other orders that ought to be bestowed or are attached. This does

316
not include, however, the dispensations granted according to the form of Boniface VIII’s
constitution beginning Cum ex eo We decree that within six months from the publication of
this our constitution, for those who are presently holding such appointments, and within the
time laid down by the law for those who will hold them in the future, the persons concerned
are to have themselves consecrated or blessed or promoted to some other required order.
Otherwise they are deprived by the law itself of the said churches, monasteries, dignities,
parsonages, offices and benefices. These may then be freely conferred on other persons or
provision may be made for them. However, other published constitutions on this matter are to
remain in force.

On tithes and other dues

Martin, etc. We command and order the strict observance of the laws which forbid tithes and
other dues to be imposed on churches and ecclesiastics by persons lower than the pope. For
ourselves, moreover, we shall in no way impose them generally on the whole clergy unless
there is a grave and serious reason and an advantage for the universal church in doing so, and
then with the advice, consent and written endorsement of our brothers, the cardinals of the
holy Roman church, and the prelates whose advice can conveniently be obtained. This should
not happen especially in any kingdom or province where the prelates in question, or the
majority of them, have not been consulted or have not consented. In this way they may only
be levied by ecclesiastics acting on the authority of the apostolic see.

On the life and probity of clerics

Martin, etc. Among the various faults of clerics and prelates this one has especially taken
root, namely that many of them despise an appearance of ecclesiastical decency in their dress
and delight in what is unbecoming. They seek to conform to the laity and they exhibit
outwardly in their dress whatever they are thinking in their minds. Therefore, with the
approval of this sacred council, we renew and order the careful observance of all the laws
currently in force regarding the clothing, tonsure and habits of clerics, as to both shape and
colour, and their hair-styles and the style and uprightness of their lives. These laws have been
heeded far too little by both the secular and the regular clergy. Especially we order to be
utterly abolished, with the same council’s approval, the abuse whereby in certain regions
some clerics and churchmen, both secular and regular, and even (which we deplore still
more) prelates of churches, wear long gloves that are unnecessarily large and sumptuous,
extending to their elbows, and clothes with slits at the back and sides, with furs covering the
edges even of the slit parts. Moreover, they are not afraid to attend the divine offices in
churches–even in the churches in which they are beneficed–in such clothes together with
their surplices and other garments worn for worship and the church’s services. We condemn
this unbecoming way of dressing for all churchmen and we forbid the wearing of such
garments. Those who do otherwise are to be punished as transgressors of the canons. We
decree in particular that if any beneficed person, or any holder of an office in a church, dares
to attend the divine office in such clothing, then he shall know that he is suspended from

317
receiving his ecclesiastical incomes for one month for each such occasion, and the fruits of
these incomes are to be applied to the fabric of the church in question.

Martin, etc. We decree and declare with the approval of this sacred council, that the demands
of this same sacred council. regarding the articles contained in the reform decree promulgated
on Saturday 30 October [43 ] of last year, have been and are met by the various decrees,
statutes and ordinances, both those which have been read out in this present session and those
upon which agreement has been reached with the individual nations of the council. [44 ] We
wish these decrees, statutes and ordinances to be deposited in our chancellery and that letters
in public form, under the seal of our vice-chancellor, be drawn up and handed over to those
who wish to have them.

SESSION 44 – 19 April 1418

[Decree on the place of the next council]

Martin, etc. We wish and desire to put into effect a decree of this general council [45 ] which
lays down, among other things, that general councils must always be held in the place which
the supreme pontiff, with the consent and approval of the council, is bound to depute and
assign, within the month before the end of this council, as the place for the next council after
the end of the present one. With the consent and approval of this present council, we
therefore, by this present decree, depute and assign the city of Pavia for this purpose, and we
ordain and decree that prelates and others who ought to be summoned to general councils are
obliged to go to Pavia at the aforesaid time. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however . . .
Given and enacted at Constance, in the place of this public session . . .

SESSION 45 – 22 April 1418

[Sentence dissolving the council, and the granting of indulgences]

Martin, etc. We dissolve the council, as the sacred council itself requires, for reasons that are
certain, reasonable and just. We give permission, with the council’s approval, to each and
every person at the council to return home. Furthermore, on the authority of almighty God
and of his blessed apostles Peter and Paul and on our authority, we grant to each and every
person who has taken part in this sacred council and its business a full absolution of all his
sins, once in his life, provided he takes advantage of the absolution in the correct form within
two months of his hearing about it. We grant the same at the hour of death. This is to be
understood as applying to both lords and members of their households; provided that they fast
on each Friday for a year from the day they come to know of this indulgence, in the case of

318
those who seek the absolution for while they are alive, and for another year in the case of
those who seek it for the hour of death, unless they are legitimately prevented from doing so,
in which case they should perform other pious works. After the second year, they ought to
fast on Fridays until the end of their lives or to perform other pious works.
Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone however . . . Given and enacted at Constance in the place
of this public session. ..

319
Council of Basel-Ferrara-Florence,
1431-49 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1431-1449 A.D.

INTRODUCTION

Basel had been designated as the place for this ecumenical council by the abortive council of
Pavia — Siena (1423-1424). It was opened on 25 July 1431 by the papal legate, who had
been appointed by Pope Martin V in two bulls dated 1 February 1431, Dum onus universalis
gregis and Nuper siquidem cupientes shortly before the pope’s death on 20 February 1431. A
great part of the council’s work in the early years was taken up with its quarrel with Pope
Eugenius IV, who was accused of wishing to dissolve or transfer the council. The prospect of
re-union with the eastern church provided an opportunity to transfer the council to another
city. This move was supported by the council fathers loyal to the pope, who however were in
a minority, and in the 25th session they voted for the city of Ferrara. There the council was
re-opened on 8 January 1438, Pope Eugenius IV later attending in person. Some historians
doubt the ecumenicity of the first 25 sessions at Basel. All agree that the sessions held at
Basel after the 25th session until the final one on 25 April 1449 cannot be regarded as
sessions of an ecumenical council.

The Greek bishops and theologians attended the council of Ferrara from 9 April 1438. The
council was transferred to Florence on 10 January 1439. There, in the session on 6 July 1439,
the decree of union with the Greek church was approved. Subsequently decrees of union with
the Armenian and Coptic churches were approved. Finally the council was transferred to
Rome on 24 February 1443. There other decrees of union with the Bosnians, the Syrians and
finally with the Chaldeans and Maronites of Cyprus, were approved. The last session of the
council was held on 7 August 1445.

The decisions taken at Basel have the form of conciliar decrees. Those taken at Ferrara,
Florence and Rome are almost always in the form of bulls, since the pope was presiding in
person; in these cases the decree mentions the council’s approval and contains the words “in
a solemnly celebrated general session of the synod”.

Almost all the decrees of re-union were of little effect. Nevertheless it is significant that the
church’s unity was discussed in a council attended by some eastern bishops and theologians,
and that there was agreement on the principal dogmatic and disciplinary questions which had
divided the two churches for many centuries.

The acts of the council of Basel were first published by S. Brant in Basel in 1499, with the
title Decreta concilii Basileensis (= Dc). This collection was subsequently published by Z.
Ferreri at Milan in 1511, and by J. Petit at Paris in 1512. Almost all later conciliar collections

320
included the acts and decrees of the council of Basel, from Merlin to Mansi’s Amplissima
collectio (= Msi). A brief history of these collections was written in 1906 by H. Herre in his
work entitled, Handschriften und Drucke Baseler Konzilsakten, in Deutsche Reichstagsakten
unter Kaiser Sigmund, Part IV/1, 1431-1432, 10/1, Goettingen 1957, XCVI-CI. Another
edition of the decrees of Basel is contained in John of Segovia’s diary, which is to be found
in Monumenta conciliorum generalium saeculi XV (= Mxv), II Vienna 1873. Editio Romana,
however, omits the council of Basel (see Labbe-Cossart XIII, n. 7; S. Kuttner, L ‘Edition
romaine des conciles generaux, Rome 1940).

For Basel, we have followed the edition of Msi 29 (1788) 1-227. We have noted the principal
variants in Dc and Mxv. We have omitted some decrees pertaining to internal matters of the
council, to the quarrel with Eugenius IV and to administration; we have always noted the
titles of these decrees in footnotes. The decrees of Ferrara, Florence and Rome were first
published by P. Crabbe (1538, 2, 754V-826). H. Justinianus subsequently published a more
careful edition, Acta sacri oecumenici concilii Florentini, Rome 1638, which was followed by
later collections until Msi 31 supplement (1901) (see V. Laurent L’edition princeps des actes
du Concile de Florence, Orient. Christ. Per.21 (1955) 165-189, and J.Gill, ibid. 22 (1956)
223-225). The decrees are also to be found in Monumenta conc. gen. saec. XV, III-IV Vienna
1886-1935. We have followed the critical edition published by the Pontifical Oriental
Institute, Concilium Florentinum. Documenta et Scriptores (= CF), Rome 1940-, and we have
included the principal variants noted in it.

As regards the English translation, the following points should be noted where the original
text is given in two languages, namely Latin and another. Where a Greek text is given (pp.
520-528), this is of equal authority with the parallel Latin version, and in the English
translation the few significant discrepancies between the two texts have been noted. In the
cases of Armenian and Arabic texts (pp. 534-559 and 567-583), these were translations from
the Latin, which was the authoritative text, and therefore the English translation is from the
Latin alone (the differences from the Latin in the Armenian and Arabic texts are numerous
and complex). For these points, see J. Gill, The Council of Florence, Cambridge 1959, pp.
290-296, 308 and 326.

SESSION 1 14 December 1431

The holy synod of Basel, representing the universal church, legitimately assembled in the
holy Spirit under the presidency of the most reverend father in Christ lord Julian, cardinal
deacon of St Angelo of the holy Roman church, legate of the apostolic see, for the glory of
almighty God, the exaltation of the catholic faith and the progress of the Christian religion,
laying its foundation on the cornerstone Christ Jesus, in whom the whole structure is joined
together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord, calls to mind that the holy general synod
of Constance, celebrated in the holy Spirit, esteeming it salutary and beneficial that general
councils should be frequent in the holy church of God, established this by its decree as
follows: The frequent holding of general councils . . . 2 Hence for the execution of that
decree, the city of Pavia in Italy was chosen for the general council to be held at the end of

321
the five years immediately following. At the decreed time that council was indeed
inaugurated in the said city of Pavia and thence it was translated for certain reasons to the city
of Siena. In that general council which was begun in Pavia and was held in the city of Siena,
this city of Basel was chosen and duly assigned for the next future general council to be held
after the seven-year period from the end of the council of Siena, as is stated in the public
instrument then composed about this succession.

[Establishment of the holy council of Basel]

The most reverend lord legate in his desire to fulfill the apostolic commission since at the
time when the beginning of the council was imminent he was immersed in the expedition
against the pestilential heresy of the Hussites for the sake of the faith, had his vicegerents
dispatched to this city and thereafter with all possible speed came himself to this city, in order
that, with the help of God’s grace, he might fulfill in this general council the office of legate
laid upon him, as our most holy lord Eugenius IV, pope by divine providence, had by a series
of letters of his holiness enjoined on him. In this city, during more than three months, he held
several congregations with prelates and others who had arrived in the city for the said general
council, and he had discussions about the establishment and holding of the council. Finally it
was decreed that the present solemn session should be held, in which, firstly, since from the
above it is manifest that this city is the place deputed for the general council and the date for
it to be held is already past, and the authority of the most holy apostolic see is not lacking, it
decrees, defines and declares that in this city and place the general council is canonically
fixed and founded, and that all, both prelates and others who by right or custom are obliged to
attend general councils, are bound to come to its celebration.

[Purpose of the council of Basel]

Seeing that all things direct their actions more immediately and intensely the more
knowledge they have of their destined purpose, so this holy synod, after intense meditation
and thought on the needs of the Christian religion and after mature and ordered deliberation,
decrees that, with the help of God from whom all good things comet, it will pursue with all its
zeal and attention these three ends. First that, with the banishment of the darkness of all
heresies from the bounds of the Christian people, the light of catholic truth, by the generosity
of Christ the true light, may be resplendent. Secondly that, after due thought and with the
help of the author of peace, the Christian people, freed from the madness of wars by which —
with the sower of weeds doing his work — it is affected and divided in various parts of the
world, may be brought back to a peaceful and tranquil state. Thirdly, as the vine of Christ has
already almost run wild on account of the multitude of thistles and thorns of vices crowding
in upon it, to cut them back through the endeavour of necessary cultivation, with the work
from on high of the evangelical husbandman, so that it may flourish again and produce with
happy abundance the fruits of virtue and esteem. Since such great benefits as these cannot be
hoped for without a generous flow of heavenly grace, it earnestly exhorts in the Lord all
Christ’s faithful that for the happy achievement of the aforesaid they should urge the divine
majesty with devout prayers, fasts and almsgiving that the good and merciful God, placated

322
by such humble submission, may deign with his accustomed goodness to grant to this sacred
council the desired completion of all these things, imposing this on them unto the remission
of their sins.

SESSION 2 15 February 1432

The holy general synod of Basel, representing the church militant, for an everlasting record.
To the praise of almighty God and the glory and honour of the blessed and undivided Trinity,
for the extirpation of heresies and errors, for the reformation of morals in head and members
of the church of God, and for the pacification of kings and kingdoms and other Christians in
discord among themselves through the instigation of the author of discords, the synod,
legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, decrees, establishes, defines, declares and ordains
as follows.

[Decree that the council of Basel is legitimately begun]

First, that the same sacred synod of Basel, by the decrees and ordinances of the sacred
general councils of Constance and of Siena, and by the action of apostolic authority, was and
is duly and legitimately begun and assembled in this place of Basel. And lest anyone should
doubt about the power of the same sacred synod of Basel, this same synod in this present
session ordains and decrees that two declarations from the decrees of the synod of Constance
are to be inserted among its other decrees already issued or to be issued. The text of the first
of these declarations is as follows, First it declares . . . 1; that of the other is this, Next it
declares . . . I Therefore, presupposing also some other decrees of the council of Constance,
especially the one beginning The frequent, which were read out in a former session of this
sacred synod of Basel, the said synod of Basel decrees and declares that, legitimately
assembled in the holy Spirit, for the extirpation of heresies and a general reformation of
morals in the church in head and members, and also for procuring peace among Christians, as
is stated above, no one of whatever authority, even if he is distinguished by the dignity of the
papacy, could or should have in the past, or can or ought to now or in the future, dissolve or
transfer the said synod of Basel to another locality or prorogue it to another date without the
deliberation and consent of the same synod of Basel.

SESSION 3 29 April 1432

[Impossibility of the dissolution of the council is decreed]

This holy council, considering that the aforesaid dissolution of the council was enacted
contrary to the decrees of the council of Constance, and that it leads to a serious danger of
subversion of the faith as well as disturbance and harm for the state of the church and scandal
for the whole Christian people, decreed that the dissolution could not be made. Since,
therefore, the dissolution is no obstacle at all, the prosecution of what has been praiseworthily
set in motion for the stability of the faith and the salvation of the Christian people should,
with the grace of the holy Spirit, be proceeded with. But since the aforesaid bishop of
Lausanne and the dean of Utrecht, on their return, did not bring back from the most holy lord

323
pope the desired reply, although the said most holy lord pope had been entreated, appealed to,
required, requested and with every insistence very often implored not only by the aforesaid
messengers in the name of the council but also by the most serene lord Sigismund, king of the
Romans and loyal supporter of the church, so this holy synod, relying on the decrees of the
sacred council of Constance, whose words are these, That the holy synod . . . ‘ decreed in this
solemn session to make its demands to the most holy lord pope and also to the most reverend
lord cardinals in the way and style as follows.

This holy synod, therefore, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, beseeches the aforesaid
most blessed lord pope Eugenius with all reverence and insistence and through the tender
mercy of Jesus Christ entreats, requires implores and warns him to revoke in fact the alleged
dissolution as in fact it was issued, and in the same way as he made the dissolution to send
and publish over the different parts of the world the revocation, and completely to desist from
every obstacle against the said council: indeed more, to favour and assist the council, as is his
duty, and to offer it every support and opportune help, and to come in person within three
months — an interval which it assigns and determines as a peremptory limit — if his physical
state so allows. But if it does not, in his place and stead he should nominate some person or
persons and send them with plenary power for each and every question in this council up to
its very end through each and all of its acts gradually and successively. Otherwise, if his
holiness should fail to do this, which is a thing that in no way is to be expected of the vicar of
Christ, the holy synod will see to it that provision is made for the necessities of the church as
shall seem just and as the holy Spirit shall dictate, and will proceed in accordance with what
befits both divine and human law.

In the same way it beseeches, requires, implores and warns the aforesaid most reverend lord
cardinals, who as the chief hinges of the church of God should apply their minds with great
fervour to these things, that they should bring earnest pressure to bear on the lord pope about
the aforesaid things, and should favour, aid and help this sacred council in every opportune
way. And since their presence, in view of their authority, great prudence and practical
experience, is highly expedient for this sacred council, it requires and warns and cites the lord
cardinals and each of them in particular that, canonical impediment ceasing, they shall come
to the said council within three months from the notification by this present decree, which
interval it precisely and peremptorily assigns and determines for the triple canonical
monition. Otherwise, since failure to come to the sacred general council so as to aid the
church in its great necessities will without doubt be judged as contributing to the danger of a
serious challenge to the catholic faith and to the harm of the whole church, this holy council
at the expiry of the stated interval will take proceedings against those who have failed to
come, since their contumacy demands this, according as the order of divine as well as human
law shall dictate and allow, and will take steps, with the help of the most High, to provide for
the necessities of the church. In the aforesaid however, the said synod has no intention of
including the most reverend lord cardinal of holy Cross as long as he is engaged in
negotiations for peace between the kingdoms of France and England; but in respect of the
most reverend lord cardinals of Plasencia and of Foix, as they are commonly called, and the

324
cardinal of St Eustathius, since they are in nearer localities, it limits the above-mentioned
interval to two months.

Further the holy synod orders all lord patriarchs, archbishops, bishops and other prelates of
churches, and clerics, notaries and ecclesiastical personages, as also other faithful of Christ,
of every status, dignity, grade and condition, and it requires and requests all princes and
lords, even if they possess imperial, regal, ducal or any other authority, who shall have been
requested regarding the above, that in virtue of holy obedience, under threat of the divine
judgment and under pain of excommunication, they should report, intimate and notify all and
each of the aforesaid things to the said most holy lord pope and to the most reverend lord
cardinals, and should have them reported, intimated and notified to these people in person, if
they have safe and convenient access to them. Where personal access is not possible, this is to
be done by affixing notices drawn up by a public notary, if this can be done safely, to their
residences and also on the door of the apostolic palace and on the churches of St John
Lateran, St Peter’s and St Mary Maggiore; or failing that, on the chief churches of the cities
of Sutri Viterbo and Siena, or three other neighbouring cities, as it shall seem better. This
holy synod decrees that these places are suitable for the execution of all the aforementioned.

Yet this holy synod, desiring to meeting future eventualities and to avoid all waste of time,
since delay in these matters is fraught with danger, ordains and decrees that a decree of
admonition and citation of this kind, after it has been read out in this solemn session and
published, shall be affixed to the doors of the cathedral church of Basel so that, should it
happen that its intimation cannot be effected in any of the ways outlined above, in that case,
as by a public edict, for four months to be calculated from this day, the publication, monition
and citation shall be considered as performed in respect of all its effects, so that all its effects
are obtained and it binds those to whom it is directed as if it had been insinuated and
presented in person, the above peremptory force and threats being considered here as
inserted.

Further, this holy council declares and insists that, despite the aforesaid delays, since a legal
summons has already been issued by the decrees of the council of Constance, and since the
urgency of the situation suggests the following, as does also the nature of what is to be
accomplished in the continuation of the council and of the things to be done in it, it means to
proceed in anorderly, due and mature manner, and for that reason not to be remiss in any way
in the process. Lastly, this holy synod decrees citations for all prelates and others who are
obliged to come to a general council, and each and all generals of orders and also inquisitors
of heresy, with the delay of a fixed term or terms as it shall seem good to the deputies, with
penalties and censures and suitable conditions.

SESSION 4 20 June 1432

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church. By this decree we indicate to all that to each and every priest, baron, noble,
soldier and citizen and every other man of whatever status, condition or rank from the

325
kingdom of Bohemia and the marquisate of Moravia, from Prague and the cities and other
places of the same, and to all other ecclesiastical and secular persons who, male or female,
will be sent with them to the general council of Basel and are about to set out, to all these
persons under whatever name they are listed or can be called, within however the number of
two hundred persons, by the force of this present decree we grant and give our fullest and
perfect safe-conduct and we bestow a most genuine security for their coming to this city of
Basel and their abiding, staying and resting here, and for their treating with us on affairs
suitably committed to them and their arranging, concluding and ending them. We allow them
to perform the divine offices in their lodgings without any obstacle on our part; so that also,
on account of their presence, neither on their journey nor in any other place of their journey,
in coming, remaining or returning, nor in the city itself of Basel, will cessation from divine
offices be imposed in any way in the form of an interdict.

Further, they will be allowed freely to propose and explain in the general council or synod of
Basel, by word of mouth or in writing, the four articles on whose clarity they insist; to prove,
support and recommend them with quotations from the sacred scriptures and the blessed
doctors and, if need be, to reply to the objections of the general synod or to argue about them
with one or several from the council or to discuss them in a charitable way without any
impediment; with reproach, abuse and taunt being totally excluded, observing the form and
the ways specified and mutually agreed between our envoys and the messengers of the
aforesaid kingdom and marquisate in the city of Eger; and specifically that in the case of the
four articles proposed by them, the divine law, the apostolic practice of Christ and of the
primitive church, and the councils and doctors truly founding themselves on the same, will be
accepted in the council of Basel as the most true and impartial judge. Whether these
discussions are or are not brought to a conclusion, whenever by the order or permission of
their superiors they, or any one of them, shall choose to return home, then straightaway,
without any refusal, condition or delay, they may return freely and safely at their pleasure,
with their goods, honour and persons intact, but with the knowledge of the deputies of the
council so that suitable provision may be made, without guile or fraud, for their safety.

Moreover, in this safe-conduct of theirs we wish all clauses to be included and contained, and
to be held as included, which are necessary and opportune for full, efficacious and sufficient
safety in coming, staying and returning; we express these things clearly in order to secure and
keep the good of peace. If any one or several of them, whether coming on their journey to us
in Basel or while staying here or on their return, shall commit (may it not be so) some
heinous crime by which the benefit of security conceded to them could be annulled and
quashed, we wish, admit and concede that those arrested in a deed of such sort shall
straightaway be punished only by their own people, not by others, by an adequate censure
and a sufficient penalty to be approved and praised by us, with the form, conditions and ways
of their security remaining completely unimpaired. Similarly if any of ours, whether on their
way to us in Basel or while staying here or returning, shall commit (may it not be so) some
heinous crime through which the benefit of the security conceded to them could be annulled
or quashed, we wish that those arrested in a crime of this sort shall straightaway be punished
only by us and our people, not by others, by an adequate censure and a sufficient penalty to

326
be approved and praised by the lord ambassadors and envoys, with the present form,
conditions and ways of the security remaining completely unimpaired.

We wish also that it be allowed to each and every ambassador as often as it is opportune or
necessary, to leave the city of Basel in order to take the air and to return to it, and freely to
send and despatch their messengers to any place for the arrangement of necessary affairs and
to receive a messenger or messengers as often as it suits them, in such a way that they are
accompanied by the deputies of the council who will provide for their safety. Further, neither
in discussions, public sermons or other conferences can or may our side, in prejudice,
derogation or depreciation of the case of the four articles, employ or procure in the locality of
the city of Basel any terms that tend to disorder. These safe-conducts and assurances are to
remain in force from the moment when, and for as long as, they are received into the care of
our protection, to be brought to Basel, and in all the period of their staying here: and again on
the conclusion of a sufficient hearing, an interval of twenty days having been set in advance,
when they shall request it, or after the hearing the council shall decide, we shall, with God’s
help and without any guile or fraud, let them return from Basel to Tuschkau, Tachov or
Engelsberg, to whichever of these places they prefer to go.

Also for all of Christ’s faithful, especially for the most holy lord the Roman pontiff, the most
serene prince the lord Sigismund, king of the Romans etc. , the venerable lord cardinals,
archbishops and bishops and lord abbots, prelates and clerics as well as for the most
illustrious princes, kings, dukes, marquises, counts, barons and noble soldiers, universities,
and communities of cities, castles and towns, and their councillors, magistrates, officials and
others of whatever condition and status, whether ecclesiastical or secular, under whatever
name they go, and for the subjects of all the aforesaid and every part of them, we promise in
good faith and guarantee that all of us and every one of the aforesaid persons will observe
and guard the prescribed security and the form of their safe-conduct in all its conditions,
points and clauses elaborated above, inviolably and unbroken in good faith and with pure
heart. Further, we promise that we neither wish nor ought on any alleged occasion, covertly
or overtly, to employ any authority, power, law, statute or privilege of laws or canons or of
any councils whatever, especially of Constance and Siena, in whatever form of words they
may be expressed, to any prejudice of the safe-conduct or assurance and the public hearing
which we have granted to them. But if we or anyone of us, of whatever condition or status or
pre-eminence, shall violate in any detail or clause the form and way of the above assurance
and safe-conduct (which, however, may the Almighty deign to avert), and a suitable penalty
shall not have followed straightaway, to be fittingly approved and praised by their judgment,
let them hold us, as indeed they can, to have incurred all penalties which by divine and
human law or by custom violators of such safe-conducts incur, without any excuse or any
challenge from this side .

[If the apostolic see becomes vacant while the council is in progress, the election may not be
held outside the council]’

327
The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, bears in mind that it pertains to the duty of providence to foresee the future
with clear-sighted consideration and to take wholesome steps against what could bring harm
to the common good. The synod is intent upon the extirpation of heresies, peace among the
people of Christ and the reformation of morals, with the grace of the holy Spirit, as is really
necessary in view of the present situation. It has summoned the venerable fathers in Christ,
the cardinals of the holy Roman church, to this sacred council, convinced that their presence
at it is fruitful in many ways in view of their authority, wisdom and knowledge of affairs. If,
then, as obedient sons they are coming to the council when the apostolic see falls vacant
elsewhere, such a situation would redound to the benefit of the church but the obedient
cardinals would be serving the council to their own disadvantage, whereas everyone knows
that obedience should bring with it not disadvantage but an increase of benefit and honour.
Lest disobedience may seem to be to the advantage of some who fail to come, this holy
synod, with purposeful anticipation and for the above and other reasons which can and should
motivate a prudent mind establishes, decrees and defines that, in the event of a vacancy of the
apostolic see while this sacred council is in progress, the election of the supreme pontiff shall
be held in the place of this sacred council, and it forbids it to be held elsewhere. The synod
also decrees that any attempt against this by any authority whatsoever, be it even papal,
notwithstanding any constitutions issued or to be issued or anything else acting to the
contrary, even if there should be special mention in so many words or a confirmation on oath,
which the synod rejects with full knowledge, is null and void and of no force or importance
by law; and that those who attempt such things shall be disqualified in both active and
passive voice with respect to the election of a Roman pontiff and for every other dignity, and
deprived perpetually of all dignities which they hold, and shall automatically incur the mark
of infamy as well as sentence of excommunication. If any such pretended election should be
attempted, then both the one allegedly elected and his supporters as well as those who treat
him as elected incur in the same way the above-mentioned penalties. The said synod reserves
to itself, except at the moment of death, absolution of everyone who in any way shall incur
the said sentences or any one of them. It declares that the present decree shall bind and come
into force after forty days following its publication.

SESSION 5 9 August 1432

[In this session there were approved rules about the organization of the council: On cases and
the procurator of the faith; Judges are deputed for the general examination of cases; That
members of the council may not be brought to trial outside the place of this council; Officials
are appointed. ]

SESSION 6 6 September 1432

[This session was devoted to reading: Petition of the promoters of the council against the
pope and the cardinals. ]

SESSION 7 6 November 1432 [Interval for a papal election]

328
The most holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing
the universal church, for an everlasting record. Earlier this holy synod issued a decree about
the election of a Roman pontiff if a vacancy of the apostolic see occurs during this sacred
council. It is entitled, It pertains to the duty of providence . . . , and is to be found in full in
the fourth session. However, a doubt about that decree has occurred to some, namely that the
interval of ten days which the constitution of the council of Lyons fixed for the cardinals of
the holy Roman church to enter the conclave, might elapse and be too restricted at least by
the time that notification of the vacancy reaches this council. For, the interval would seems to
be too rigid and too short for many of the cardinals who may be away in localities distant
from this council. Moreover this holy synod wishes to eliminate all grounds for doubt and to
provide carefully for what is conducive to the peace and unity of God’s holy church, and with
all modesty and due maturity to proceed with what is known in this matter, as in all things to
promote the exaltation of the catholic faith and the general reformation and peace of the
Christian people, for which the council is legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit. It
therefore decrees that in the case of a vacancy of the apostolic see in the lifetime of this
present council, nothing shall be done for the election of a Roman pontiff before the expiry of
sixty days from the day of the vacancy.

SESSION 8 18 December 1432

[Decree that there ought to be only one council]

The most holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing
the universal church, for an everlasting record. Just as there is only one holy catholic church,
as Christ her spouse says, My dove, my perfect one, is only one, and as an article of the faith
declares, since unity does not tolerate division, so there can be only one general council
representing the holy catholic church. Since, therefore, by decrees of the sacred general
councils of Constance and of Siena and by the approval of two Roman pontiffs, namely
Martin V and Eugenius IV of happy memory, a general council was instituted and established
in this city of Basel and assembled legitimately in the holy Spirit, it is clear that during this
council another general council cannot exist elsewhere. Whoever therefore, during the
lifetime of this sacred council shall presume to raise and hold another assembly with the title
of a general council, is convicted of raising and holding a conventicle of schismatics and not
a council of the catholic church. Therefore this holy council warns and exhorts all Christ’s
faithful, of whatever status or rank they may be, even if papal, imperial or regal, under the
adjuration of the divine judgment which holy scripture relates in the case of Korah, Dathan
and Abiram, authors of schism, and it strictly commands and forbids them in virtue of holy
obedience and under the penalties laid down by the law, not to hold or summon, during this
sacred council, another assembly with the title of a general council, which in reality would
not be a council, nor to go to or to take part in or in any way to have recourse to it as if it
were a general council, even under the pretext of any promise or oath, nor to hold or esteem it
to be or even to call it a general council, even if it claims to have been summoned or shall try
in the future to be summoned. If any ecclesiastical person, even a cardinal of the holy Roman
church, or anyone else of whatever status, rank or condition he may be, shall dare to go to or
stay in Bologna or any place with a pretended general council, during this present council, he

329
shall automatically incur sentence of excommunication and deprivation of all benefices,
dignities and offices and disqualification from them; and the dignities, offices and benefices
of such persons may be freely disposed of by those to whom this pertains by law even if

SESSION 9 22 January 1433

[This session was entirely taken up with the solemn reception of the emperor Sigismund. ]

SESSION 10 19 February 1433

[This session was almost entirely taken up with reading: Accusation of contumacy of the
pope. ]

SESSION 11 27 April 1433

[For the permanent validity of the authority of general councils]

The holy general council of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. Since the frequent holding of general councils, as
a principal means of cultivating the Lord’s field affects the universal church, every effort
should be made that all obstacles that could impede so holy an institution are removed with
great care. Hence this holy synod, obeying the decree of the council of Constance beginning
The frequent, and anxious that no scandals such as unhappily have occurred in our day should
spring up again in the future, to the detriment of the church, establishes and decrees that the
Roman pontiff, who ought to be the first in working in the Lord’s vineyard and in drawing
others to work by his example, should take part in general councils in person or by a legate or
legates a latere who is or are to be chosen in consultation with and with the consent — which
is not to be just by word of mouth — of two-thirds of the cardinals. Also, all ecclesiastical
persons who by law or custom ought to attend general councils are bound henceforward to
come in person without further summons to general councils, both by force of the
constitution The frequent and by the authority of this sacred council of Basel or of some other
future council legitimately assembled, unless they are prevented by a legitimate impediment,
in which case they are bound to send suitable persons with a sufficient mandate. If the Roman
pontiff or other above-mentioned persons fail to do this, or in any way take means to impede
change, prorogue or dissolve the council, and shall not have repented with real satisfaction
within four months, thereafter the pope will be automatically suspended from the papal
administration and the other persons from the administration of their dignities; the papal
administration will devolve by law upon the sacred council. If they persist with hardened
hearts under the aforesaid penalties for a further two months after the said four months, then
the general council shall proceed against both the Roman pontiff and the above-mentioned
persons up to and including the penalty of deprivation.

[That everybody is free to come to the council]

This holy synod decrees that, notwithstanding any prohibition, even from the Roman pontiff,
there is freedom for absolutely all persons, of whatsoever status or condition they may be,
even if they are cardinals of the Roman church, to go to general councils; and that the Roman

330
pontiff is bound to grant permission to those who wish to go to general councils, especially to
the aforesaid cardinals, if they request it.

[The council explains the phrase about prorogation of the council, and annuls attempts to the
contrary, including future attempts]

This holy synod also declares that those words “it may never be prorogued”, contained in the
said decree, are to be understood so prohibitively that it cannot be prorogued even by a pope,
and that a council actually assembled cannot be dissolved or moved from place to place by a
Roman pontiff without the express consent of the council itself, and it quashes, voids and
annuls anything that may be attempted in the future against this or even in disparagement or
obstruction of this general council or of the persons, prelates and supporters of it, by
deprivation, translation and ecclesiastical censures or in any other way.

[That the council may not be dissolved or moved without the express consent of two-thirds of
each deputation, etc. ]

For certain reasonable causes it decrees that the present council of Basel cannot be dissolved
or moved from place to place by anybody, even by the pope, unless there is obtained the
express consent of two-thirds of each deputation, after a scrutiny of the votes of individual
members, and then the approval of two-thirds of the general congregation, after a similar
scrutiny of the votes of individual members, and finally a declaration is to be made in a
public session. It prays through the tender mercy of Jesus Christ, and by the sprinkling of his
precious blood it adjures all members of this sacred council, both present and future, that in
no way they give their consent to a dissolution or allow a change of place, except for just and
manifest reasons, before the reform in head and members has been completed, in so far as
this can reasonably be achieved.

[That the place of the council should be chosen a month before the dissolution, and the phrase
“in ten years” is clarified]

In accordance with the ordinance of the council of Constance, it wishes that the place of the
future council should be chosen at least a month before the date of the dissolution. It also
declares, as a precaution, that the phrase “in ten years” which is used in the said constitution
should be understood in this way, namely that the ten years should be completely finished,
and when it is fully completed the authorization to hold a general council begins. If it
happens for any reason that those who are obliged to attend general councils do not come at
the beginning, it declares that the said authorization to hold the council does not thereby
cease, but that it should be held as soon as it conveniently can. But so that it cannot be
deferred for a long time, this council decrees that for twenty days before the end of the said
ten years, or of some other interval if perhaps this should reasonably be determined by the
council, the Roman pontiff in person or through his legate or legates, and the archbishop in
whose province or diocese the council is to be held and all the prelates who are within four
days’ journey of the place of the forthcoming council, provided there is no canonical

331
impediment, in person or, if that cannot be, through suitable men constituted as proxies for
this purpose, are obliged to present themselves so as to negotiate about the disposition of the
place and other preliminaries of the council. On the day appointed for the opening of the
council, those present shall celebrate a solemn mass of the holy Spirit, and the council shall
be considered constituted and begun from that day. However, on account of the many
necessities that can occur for those coming to a council, this holy synod exhorts those who
shall be present not to bring difficult questions to a conclusion until after a reasonable wait
for those absent and a fitting interval of time, rather, with divine fear as a guide, let
everything proceed with due gravity, as the great mass of business of the universal church
demands and requires. In those cases in which, according to the decree of Constance, the
pope may, with the consent of the cardinals of the holy Roman church, change the place of a
future council, it determines that, should the pope fail to do this, the college of cardinals may
supply for the defect, on condition however that two-thirds of the cardinals agree, keeping, ,
nevertheless to the procedure contained in the said decree The frequent. The said cardinals
shall swear by God and their consciences that they are making the change of place, if indeed
they decide this, for the clear reasons that are mentioned in the decree The frequent.

[That the electors of a pope before entering the conclave shall swear that, if one of them is
elected, he will observe the said decrees]’

So that the aforesaid may be put into execution the more easily, the holy synod determines
that the electors of a Roman pontiff are bound, before entering the conclave, to swear to God
and to promise the church that, should one of them be chosen as pope, he will observe the
above decrees, statutes and ordinances, and to the best of his ability will endeavour to fulfil
them really and effectively adding that whoever in future years shall be chosen as Roman
pontiff must swear, among the other things which he must profess according to the decree of
the council of Constance beginning Since the Roman pontiff, effective observance of the
present decree. Later, in his first public consistory, he is bound to make again the same
profession and let him also profess that, if he violates what is contained in this decree or
commits a notorious crime which scandalizes the church, he will subject himself to the
judgment of a general council. Both he and the college of cardinals shall insert this profession
in the letters which they customarily send throughout the world on the accession of a new
pope.

[That this decree should be published in synods]

So that nobody may plead ignorance of this wholesome and necessary decree, the holy synod
orders, in virtue of holy obedience, all metropolitan bishops to have this decree read and
published in provincial and synodal councils, and superiors of religious to have it read and
published in their general chapters. 2

SESSION 12 13 July 1433

[Decree on elections and confirmations of bishops and prelates]

332
Just as in building a house the architect’s chief concern is to lay such a foundation that the
edifice built on it will endure immovable, so in the general reformation of the church the
principal preoccupation of this holy synod is that the pastors set over the church may be such
that, like pillars and bases, they will firmly uphold the church by the strength of their doctrine
and merits. The office enjoined on prelates manifestly shows how great care should be taken
in their election, for they are appointed for the government of souls for which our lord Jesus
Christ died and shed his precious blood. Therefore the sacred canons promulgated under the
Spirit of God, providentially established that each church and college or convent should elect
a prelate for itself. Adhering to these prescriptions this holy synod, assembled in the same
Spirit, establishes and defines that a general reservation of all metropolitan, cathedral,
collegiate and monastic churches and elective dignities ought not to be made or used by the
Roman pontiff in the future, always with the exception of reservations contained in the body
of law and those which may arise in territories mediately or immediately subject to the
Roman church by reason of direct or beneficial dominion. Rather, provision should duly be
made for the aforesaid metropolitan, cathedral, monastic and collegiate churches and elective
dignities, when they are vacant, by canonical elections and confirmations in conformity with
the dispositions of the common law, without thereby derogating from statutes, privileges and
reasonably customs, all postulations in the disposition of the common law remaining intact.
This holy synod also decrees that it will be in conformity with reason and beneficial for the
common good that the Roman pontiff should attempt nothing contrary to this salutary decree,
except for an important, reasonable and manifest cause, which is to be specified expressly in
an apostolic letter. So that this salutary decree may be more strictly adhered to, the same holy
synod wishes that, among other things that the Roman pontiff shall profess on assuming
office, he shall swear to observe inviolably this decree.

Since prelates should be such as is described above, those with the right of electing them
should be very careful that they make a worthy election in the presence of God and of the
people, and let them be most solicitous to elect such persons as can fill so great an office. Let
them remember that if they act in so important an affair either fraudulently or carelessly or
without regard for the fear of God, they will be the authors and cause of evil pastors and will
therefore share in the penalties which the evil pastors themselves will suffer in the severe
judgment of God. Since the endeavour of human fragility can effect nothing without the help
of almighty God, from whom every good endowment and every perfect gift comes down,
those in whose hands lies the election of a pontiff or an abbot shall meet in church on the day
of the election in order to hear with great devotion a mass of the holy Spirit, whom they will
humbly petition to deign to inspire them to elect a worthy pastor. The more devoutly they
approach the act of election, the more readily they will merit that grace, so let them confess
and reverently receive the sacrament of the Eucharist. When they have entered the place of
the election of any prelate who is to be chosen through election, they shall swear in the hands
of the president of the chapter, and the president in the hands of his immediate subordinate, in
these words: I, N. , swear and promise to almighty God and to such and such a saint
(according to the dedication of the church) to elect the person who I believe will be the more
useful to the church in spiritual and temporal things, and not to give a vote to anyone who I
think is procuring the election for himself by the promise or gift of some temporal thing, or

333
by making a request in person or through another, or in any other way directly or indirectly.
He who appoints a procurator to elect a certain person shall take the same oath and shall
confess and communicate; so also shall a procurator with a general mandate for election in
matters in which by common law he can be appointed a procurator in the business of such an
election. The oath shall be taken also by those who may have made an agreement about the
election of a future prelate, and they too are obliged to confess and to communicate. If they
do not do so, for that occasion they shall be deprived by law of the power of electing.
Thereupon let them elect to the said prelacy a man of lawful age, of serious character and
adequate education, already in sacred orders and suitable in other respects in accordance with
canonical regulations.

If the election is made in another way and of a different kind of person than the above or by
the wickedness of simony, the election shall be invalid and null by law. Those electing
simoniacally shall be automatically subject to perpetual deprivation of the right of electing,
besides other penalties. Others shall be subject to canonical penalties. Those elected
simoniacally and those who take part in such a simoniacal election, as well as the electors and
those confirmed shall automatically incur the penalty of excommunication in horror of so
great a crime. Moreover, those so elected and confirmed cannot be absolved from such guilt
and excommunication unless they freely resign the churches and dignities which they had
disgracefully obtained, and they are rendered perpetually disqualified from acquiring them
again. In order to remove every root of ambition this holy synod implores through the tender
mercy of Jesus Christ and most earnestly exhorts kings and princes, communities and others
of whatever rank or dignity, ecclesiastical or secular, not to write letters to electors or to
provide petitions for someone who will get such petitions or letters for himself or for another,
and much less to resort to threats or pressure or anything else whereby the process of election
would be rendered less free. Similarly, in virtue of holy obedience, it is enjoined on electors
not to elect anyone on the strength of such letters, petitions, threats or pressure.

When the election has been completed and presented to the person who has the right of
confirmation, if a co-elected person or an objector to the election shows himself, he should be
summoned by name to discuss the matter of the disputed election. Usually a public
announcement should be made in the church in which the election was held, in accordance
with the constitution of Boniface VIII of happy memory. Whether or not a co-elected person
or an objector appears, the confirmer should proceed in virtue of his office, as is done in the
business of the inquisition, using diligence in the due examination and discussion of the form
of the election, of the merits of the one elected and of all the circumstances. The confirmation
or the annulment of the election should be done in a judicial manner. So that the whole
process may be clean and without blemish or even a suspicion of it, the confirmer should
altogether refrain, personally as well as through others, from presuming to demand anything
at all or even to receive free offerings in return for the confirmation or under the pretext of
homage, subvention, gratitude or any other excuse of supposed custom or privilege. For
notaries and scribes in such cases, let a moderate fee be levied which is proportionate to the
work of writing and not to the value of the prelacy. If the said confirmers shall confirm
elections in contravention of the above regulations or in respect of unsuitable persons or

334
involving simony, such confirmations are automatically null. This is to be the case for the
occasion, for those who confirm persons other than as stated above: but for the stain of
simony, if they have incurred it, they automatically incur sentence of excommunication, from
which they cannot be absolved except by the Roman pontiff’, except at the point of death.

This holy synod exhorts the supreme pontiff, since he should be the mirror and standard of all
sanctity and purity, not to demand or accept anything at all for confirming elections referred
to him. Otherwise, if he scandalizes the church by notorious and repeated contraventions, he
will be delated to a future council. However, for the burdens which he must carry for the
government of the universal church, and for the sustenance of the cardinals of the holy
Roman church and of other necessary officials, this holy council will make due and suitable
provision before its dissolution. If it does not make any provision in this way, then those
churches and benefices which hitherto paid a certain tax on the entry into office of a new
prelate, shall be obliged thenceforward to pay in parts half of this tax for the year after their
peaceful possession; this provision shall continue until the sustenance of the said pope and
cardinals is otherwise provided for. By these ordinances the same synod does not intend any
prejudice to the holy Roman and universal church or to any other church.

SESSION 13 11 September 1433

[In this session there was read out, Accusation of contumacy of the pope made by the
promoters of the sacred council; the time-limit already intimated to Eugenius IV for him to
come to Basel and to abrogate his decree dissolving the council was deferred; finally a new
Decree for the protection of members was approved. ]

SESSION 14 7 November 1433

[In this session there was made, Another deferral, for ninety days, of the monition to the
pope, to which were added two proposals, one regarding the revoking of the suspension of
the council. the other regarding Eugenius IV’s assent to the council. ]

SESSION 15 26 November 1433

[On provincial and synodal councils]

The holy general council of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. Already this holy synod has promulgated a most
salutary decree on the stability and authority of general councils, the frequent holding of
which is a principal means of cultivating the Lord’s field. Indeed, since there is no doubt that
episcopal synods and provincial councils form part of this same cultivation, inasmuch as the
ancient canons decreed that they should be frequent, so this holy synod, desiring that ancient
and praiseworthy customs should be observed in our age, establishes and commands that an
episcopal synod should be held yearly in every diocese after the octave of Easter, or on
another day according to diocesan custom, at least once a year where custom does not
prescribe two, by the diocesan in person unless he is prevented by a canonical impediment, in
which case by a vicar who is fitted for the task. This synod should last at least two or three
days, or as the bishops deem to be necessary.

335
On the first day, when the diocesan and all those who are obliged to be present at the synod
have assembled, during or after the celebration of mass, the diocesan or another in his name
shall expound the word of God, exhorting all to strive after good behaviour and refrain from
vice, and to strive after what pertains to ecclesiastical discipline and each one’s duties, and
especially that those who have the care of souls should instruct the people subject to them in
doctrine and with salutary exhortations on Sundays and feast-days. Then there should be read
out the provincial and synodal statutes and, among other things, a comprehensive treatise on
how the sacraments should be administered and other useful points for the instruction of
priests. Then the diocesan himself should diligently inquire into the life and morals of his
subjects and check with suitable correction the evil of simony, usurious contracts,
concubinage, fornication and all other faults and excesses. He should revoke alienations of
ecclesiastical property forbidden by law, and he should correct and reform abuses of clerics
and other subjects who have failed in respect of the divine office and the wearing of proper
dress. Since many scandals often arise because Pope Boniface VIII’s constitution Periculoso
on the enclosure of nuns is not observed, the diocesan should insist that this enclosure be
strictly observed in accordance with that constitution; also that all religious subject to the
diocesan should inviolably observe the rules and constitutions of their orders, especially that
all ownership is renounced by them. Also let nothing be demanded simoniacally at their
reception into a religious order. A chief care of the bishop at the synod should be to make
inquiry and to apply proper remedies lest any teaching that is heretical, erroneous, scandalous
or offensive to pious ears, or fortune-telling, divinations incantations, superstitions or any
diabolic inventions, infiltrate into his diocese. Let there be appointed synodal witnesses, who
should be serious, prudent and honest men, filled with zeal for God’s law, in a number
proportionate to the area of the diocese, or others with their powers if none are appointed for
this, who may be removed by the diocesan if they seem to him to be unsuitable and he may
appoint others (as he thinks fit). They shall be obliged to take an oath in the hands of the
diocesan himself or of his vicar, as is stated in the canon Episcopus in synodo; they shall
travel round the diocese for a year and shall refer what they have seen to be in need of
correction and reform to those whose duty it is to correct and reform. If these matters are not
corrected and reformed, they shall refer them to a subsequent synod, when proper remedies
should be applied. Besides what the diocesan hears from the synodal witnesses or others
exercising their office, he should himself inquire assiduously about the faults of his subjects
and so confront the guilty with the discipline of needed correction that it may serve as an
example to others inclined to do evil.

Also, in every province within two years of the end of a general council, and thereafter at
least once in every three years, a provincial council should be held in a safe place. It should
be attended by both the archbishop and all his suffragans and others who are obliged to take
part in such provincial councils, after a due summons has been issued to them. If a bishop is
prevented by a canonical impediment, he should designate his procurator, not only to excuse
and justify his absence, but also to participate in the council in his name and to report back
what the council decides. Otherwise the bishop is automatically suspended from receiving
half the fruits of his church for one year: these should be effectively diverted to the fabric of

336
his church by someone deputed in the council itself. Others who fail to attend are to be
punished at the decision of the council and other penalties of the law are to remain in force.
Provincial councils are not to be held while a general council is sitting and for six months
beforehand. At the beginning of a provincial council the metropolitan or someone in his name
during the celebration of mass or afterwards, shall deliver an exhortation calling to mind the
things that pertain to the ecclesiastical state and especially the episcopal office and warning
all the participants that, as the prophet says, if any soul is lost by their fault his blood will be
required by the Lord at their hands. In particular, there should be a strict warning that orders
and benefices should be conferred, without any simony, on worthy and deserving persons
whose lives are sufficiently well known. Above all, the greatest care and mature inquiry
should be used when entrusting the care of souls. Ecclesiastical property on no account
should be used for illegal purposes, but for the glory of God and the conservation of churches
and, following the holy canons, with a primary concern for the poor and needy, mindful that
at the tribunal of the eternal judge they will have to give an account of all of it to the very last
farthing. In these councils there should be, according to the regulations of the law, a careful
investigation into the correction of faults, the reform of the morals of subjects and especially
the conduct of bishops in conferring benefices, confirming elections, administering orders,
deputing confessors, preaching to the people, punishing the faults of their subjects and
observing episcopal synods, and in any other points respecting the episcopal office and the
jurisdiction and administration of bishops in spiritual and temporal matters, especially
whether they keep their hands clean of the stain of simony, in order that all those who are
found to have transgressed in the aforesaid matters may be corrected and punished by the
council. A similar careful inquiry should be instituted about the metropolitan himself in all
these respects, and the council should explain clearly to him his faults and defects,
admonishing and imploring him that since he is called and ought to be the father of others, he
should altogether desist from such failings. Even so, the council should send straightaway to
the Roman pontiff, or to another of his superiors if he has one, a written account of the
investigation made about him, so that he may receive punishment and fitting reform from the
Roman pontiff or other superior. Besides, if there are discords, quarrels and feuds among
some which could disturb the peace and tranquillity of the province, the holy council should
strive to pacify them and seek watchfully, as would a dutiful father, for peace and agreement
among its sons. If discords of this sort arise between kingdoms, provinces and principalities,
the holy bishops of God should straightaway arrange the simultaneous convocation of
provincial councils and, in combining their respective counsel and help, strive to banish
whatever promotes discord; they should not cease from this out of love or hatred for anyone,
but raising the eyes of their minds to God alone and the salvation of their people and putting
aside all half-heartedness, they should be intent on the sacred work of peace.

Moreover, in a provincial synod that immediately precedes a forthcoming general council,

thought should be given to all that is likely to be dealt with in that general council, to the
glory of God and the good of the province and the salvation of the Christian people. Let a
suitable number of people be elected at it to go in the name of the whole province to the next
general council; let them be provided for by a grant or in some other way, according to the
law and the judgment of the provincial council; in such a way, however, that those wishing to

337
go to the council or their clergy, in addition to those deputed as above, shall in no way be
disadvantaged thereby. Also, let there be read out in each provincial council those things
which the canonical regulations order to be read out in them, so that they may be observed
inviolably and transgressors may be duly punished. If metropolitans and diocesans fail to
celebrate provincial and episcopal synods at the aforesaid time, after the cessation of any
legal impediment, they shall lose half of all fruits and revenues accruing to them by reason of
their churches, and these shall be applied immediately to the fabric of their churches. If they
persist in such neglect for three consecutive months, they shall automatically be suspended
from their offices and benefices. After these intervals of time have elapsed, with the aforesaid
penalties, the senior bishop in the province of the metropolitan, or the person in orders who is
highest in dignity below a bishop, unless by custom or privilege it pertains to another, is
obliged to supply for this failure to hold the said provincial and episcopal synods. Moreover,
this holy synod bids all superiors of religious communities and orders of all kinds, who are
responsible for holding chapters, to hold them at the appointed times, under the aforesaid
penalties, and to see that they are held; and let them aim in them, in accordance with
canonical sanctions and the constitutions of the orders, at a true reform of the individual
communities and orders, so that thereafter regular observance may duly flourish in all
monasteries in accordance with their rules and constitutions, and in particular that the three
fundamental vows of profession may be strictly observed. By the aforesaid, however, the
holy synod does not mean to derogate in any way from anyone’s rights.

SESSION 16 5 February 1434

[This session declares the adherence of Pope Eugenius to the council, with the usual
ceremonies; Eugenius’s bull Dudum sacrum, and three other bulls abrogated by that bull, are
incorporated into the acts. ]

SESSION 17 26 April 1434

[On the admission of the presidents into the council in the name of the lord pope Eugenius
IV]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, admits the beloved sons of the church Nicholas, priest of the title of holy
Cross in Jerusalem, and Julian, deacon of St Angelo, cardinals of the holy Roman church, the
venerable John, archbishop of Taranto, and Peter, bishop of Padua, and the beloved son of the
church Louis, abbot of St Justina of Padua, as presidents in this sacred council in the name,
stead and place of the most holy lord pope Eugenius IV, to have the fullest authority and
effect throughout, but only on the following conditions: they are to be without any coercive
jurisdiction, and the way of proceeding hitherto observed in this council is to remain
unchanged, especially what is contained in the ordinances of this sacred council beginning,
First, there shall be four deputations, as there are, among which all from the council shall be
distributed equally as far as is possible, etc. It also ordains that apart from on a Friday, which
is the ordinary day for a general congregation, another general congregation cannot be called
unless at least three of the deputations agree to this beforehand. And then the presidents
should be informed, or one of them, so that they may announce the programme. If they do

338
not, one of the promoters of the council or someone from the deputations shall announce the
programme. All from the council shall come to the congregation. On the other occasions, if
the three deputations do not agree, nobody shall come to that congregation; and whatever is
done there shall be null and void. The same with regard to a session. When what has been
agreed upon by the deputations has been read out in the general congregation, the first of the
presidents there present, even if another or others of them are absent, shall conclude the
matter in accordance with the ordinances of the sacred council. If he or another of the
presidents then presiding refuses to do this, the next prelate in the order of seating shall
conclude the matter. If he is unwilling, let another in succession do it. If it happens that none
of the presidents comes to a congregation or a session of the general council, then the first
prelate, as indicated above, shall fulfill the office of president for that day. Also, all the acts
of this sacred council shall be made and dispatched under the name and seal of this council,
as has been done until now.

SESSION 1 8 26 June 1434

[On the renewal of the decree of the council of Constance about the authority and power of
general councils]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. It is well known that it redounds to the great
benefit of the catholic church that its authority, which was earlier declared in the sacred
council of Constance and to which all are obliged to submit, should be manifested frequently
and the attention of all should be drawn to it. Just as councils of the past were accustomed to
renew the salutary institutions and declarations of previous synods, so this holy synod too
renews that necessary declaration on the authority of general councils, which was
promulgated in the said council of Constance in the words that follow: First it declares . . .
and Next it declares ,

SESSION 19 7 September 1434

[On the agreement between the council and the Greeks about union]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. As a dutiful mother is ever anxious about the
health of her children and is uneasy until any dissension among them has been quietened, so
and to a much greater extent holy mother church, which regenerates its children to eternal
life, is wont to strive with every effort that all who go by the name of Christian may put aside
all quarrelling and may guard in fraternal charity the unity of the faith, without which there
can be no salvation. It has therefore been a primary care of this holy synod from the
beginning of its meeting to put an end to the recent discord of the Bohemians and the ancient
discord of the Greeks, and to bind them to us in the same permanent bond of faith and
charity. We invited in all charity to this sacred council, through our letters and envoys, first
the Bohemians, since they are nearer, and then the Greeks, so that the holy union might be
achieved. Although many from the beginning thought that the Bohemian affair was not only

339
difficult but almost impossible and judged our labours to be a waste of time and useless,
nevertheless our lord Jesus Christ, to whom nothing is impossible, has so safely directed the
business until now that the invitation to the Bohemians has been of much greater benefit to
holy church than the many powerful armies which frequently invaded their country.

This fills us with greater hope to pursue the union with the Greeks with all confidence and
perseverance. We approach this task the more willingly because we perceive the Greeks to be
very inclined to this union. For as soon as the most serene emperor of the Greeks and the
patriarch of Constantinople were approached by our envoys, straightaway they appointed to
this holy synod three outstanding men from those who seem to be of great authority among
them — the first of whom was indeed a blood-relative of the emperor — with a sufficient
commission from the emperor himself signed by his own hand and with a golden seal, and
furnished with letters of the patriarch. Both in a general congregation and in the presence of
our commissaries they expressed the most fervent desire of the emperor, the patriarch and the
whole eastern church for this union. They urge and daily stimulate us in a wonderful way to
pursue this holy work, strongly and persistently affirming two things: that union is only
possible in a universal synod in which both the western church and the eastern church meet,
and that union will assuredly follow if matters proceed in that synod in the way that is agreed
below. We were filled with joy and gladness when we heard this. For what happier and more
glorious thing could ever happen to the catholic church than that so many eastern peoples,
who seem to be about equal in number to those of our faith, should be joined with us in the
unity of faith ? What could be more useful and fruitful to the Christian people, since the
beginning of the church, than for an inveterate and destructive schism to be completely
eradicated ? Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the
Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that
very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the catholic faith.
What, then, should not be attempted and done by Christ’s faithful for so holy and salutary an
objective? What Catholic is not in duty bound to risk not only the passing substance of this
world but even his body and soul for such an advance of the Christian name and the orthodox
faith? Wherefore, we venerable cardinals of the holy Roman church, presidents of the
apostolic see, casting all our thought on God, who alone does great wonders, deputed the
patriarch of Antioch and a suitable number of archbishops, bishops, abbots, masters and
doctors to treat of this question with the ambassadors of the Greeks and to look for a way to
reach a solution. After these men had frequently met and discussed among themselves and
with the envoys, they reached the conclusions given below. These conclusions, in accordance
with the custom of this council, were seriously debated by the deputations and ratified by a
general congregation. Their contents, together with the chrysobull of the lord emperor, are as
follows.

[Agreement of the deputies of the sacred council with the ambassadors of the Greeks]

The ambassadors of the most serene lord emperor of the Greeks and of the lord patriarch of
Constantinople, namely the lord Demetrius protonostiarius Palaeologus Metotides, the
venerable Isidore abbot of the monastery of St Demetrius, and the lord John Dissipatus of the

340
household of the same emperor, meeting together with the lord deputies of the sacred council,
first declared that if the western church would agree that this synod should be held in
Constantinople, the eastern church would meet there at its own expense and there would be
no need for the western church to pay any expenses to eastern prelates. Indeed, the lord
emperor himself would, within his limits, provide for Latin prelates on their way to
Constantinople. But if it was preferred that the prelates of the eastern church should come to
Latin territories for the said synod, then for legitimate reasons the western church would have
to meet the expenses of the eastern church. Since the said lord deputies for many reasons
believed that this union would be more conveniently arranged in the city of Basel, where in
fact the council was sitting, they frequently and urgently pressed the lord envoys that this
place should be chosen for the holy union and offered to pay the necessary expenses for this.
The envoys replied that since the instructions given to them by the emperor and the patriarch
contained limitations on certain places, they would not choose the city of Basel because it
was not mentioned in the instructions. The deputies of the sacred council, aware of the holy
and perfect intention of the council not to spare any labour and expenditure for the honour of
God and the advance of the catholic faith, judged it inexpedient to miss so great a good
merely on a question of place. So they agreed, subject to the council’s consent, to one of the
places named below with the condition, which is detailed later, that one or more persons
should be sent to the lord emperor, the patriarch and others to persuade them by cogent
reasons to agree to the city of Basel. The nominated places are these: Calabria, Ancona or
another maritime territory; Bologna, Milan or another Italian city; and outside Italy, Buda in
Hungary, Vienna in Austria or in the last place, Savoy.

The lord deputies agreed with the lord ambassadors in what follows, subject to the council’s
consent. First, the ambassadors promised that the emperor of the Greeks, the patriarch of
Constantinople, the other three patriarchs and the archbishops, bishops and other ecclesiastics
who can conveniently come, will come to the synod. Likewise, representatives will come
from all the kingdoms and territories subject to the churches of the Greeks, with full power
and authority which shall be confirmed by oath and suitable documents by both the secular
authorities and the prelates. Also, the sacred council shall send one or more ambassadors with
eight thousand ducats for the holding of a congregation of the prelates of the eastern church
in Constantinople. The eight thousand ducats will be paid out by the ambassadors of the
sacred council, as it shall seem good to the lord emperor or to the ambassadors themselves;
but in such a way that, if the said prelates refuse to come to Constantinople or, having come
to Constantinople, refuse to go to the synod, then the emperor shall be bound to restore to the
said ambassadors whatever they may have expended on this matter.

Also, that the western church shall pay the expenses of four large galleys, of which two shall
be from Constantinople and two from elsewhere, to convey to our port at the appropriate time
the emperor, the patriarchs and the prelates of the eastern church with their suites, to the
number of seven hundred persons, and to return them to Constantinople. The western church
shall pay the expenses for this in the following way. For the expenses of the emperor and of
seven hundred persons from Constantinople to our last port, it will give the emperor fifteen
thousand ducats. From the said last port to the place of the said council, and thereafter as long

341
as they remain at the synod and until their return to Constantinople, it will give to the
emperor with the said seven hundred persons fair expenses. Also that within the ten months
after next November, the sacred council shall be obliged to send two large galleys and two
lighter ones to Constantinople with three hundred crossbowmen. On these galleys shall travel
the ambassadors of the sacred council and the lord Demetrius protonostiarius Palaeologus,
chief of the lord emperor’s ambassadors. These ambassadors of the sacred council will have
with them fifteen thousand ducats to be given to the lord emperor for the expenses that he and
the patriarchs, prelates and others who are coming, to the number of seven hundred persons,
shall incur between Constantinople and the last port at which they shall put in, as mentioned
above. Also, the said ambassadors of the sacred council who are to travel on the galleys will
arrange that ten thousand ducats are at hand to be expended, if necessary, on the defense of
the city of Constantinople against any danger that the Turks might cause the city during the
lord emperor’s absence; this money will be expended by someone deputed by the said
ambassadors of the sacred council in proportion to the necessity. Also, the said ambassadors
of the sacred council will pay the cost of two light galleys and three hundred crossbowmen
for the defense of the city of Constantinople in the lord emperor’s absence, and shall ensure
that the crews of the said galleys and the crossbowmen take an oath in the hands of the
emperor that they will serve him faithfully. Their captains shall be appointed by the emperor.
Also, that the said ambassadors shall have for the expenses of the two large galleys what is
usually expended in arming such galleys.

Also, the ambassadors of the sacred council who are to go with the said galleys to
Constantinople, shall name to the lord emperor the port at which they should finally land and
the place, from among those listed above, where the said universal synod shall be held. They
will, however, strive with all their might that the city of Basel be chosen, as is to be hoped.
Also, this sacred council of Basel will remain meanwhile at Basel, and shall not be dissolved
as long as there is no legitimate impediment; but if a legitimate impediment arises, which
may God avert, it may transfer itself for its continuation to another city, in accordance with
the decree The frequent . If the lord emperor is not satisfied with this place, then within one
month after he has landed at the said last port, the sacred council will transfer itself to one of
the said places nominated by the same council, as was said above.

Also that, in any event, all the above shall be fulfilled by both parties; and all the above shall
be effected in a really stable way and with the greatest force and security that is possible for
the sacred council, namely by a decree and under a seal. Also, when all the aforesaid matters
have been concluded and agreed and, as was said, fully confirmed, the supreme pontiff
should give his express consent by his patent bulls. Everything above is to be understood in
good faith, without fraud or deceit and without legitimate or manifest impediment. If all the
clauses are fulfilled, the said ambassadors of the Greeks shall state and promise that assuredly
the above persons will come even if there should be war and threats to their city, and in
confirmation of all this they will deliver to the sacred council a chrysobull of the said
emperor, and on behalf of the said emperor they and the others shall take an oath, in writing
and signed, in pledge of their firm and true belief that the universal holy synod ought to take

342
place with God’s help, unless there intervenes the death of the emperor or some obvious and
real obstacle that cannot be escaped or avoided.

Lastly, the ambassadors of the Greeks were requested to explain the meaning of some terms
contained in their instructions. First, what they understand by “universal synod”. They replied
that the pope and the patriarchs ought to be present at the synod either in person or through
their procurators; similarly other prelates ought to be present either in person or through
representatives; and they promised, as is stated above, that the lord emperor of the Greeks
and the patriarch of Constantinople will participate in person. “Free and inviolate”, that is
each may freely declare his judgment without any obstacle or violence. “Without contention”,
that is without quarrelsome and ill-tempered contention; but debates and discussions which
are necessary, peaceful, honest and charitable are not excluded. “Apostolic and canonical”, to
explain how these words and the way of proceeding in the synod are to be understood, they
refer themselves to what the universal synod itself shall declare and arrange. Also that the
emperor of the Greeks and their church shall have due honour, that is to say, what it had
when the present schism began, always saving the rights, honours, privileges and dignities of
the supreme pontiff and the Roman church and the emperor of the Romans. If any doubt
arises, let it be referred to the decision of the said universal council. There follows the text of
the chrysobull of the said emperor translated from Greek into Latin, Whereas there were sent
. . . 1; and the letter of the lord patriarch of Constantinople with a leaden seal translated from
Greek into Latin, which is as follows, Joseph by the grace of God archbishop of
Constantinople . . . we receive the letter of your reverence . . . 2

By the authority of the universal church, therefore, this holy synod by this present decree
approves, ratifies, confirms, determines and decrees the above clauses and agreements, and it
promises to observe each and all of them and to keep them intact, as is said above. As they
lead to an increase of the orthodox faith and the benefit of the catholic church and the whole
Christian people, they should be most welcome and acceptable to all who love the faith of
Christ. Since, as has been said above, the Greeks for a variety of reasons request that the most
holy lord pope Eugenius IV should expressly consent to these clauses and agreements, lest on
this account so great a good should be let slip, this holy synod implores and begs Eugenius in
all charity, and through the tender mercy of Jesus Christ it requests and demands with all
possible insistence, that he expresses his assent, for the benefit of the faith and of
ecclesiastical unity, to the aforesaid clauses and agreements, which have already been
approved and ratified by a synodal decree, by his bulls in the customary style of the Roman
curia.

[Decree on Jews and neophytes]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. This holy synod following in the footsteps of our
saviour Jesus Christ, desires in deepest charity that all may acknowledge the truth of the
gospel and thereafter abide in it faithfully. By these salutary instructions it desires to provide
measures whereby Jews and other infidels may be converted to the orthodox faith and

343
converts may remain steadfastly in it. It therefore decrees that all diocesan bishops should
depute persons well trained in scripture, several times a year, in the places where Jews and
other infidels live, to preach and expound the truth of the catholic faith in such a way that the
infidels who hear it can recognize their errors. They should compel infidels of both sexes who
have reached the age of discretion, to attend these sermons under pain both of being excluded
from business dealings with the faithful and of other apposite penalties. But the bishops and
the preachers should behave towards them with such charity as to gain them for Christ not
only by the manifestation of the truth but also by other kindnesses. The synod decrees that
Christians of whatever rank or status who in any way impede the attendance of Jews at these
sermons, or who forbid it, automatically incur the stigma of being supporters of unbelief.

Since this preaching will be more fruitful in proportion to the linguistic skill of the preachers,
we decree that there must be faithful observance of the constitution of the council of Vienne,
which ordered the provision in certain universities of teachers of the Hebrew, Arabic, Greek
and Chaldean languages. So that this may be more adhered to, we wish that the rectors of
these universities should add to what they swear to on taking office, that they will endeavour
to observe the said constitution. It should be clearly laid down, at the councils of the
provinces in which these universities are situated, that the teachers of the said languages are
to be adequately recompensed.

Furthermore, renewing the sacred canons, we command both diocesan bishops and secular
powers to prohibit in every way Jews and other infidels from having Christians, male or
female, in their households and service, or as nurses of their children; and Christians from
joining with them in festivities, marriages, banquets or baths, or in much conversation, and
from taking them as doctors or agents of marriages or officially appointed mediators of other
contracts. They should not be given other public offices, or admitted to any academic
degrees, or allowed to have on lease lands or other ecclesiastical rents. They are to be
forbidden to buy ecclesiastical books, chalices, crosses and other ornaments of churches
under pain of the loss of the object, or to accept them in pledge under pain of the loss of the
money that they lent. They are to be compelled, under severe penalties, to wear some garment
whereby they can be clearly distinguished from Christians. In order to prevent too much
intercourse, they should be made to dwell in areas, in the cities and towns, which are apart
from the dwellings of Christians and as far distant as possible from churches. On Sundays
and other solemn festivals they should not dare to have their shops open or to work in public.

[About those who desire conversion to the faith]

If any of them wishes to be converted to the catholic faith, all his goods, both movable and
immovable, shall remain intact and unharmed in his possession. But if his goods were
acquired by usury or illicit dealings, and the persons to whom restitution ought to be made
are known, it is absolutely necessary that this restitution be made, since the sin is not forgiven
unless the illegal object is restored. However, if these persons are no longer an issue because
the church has turned the goods to pious uses, this holy synod, acting for the universal
church, grants in favour of the baptism received that the goods should remain with the church

344
as a pious use, and it forbids both ecclesiastics and secular persons, under pain of divine
anathema, to cause or allow to be caused any vexation on this count under any pretext
whatsoever, but they should regard it as a great gain to have won such persons for Christ.
Moreover since, as it is written, if anyone has this world’s goods and sees his brother in need,
yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him ?, this holy synod through
the tender mercy of God exhorts all, both ecclesiastics and secular persons, to stretch out
helping hands to such converts if they are poor or in need at the time of their conversion.
Bishops should exhort Christians to aid these converts and should themselves support them
from the income of churches, as far as they can, and from what passes through their hands for
the benefit of the poor, and they should defend them with fatherly solicitude from detraction
and invective.

Since by the grace of baptism converts have been made fellow citizens with the saints and
members of the household of God, and since regeneration in the spirit is of far greater worth
than birth in the flesh, we determine by this edict that they should enjoy these privileges,
liberties and immunities, of the cities and localities in which they are regenerated by holy
baptism, which others obtain merely by reason of birth and origin. Let the priests who baptize
them and those who receive them from the sacred font carefully instruct them, both before
and after their baptism, in the articles of the faith and the precepts of the new law and the
ceremonies of the catholic church. Both they and the bishops should strive that, at least for a
long time, they do not mingle much with Jews or infidels lest, as occurs with convalescents
from illness, a small occasion may make them fall back into their former perdition. Since
experience shows that social communication between converts renders them weaker in our
faith, and has been found to damage much their salvation, this holy synod exhorts local
ordinaries to exercise care and zeal that they are married to born-Christians, in so far as this
seems to promote an increase of the faith. Converts should be forbidden, under pain of severe
penalties, to bury the dead according to the Jewish custom or to observe in any way the
sabbath and other solemnities and rites of their old sect. Rather, they should frequent our
churches and sermons, like other Catholics, and conform themselves in everything to
Christian customs. Those who show contempt for the above should be delated to the diocesan
bishops or inquisitors of heresy by their parish priests, or by others who are entrusted by law
or ancient custom with inquiring into such matters, or by anyone else at all. Let them be so
punished, with the aid of the secular arm if need be, as to give an example to others.

There should be careful inquiry into all these things in provincial councils and synods, and an
opportune remedy should be applied not only to negligent bishops and priests but also to
converts and infidels who scorn the above. If anyone, of whatever rank or status, shall
encourage or defend such converts against being compelled to observe the Christian rite or
anything else mentioned above, he shall incur the penalties promulgated against abettors of
heretics. If converts fail to correct themselves after a canonical warning, and as Judaizers are
found to have returned to their vomit, let proceedings be taken against them as against
perfidious heretics in conformity with the enactments of the sacred canons. If there have been
granted to Jews or infidels, or perhaps shall be granted to them in the future, any indults or
privileges by any ecclesiastics or secular persons, of whatever status or dignity, even papal or

345
imperial, which tend in any way to the detriment of the catholic faith, the Christian name or
anything mentioned above, this holy synod decrees them quashed and annulled; the apostolic
and synodal decrees and constitutions enacted about the above remaining in force. In order
that the memory of this holy constitution may be perpetually retained and that nobody may be
able to claim ignorance of it, the holy synod orders that it should be promulgated at least once
a year during divine service in all cathedral and college churches and other holy places where
the faithful gather in large numbers.

SESSION 20 22 January 1435

[Decree on concubinaries]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. We are inclined to grant requests for authentic
statutes and decrees in proportion to the likelihood that they will be observed. For this reason
we ordered to be extracted from our acts and recorded in this present document, at the request
of the beloved sons of the church N. and N. , who assert that they need texts of this kind for
judicial and extra-judicial purposes, the texts of the constitutions transcribed below, which we
issued some time ago and promulgated in the cathedral church of Basel on 22 January 1435
and incorporated into our acts. They are as follows.

Any cleric of whatsoever status, condition, religious order or dignity, even if it be episcopal
or some other pre-eminence, who, after receiving notice of this constitution, as he may be
presumed to have done, for two months after its publication in cathedral churches, which
bishops are bound to arrange, after the constitution has come to his notice, still persists as a
public concubinary, shall automatically be suspended for three months from the fruits of all
his benefices. These fruits shall be consigned by his superior to the fabric or some other
evident need of the churches from which the fruits come. His superior is bound to admonish
him, as soon as he is aware that he is a public concubinary, to dismiss his concubine within a
very short time. If he does not dismiss her, or having dismissed her takes her again or another
woman, this holy synod orders his superior to deprive him of all his benefices. These public
concubinaries moreover, shall be disqualified from receiving any goods, dignities, benefices
or offices until such time as, after dismissing their concubines and an evident emendation of
their lives, they shall have received a dispensation from their superiors. Those who receive a
dispensation and then return to public concubinage, as to their vomit, shall be totally debarred
from the above without any hope of another dispensation. If those who are responsible for
correcting such people fail to punish them, as stated above, their superiors shall punish
properly both them for their neglect and the others for their concubinage. Severe measures
must be taken also in provincial and synodal councils against both those who neglect to
punish and those who are reputed offenders, even by suspension from the conferment of
benefices or some other adequate penalty. Those who are found by provincial councils or
their superiors to deserve deprivation for public concubinage, but who can be deprived only
by the supreme pontiff, should be referred immediately to the supreme pontiff together with
the process of inquiry. The same diligence and inquiry should be employed by general and
provincial chapters in respect of their subjects: and other penalties established against them

346
and other non-public concubinaries are to remain in force. By “public” is meant not only
someone whose concubinage is made notorious by a judicial sentence or a legal confession or
by a notoriety that no subterfuge can conceal, but also anyone who keeps a woman suspected
of incontinence and of ill repute and who, after being admonished by his superior, does not
dismiss her.

Because in some regions there are persons with ecclesiastical jurisdiction who are not
ashamed to accept bribes from concubinaries for allowing them to wallow in their filth, this
holy synod commands, under pain of eternal malediction, that henceforth they shall not
tolerate or dissemble such conduct in any way by agreement, composition or promise;
otherwise, in addition to the aforesaid penalty for negligence, they shall be strictly obliged
and compelled to give to pious causes double what they have received in this way. Prelates
should take every care to segregate from their subjects concubines and women of doubtful
repute, even by recourse to the secular arm if need be, and they should not allow children
born of such concubinage to live with their fathers. This holy synod also orders that this
constitution is to be published in the aforesaid synods and chapters, and that stern warning
should be given to subjects to dismiss their concubines. It also enjoins on all secular men,
even if they are of royal rank, not to interpose any obstacle whatever under any excuse to
prelates who proceed, in virtue of their office, against their subjects for concubinage.
Moreover, since fornication of every kind is forbidden by divine law and is to be avoided
under pain of mortal sin, this holy synod warns all lay people, both married and single, to
abstain from concubinage. That man is most blameworthy who has a wife but goes to another
woman. If a single man cannot abstain, let him marry, as the apostle advises. Let those
responsible strive with all their strength, by salutary advice and canonical sanctions, for the
observance of this divine precept.

[Excommunicates are not to be shunned unless specifically named]

To avoid scandals and many dangers and to relieve timorous consciences, this holy synod
decrees that henceforth nobody shall be obliged to abstain from communion with anyone in
the administration and reception of sacraments or in any other sacred or profane matters, or to
shun someone or to observe an ecclesiastical interdict, on the ground of any ecclesiastical
sentence, censure, suspension or prohibition that has been promulgated in general by a person
or by the law, unless the sentence, prohibition, suspension or censure was specifically or
expressly promulgated or pronounced by a judge against a specified person, college,
university, church or place, or if it is clear that someone has incurred a sentence of
excommunication with such notoriety that it cannot be concealed or in any way excused in
law. For the synod wishes such persons to be avoided in accordance with canonical sanctions.
By this, however, it does not intend any relief or favour to those so excommunicated,
suspended, interdicted or prohibited.

[Interdicts are not to be imposed lightly]

347
Since an undiscriminating promulgation of interdicts has led to many scandals, this holy
synod determines that no city, town, castle, vill or place may be laid under an ecclesiastical
interdict except by reason or through the fault of the places themselves or of their lord,
governors or officials. Such places cannot be laid under an interdict by any ordinary or
delegated authority by reason or through the fault of any other private person, unless the
person has been previously excommunicated and denounced, or publicly named in a church,
and the lords or governors or officials of the places, though requested by the authority of a
judge, have not effectively evicted the excommunicated person within two days or made him
give satisfaction. If he is evicted after two days, or retires or gives satisfaction, divine
services may be resumed straightaway. This applies also to dependencies of the place.

So that lawsuits may be brought to a speedier end, a second appeal is hereby forbidden if it is
a question of the same complaint or if the appeal is made from the same interlocutory
sentence which does not have the force of a final judgment. Anyone who makes a frivolous
or unjust appeal before the final judgment shall be condemned by the appeal judge to pay to
the party appealed against the sum of fifteen gold florins of the treasury, in addition to the
expenses, damages and interest.

SESSION 21 9 June 1435

[On annates]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. In the name of the holy Spirit the paraclete, this
holy synod decrees that in future, both in the Roman curia and elsewhere, for the
confirmation of elections, admission of postulations and provision of presentations and for
collations, dispositions, elections, postulations, presentations, even if made by layfolk,
institutions, installations and investitures, in respect of cathedral and metropolitan churches,
monasteries, dignities, benefices and any ecclesiastical offices whatsoever, and for sacred
orders, blessings and pallia, nothing whatsoever is to be exacted, either before or after, for
sealing the bull of the letters, or for common annates, minor services, first fruits or dues, or
under any other title or name, or on the pretext of any custom, privilege or statute, or for any
other reason or occasion, directly or indirectly. Only the writers abbreviators and registrars of
the letters or minutes shall receive a suitable salary for their work. If anyone dares to
contravene this sacred canon by demanding, giving or promising anything, he shall incur the
penalty inflicted on simoniacs and shall acquire no right or title to the dignities or benefices
thus obtained. Obligations, promises, censures and mandates, and whatever is done to the
prejudice of this most salutary decree, are to be deemed null and void. Even if, which God
forbid, the Roman pontiff, who beyond all others should carry out and observe the canons of
universal councils, should scandalize the church by acting contrary to this sanction, he should
be delated to a general council. Others are to be punished by their own superiors with a fitting
penalty, proportionate to their offence, in accordance with canonical sanctions.

[About those in peaceful possession]

348
Whoever has been in possession for the last three years, not through violence but with a
specious title, peacefully and without a lawsuit, of a prelacy, dignity, benefice or office, or
shall have possession of them in the future, cannot be disturbed afterwards in his claim or
possession by anyone, even by reason of a newly enacted law, except in the case of warfare
or some other legitimate impediment, which he must protest and intimate in accordance with
the council of Vienne. A lawsuit in this case is to be understood as regards future
controversies, if the proceedings have reached the execution of the citation, the exhibition of
his right in the judgment and the observance of all the terms. Ordinaries, however, should
make careful inquiry to see that nobody possesses a benefice without a title. If they find such
a person, they shall declare that the right does not belong to him, and they shall give the right
either to him, if they think fit, unless he is an intruded person or violent or undeserving in
some other way, or to some other suitable person.

[How the divine office is to be celebrated in church]

A person who is about to make a request to a secular prince takes pains to compose himself
and his words by decent dress, becoming gesture, regulated speech and close attention of
mind. How much more careful ought he to be in all these things when he is about to pray to
almighty God in a sacred place! The holy synod therefore decrees that in all cathedral and
collegiate churches, at suitable times and at the sound of a bell, the divine praises shall be
reverently celebrated by everyone through all the hours, not hurriedly but gravely and slowly
and with reasonable pauses, especially in the middle of each verse of the psalms, and with a
suitable distinction between solemn and ferial offices. Those who recite the canonical hours
shall enter the church wearing an ankle-length gown and a clean surplice reaching below the
middle of the shin-bone or a cloak, according to the different seasons and regions, and
covering their heads not with a cowl but with an amice or a biretta. Having arrived in the
choir, they shall behave with such gravity as the place and the duty demand, not gossiping or
talking among themselves or with others, nor reading letters or other writings. They have
gathered there to sing, so they should not keep their mouths shut rather all of them, especially
those with more important functions, should sing to God eagerly in psalms, hymns and
canticles. When “Glory be to the Father and, to the Son and to the holy Spirit” is being
recited, all shall rise. Whenever mention is made of the glorious name of Jesus, at which
every knee should bow in heaven, on earth and under the earth, they shall bow their heads.
Nobody should read or say the office there privately during the public chanting of the hours
in common, for not only does this take away due honour from the choir but also it distracts
the singers. To ensure that these things and whatever else concerns the performance of the
divine office and the discipline of the choir are duly observed, the dean, or the person whose
duty it is, shall carefully keep watch, looking round, to see if there is anything not in order.
Transgressors shall be punished with the penalty of that hour in which the offence was
committed, or even more severely, as the gravity of the fault demands.

[The times at which each one should be in choir]

349
Whoever is not present at matins before the end of the psalm Come let us exult at the other
hours before the end of the first psalm, and at mass before the last Lord have mercy, until the
end, except in cases of necessity and then only with the permission of the president of the
choir, is to be considered absent from that hour, saving however any stricter regulations of
churches in this regard. The same is to be observed with regard to those who do not remain in
processions from the start until the finish. To ensure observance of this, someone, who shall
be under oath to act honestly and to spare none, should be deputed with the duty of noting
individuals who are absent at the appointed times. This holy synod also orders that in
churches in which stipends are not allotted for individual hours, a deduction should be made
from the gross revenues of delinquents so that their emoluments are more or less
proportionate to their labours, thus destroying the abuses whereby anybody present at only
one hour gets a full day’s stipend and presidents or deans or other officials, from the mere
fact of being officials, receive the daily stipends even when absent for purposes other than
those of their church.

[How the canonical hours should be recited outside choir]

This holy synod admonishes all holders of benefices, or those in holy orders, since they are
bound to the canonical hours, if they wish their prayers to be acceptable to God, to recite the
day and night offices, not in a mumble or between their teeth, nor swallowing or abbreviating
their words, nor intermingling conversation and laughter, but, whether they are alone or with
others, reverently and distinctly and in such a place as will not diminish devotion, for which
they ought to dispose and prepare themselves, as the scripture says: Before prayer prepare
your soul, and do not be like someone who tempts God.

[About those who wander about the church during services]

Any holder of a benefice in a church, especially of a major one, if he is seen wandering

around inside or outside the church during the divine services, strolling or chatting with
others, shall automatically forfeit his attendance not only for that hour but also for the whole
day. If after being corrected once he does not stop, let him be deprived of his stipends for a
month, or, if he is obstinate, let him be subjected to a heavier penalty so that in the end he is
forced to desist. Also, noisy comings and goings in the church should not be allowed to
impede or disturb the divine service. Regulars who err in these matters in conventual
churches should be punished with a heavy penalty at the judgment of their superior.

[About a notice-board hanging in the choir]

So that everything may be well ordered in the house of God and that each person may know
what he has to do, let there be affixed a notice-board permanently hanging in the choir, with
information on it of the duties of each canon or other benefice-holder as regards reading or
singing at the individual hours during the week or a longer time. Anyone who fails to do in
person or by proxy what is prescribed there, shall forfeit for each hour the stipend of one day.

350
[On those who at mass do not complete the creed, or sing songs, or say mass in too low a
voice or without a server]

There are abuses in some churches whereby the “I believe in one God”, which is the symbol
and profession of our faith, is not sung to the end, or the preface or the Lord’s prayer is
omitted, or secular songs are sung in the church, or masses (including private ones) are said
without a server, or the secret prayers are said in so low a voice that they cannot be heard by
the people nearby. These abuses are to stop and we decree that any transgressors shall be duly
punished by their superiors.

[About those who pledge divine worship]

We abolish also that abuse, so manifestly incompatible with divine worship, whereby some
canons of churches, having contracted debts, bind themselves to their creditors in such a way
that, if they do not pay their debts by a fixed time there will be a cessation of divine services.
We declare this obligation null even if it has been confirmed by oath. We decree that those
who make these illicit agreements shall automatically lose for three months their revenues,
which shall be applied to their church They shall receive no emoluments from their church
until they resume the divine services.

[On holding chapters at the same time as the principal’ mass]

This holy synod forbids chapters and other meetings of canons to be held, or chapter business
to be transacted, at the same time as the principal mass, especially on solemn feasts, unless an
urgent and manifest necessity suddenly occurs. Whoever summons the chapter for that time
shall be suspended from receiving his daily stipends for a week, and the canons shall forego
their stipends for that hour.

[On not performing spectacles in churches]

In some churches, during certain celebrations of the year, there are carried on various
scandalous practices. Some people with mitre, crozier and pontifical vestments give blessings
after the manner of bishops. Others are robed like kings and dukes; in some regions this is
called the feast of fools or innocents, or of children. Some put on masked and theatrical
comedies, others organize dances for men and women, attracting people to amusement and
buffoonery. Others prepare meals and banquets there. This holy synod detests these abuses. It
forbids ordinaries as well as deans and rectors of churches, under pain of being deprived of
all ecclesiastical revenues for three months, to allow these and similar frivolities, or even
markets and fairs, in churches, which ought to be houses of prayer, or even in cemeteries.
They are to punish transgressors by ecclesiastical censures and other remedies of the law. The
holy synod decrees that all customs, statutes and privileges which do not accord with these
decrees, unless they add greater penalties, are null.

SESSION 22 15 October 1435

351
[On the condemnation of the book of friar Augustine of Rome, archbishop of Nazareth]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. The main reason, among other pious aims, why
this holy synod assembled was to preserve the truth of the catholic faith and to eradicate
errors and heresies. Therefore the chief goal of our activity is, as soon as we learn of the
spread of something that can harm the purity of the Christian faith or in any way obscures the
brilliance of the light in the minds of the faithful, to eradicate it completely and carefully to
clear the Lord’s field of noxious weeds and brambles. This holy synod therefore condemns
and censures a certain book by master Augustine, commonly called “of Rome”, archbishop of
Nazareth. Its first treatise is entitled, “On the sacrament of the unity of Jesus Christ and the
church, or on the whole Christ”; the second, “On Christ the head and his glorious
sovereignty”, another, “On the charity of Christ towards the elect and his infinite love”. The
holy synod condemns and censures the book as containing teaching that is unsound and
erroneous in the faith, as well as its defenders.

The holy synod especially condemns and censures, in the book, the assertion which is
scandalous, erroneous in the faith and offensive to the ears of the pious faithful, namely:
Christ sins daily and has sinned daily from his very beginning, even though he avers that he
does not understand this as of Christ our saviour, head of the church, but as referring to his
members, which together with Christ the head form the one Christ, as he asserts. Also, the
propositions, and ones similar to them, which the synod declares are contained in the articles
condemned at the sacred council of Constance, namely the following. Not all the justified
faithful are members of Christ, but only the elect, who finally will reign with Christ for ever.
The members of Christ, from whom the church is constituted, are taken according to the
ineffable foreknowledge of God; and the church is constituted only from those who are called
according to his purpose of election. To be a member of Christ, it is not enough to be united
with him in the bond of charity, some other union is needed. Also the following. The human
nature in Christ is really Christ. The human nature in Christ is the person of Christ. The
intimate cause that determines the human nature in Christ is not really distinguished from the
nature that is determined. The human nature in Christ is without doubt the person of the
Word; and the Word in Christ, once the nature has been assumed, is really the person who
assumes. The human nature assumed by the Word in a personal union is truly God, natural
and proper. Christ according to his created will loves the human nature united to the person
of the Word as much as he loves the divine nature. Just as two persons in God are equally
lovable, so the two natures in Christ, the human and the divine, are equally lovable on
account of the common person. The soul of Christ sees God as clearly and intensely as God
sees himself.

These propositions and others springing from the same root, which are to be found in the said
book, this holy synod condemns and censures as erroneous in the faith. Lest it come to pass
that any of the faithful fall into error on account of such teaching, the synod strictly forbids
anyone to teach, preach, defend or approve the teaching of the said book, especially the
aforesaid condemned and censured propositions, and its supporting treatises. It decrees that

352
transgressors shall be punished as heretics and with other canonical penalties. By these
measures the synod intends to detract in nothing from the sayings and writings of the holy
doctors who discourse on these matters. On the contrary, it accepts and embraces them
according to their true understanding as commonly expounded and declared by these doctors
and other catholic teachers in the theological schools. Nor does the synod intend by this
judgment to prejudice the person of the said author since, though duly summoned, he gave
reasons for being absent, and in some of his writings and elsewhere he has submitted his
teaching to the church’s judgment. Further, this holy synod orders all archbishops, bishops,
chancellors of universities and inquisitors of heresy, who are responsible in this matter, to
ensure that nobody has the said book and supporting treatises or presumes to keep them with
him, rather he shall consign them to these authorities, so that they may deal with them in
accordance with the law: otherwise let such persons be proceeded against with canonical
censures.

SESSION 23 26 March 1436

[On the election of the supreme pontiff]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. Since a good shepherd is the salvation of his
flock, it is the duty of this sacred synod to strive, with all the diligence that human law can
contrive, that the Roman pontiff, who is first in the Lord’s flock and the supreme shepherd,
should be and continue to be such as to provide for the salvation of all souls and the benefit
of the whole Christian world and to fulfill worthily so great an office. Therefore it renews the
constitutions about the election of Roman pontiffs which sacred councils and supreme
pontiffs have issued and it adds to them some further salutary norms. It decrees that whenever
the apostolic see falls vacant, all the cardinals of the holy Roman church who are present in
the place where the election of the supreme pontiff is to be held, shall meet together on the
tenth day after the see becomes vacant in some chapel or place near the conclave. From there
they shall process behind a cross, two by two, devoutly singing the Veni creator Spiritus, and
enter the place of the conclave, each taking with him not more than two necessary attendants.
In view of the ceremonies, two clerics may also be admitted, at least one of whom shall be a
notary. The chamberlain together with the deputies for the custody of the conclave shall
ensure that nobody, apart from the aforesaid persons, enters the conclave. After the cardinals
have entered and the doors have been closed, the chamberlain shall enter with the deputies
and carefully examine the cells of all the cardinals. He shall remove any food and edibles
found there, except medicines of the sick and infirm. He shall ensure a careful guard
whenever he leaves and closes the door, and each day he shall closely inspect the food being
brought in for the cardinals and allow only what seems necessary for moderate refreshment,
without prejudice to the decrees passed in the fourth and seventh sessions of this sacred
council.

On the next day all the cardinals, in the presence of all those in the conclave, shall hear a
mass of the holy Spirit and receive the Eucharist. Before the voting begins, they shall swear
before the holy gospels in these words: I, N. , cardinal of . . . , swear and promise to almighty

353
God, Father, Son and holy Spirit, and to blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, that I shall elect
as pontiff the person who I think will be beneficial to the universal church in both spiritual
and temporal matters and suitable for so great a dignity; I shall not give my vote to anyone
who I have reason to think is directly or indirectly aiming at getting himself elected, by his
promising or giving some temporal thing or by asking in person or through another or in any
other way whatsoever; and I shall not make obeisance to anyone elected as pontiff before he
takes the oath prescribed by this council of Basel; so help me God, to whom on the day of
tremendous judgment I shall have to give an account of this oath and all my deeds After this
each cardinal shall submit a ballot-card, on which he shall nominate a maximum of three
persons. If he nominates more than one person, the second and third persons shall be from
outside the college of cardinals. There shall not be more than one ballot on any day and it
shall be held immediately after the mass. When the ballot-cards have been read, they shall be
burnt straightaway unless two-thirds of the votes are for the same person. No approach shall
be made to anyone until six ballots have been completed. During this time let the cardinals
reflect and seriously ponder how much merit or loss to themselves, how much fruit or
damage to the Christian people, how much good or evil, they will be causing by their choice
of a pontiff. There is nothing, indeed, by which they can more merit the grace or the wrath of
our lord Jesus Christ than when they are setting his vicar over his sheep, which he loved so
much as to suffer the torments of the cross and to die for them.

[On the profession of the supreme pontiff]

The holy synod decrees that the person elected as pope is obliged to express his consent to
the election in the manner stated below. It is fitting that this consent should be made to the
cardinals, if the person elected is present in the curia, or to one of the cardinals or someone
mandated by them if he is not present there, in the presence of a notary and at least ten
persons. After he has been informed of the election, he is bound to act within a day of the
demand. If he does not do so, his election is annulled and the cardinals must proceed in the
Lord’s name to another election. But if he expresses his consent, as stated above, the
cardinals shall straightaway make due obeisance to him as supreme pontiff. Once the
obeisance has been made by the cardinals, nobody has any right to challenge his pontificate.

[Form of consent]

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit. I, N. , elected
pope, with both heart and mouth confess and profess to almighty God, whose church I
undertake with his assistance to govern, and to blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, that as
long as I am in this fragile life I will firmly believe and hold the catholic faith, according to
the tradition of the apostles, of general councils and of other holy fathers, especially of the
eight holy universal councils — namely the first at Nicaea, the second at Constantinople, the
third which was the first at Ephesus, the fourth at Chalcedon, the fifth and sixth at
Constantinople, the seventh at Nicaea and the eighth at Constantinople — as well as of the
general councils at the Lateran, Lyons, Vienne, Constance and Basel, and to preserve intact
this faith unchanged to the last dot, and to defend and preach it to the point of death and the

354
shedding of my blood, and likewise to follow and observe in every way the rite handed down
of the ecclesiastical sacraments of the church. I promise also to labour faithfully for the
defense of the catholic faith, the extirpation of heresies and errors, the reform of morals and
the peace of the Christian people. I swear also to continue with the holding of general
councils and the confirmation of elections in accordance with the decrees of the holy council
of Basel. I have signed this profession with my own hand; I offer it on the altar with a sincere
mind to you almighty God, to whom on the day of tremendous judgment I shall have to give
an account of this and all my deeds; and I will repeat it at the first public consistory.

‘So that this salutary institution may not fade from the supreme pontiff’s memory with the
passage of time, every year on the anniversary of his election or of his coronation, the first
cardinal present shall, during mass, publicly and in a loud voice address the supreme pontiff
thus: Most holy father, may your holiness heed and carefully ponder the promise which you
made to God on the day of your election. He shall then read out the promise and shall
continue as follows: May your holiness, therefore, for the honour of God, for the salvation of
your soul and for the good of the universal church, strive to observe to your utmost all these
things in good faith and without guile or fraud. Recall whose place it is that you hold on
earth, namely of him who laid down his life for his sheep, who thrice asked the blessed Peter
if he loved him, before he entrusted his sheep to him’, and who, as the just judge whom
nothing secret escapes, will exact from you an account of everything to the very last farthing.
Remember what blessed Peter and his successors as pontiffs did: they thought only of the
honour of God, the spread of the faith, the public good of the church and the salvation and
benefit of the faithful; finally, imitating their master and Lord they did not hesitate to lay
down their lives for the sheep entrusted to them. Do not lay up for yourself or your kinsfolk
treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves and robbers break in, but
lay up for yourself treasure in heaven. Do not be an accepter of persons or of blood-ties or of
homeland or of nation. All people are children of God and have been equally entrusted to
your care and safe-keeping. Say after the example of Christ: Whoever does the will of my
Father in heaven, he is my brother and sister and mother. In distributing dignities and
benefices put before yourself neither the flesh nor gifts nor anything temporal at all, but
solely God and the virtues and merits of people. Exercise ecclesiastical discipline in
correcting faults, mindful of what grace Phinehas merited and what punishment Eli, the one
for avenging injuries to God, the other for pretending not to know them. Defend, help and
support the poor and needy. Show a fatherly charity to all.

After the solemnities of his coronation, and each year after the anniversary of his election, the
supreme pontiff shall carefully discuss with his brethren, for at least eight consecutive days,
how he shall carry out his solemn promises to God. In the first place, therefore, he should
examine where in the world the Christian religion is being persecuted by Turks, Saracens,
Tartars and other infidels; where heresy or schism or any form of superstition flourishes, in
which provinces there has been a decline in morals and observance of the divine precepts and
in the right way of living, in both ecclesiastical and secular matters, where ecclesiastical
liberty is infringed; among which kings, princes and peoples enmity, wars and fears of war

355
are rife; and like a dutiful father he should strive with his brethren carefully to provide
remedies.

When these affairs of an universal character have been settled, let him deal with those nearer
at hand. Let him begin by reforming and ordering in an exemplary way his house, his
household and the Roman curia, where and in so far as this is necessary, so that from the
visible reform of the church which is the head of all others, lesser churches may draw purity
of morals and no occasion may be given for calumny and malicious talk. Making diligent
inquiry in person and through others about both important and lesser persons, he should allow
no delay or pretence in correcting whatever is found in need of reform, remembering that the
sin is twofold, the one being committed, the other and far more serious being its
consequences. For whatever is done there is easily made into an example. That is why, if the
head is sick, disease enters into the rest of the body. The papal household and court should be
a kind of clear mirror, so that all who look at it form themselves and live according to its
example. Thereafter let him banish and eradicate any traces of simony, filthy concubinage or
whatever may offend God or scandalize people. He should take care that officials do not
exercise their offices badly or oppress anybody or extort anything by threats or illegal means,
and that those in charge of the officials do not let their excesses go unpunished. They should
not tolerate clothes and colours which are forbidden by the sacred canons. Let him instruct
the Roman clergy, who are chiefly and immediately subject to him, in all ecclesiastical
decorum, admonishing them that God’s approval depends not on the parade and splendour of
clothes but on humility, docility, purity of mind, simplicity of heart, holiness of behaviour
and the other virtues which commend their possessor to God and to people. Let him enact
reforms especially so that the divine services may be observed in the churches of Rome with
all seemly devotion and discipline. He should also instruct the people of Rome, which is his
own parish, and direct them in the way of salvation. He should bid the cardinals to visit and
reform their titular churches and parishes as befits their office. He should appoint some
prelate of great learning and of proven and exemplary life as his vicar in the city, to take his
place in the episcopal care of the clergy and people, and he should often inquire about
whether he is fulfilling his task.

Next, let him reflect carefully with the same brethren on the good and wholesome
administration of the temporalities of the Roman church and let him ensure that the
provinces, cities, towns, castles and lands subject to the Roman church are justly and
peacefully ruled with such moderation that the difference between government by
ecclesiastics and by secular princes is like that between a father and a master. He should not
aim at gain, but cherishing all with paternal charity he should esteem them not as subjects but
as sons and daughters. Since he has charge of their spiritual and temporal well-being, he must
watch to get rid of all factions and seditious groups — especially of Guelphs and Ghibellines
and other similar parties — which breed destruction to both souls and bodies. He must strive,
employing spiritual and temporal penalties of all possible kinds, to remove all causes of
dissension and to keep people united for the defense of the church. To govern the provinces
and chief cities, he should appoint cardinals or prelates of untarnished reputation who will
seek not financial gain but justice and peace for their subjects. Their legation shall last for

356
two, or at most three, years. When their legation has ended, since it is right that each one
should give an account of his stewardship, one or more outstanding men shall be appointed to
review their administration and to hear the complaints and petitions of the inhabitants and to
render justice; these shall refer what they cannot easily effect to the pope, and he shall strive
to find out what the former have done and to punish any illegal actions, so that their
successors may learn from their example to avoid illegalities. Officials should be allotted a
suitable salary on which they can live honestly, to prevent them turning their hand to what is
illicit.

The supreme pontiff should often inquire how his legates, governors and commissars, as well
as deputies and feudatories of the Roman church, rule their subjects and whether they oppress
them with new taxes and exactions. He should not tolerate any austere measure or unjust
burden being laid on his subjects’ necks. For it would be wicked to allow those whom the
pope should rule as a father to be treated tyranically by others. He should ensure that statutes
and ancient constitutions by which provinces and districts have been well governed in the
past are kept intact. But if any have subsequently been issued unreasonably or from envy or
partiality, they should be cancelled or altered when the reasons for doing so have been
understood. Within a year from the day of his election, the Roman pontiff shall summon
spokesmen and proctors of the provinces and chief cities of the Roman church and shall
question them closely, with fatherly affection, about the following: the state and condition of
their territories, how they were governed in the time of his predecessor, whether they are
being oppressed by any unjust burden, and what should be done for their good government.
Then let him apply to them as to sons remedies which will provide for their benefit and
security and for the common good. He should not shrink from repeating this at least every
two years. Among the other things that feudatories, captains, governors, senators, castellans
and other high officials of Rome and of the lands of the church customarily swear to, there
should be added at the time of their installation an oath that, when the papacy is vacant, they
will hold their cities, lands, places, citadels, castles and peoples at the command of the
cardinals, in the name of the Roman church, and that they will freely and without opposition
hand them over to the same. Lest the supreme pontiff may seem to be influenced by carnal
affection rather than by right reason, and to avoid the scandals that sad experience shows
often arise, in future he shall not make or allow to be made anyone related to him by blood or
affinity to the third degree inclusive a duke, marquis, count, feudatory, emphyteutic tenant,
deputy, governor, official or castellan of any province, city, town, castle, fortress or place of
the Roman church, nor give them any jurisdiction or power over them, nor appoint them
captains or leaders of men under arms. The cardinals must never agree with a supreme pontiff
attempting to act otherwise, and his successor as pontiff shall withdraw and revoke anything
done in this way.

In accordance with the constitution of Pope Nicholas IV, the holy synod decrees that half of
all fruits, revenues, proceeds, fines, penalties and taxes deriving from all the lands and places
subject to the Roman church belongs to the cardinals of the holy Roman church, and that the
institution and dismissal of all rulers and governors and guardians, howsoever they may be
called, who are in charge of the aforesaid lands and places, and also of the collectors of the

357
said fruits, should be made with the advice and agreement of the cardinals. The holy synod
therefore admonishes the cardinals to protect the lands and subjects of the Roman church
from harm and oppression and, mindful of their peace, safety and good government, to
recommend them, if need be, to the supreme pontiff. While it is true that the supreme pontiff
and the cardinals should give careful attention to all the territories of the Roman church,
nevertheless the city of Rome should be at the centre of their concern. For there the holy
bodies of blessed Peter and Paul and of innumerable martyrs and saints of Christ repose;
there is the seat of the Roman pontiff, from which he and the Roman empire take their name;
thither all Christians flock for the sake of devotion. They should feel for it a special love and
affection, as being peculiarly their daughter and principal parish, so that it should be
governed in peace, tranquillity and justice and should suffer no damage to its churches, walls
and roads and the security of its streets. Hence this holy synod decrees that from the sum total
of the income and proceeds of the city, an adequate portion shall be set aside for the
preservation of the churches, walls, roads and bridges and the security of the streets in the
city itself and the district; this money is to be administered by men of proven reputation who
are to be chosen on the advice of the cardinals.

The supreme pontiff calls himself the servant of the servants of God; let him prove it in
deeds. As long as people from all parts have recourse to him as to a common father, he
should give them all easy access. Let him set aside at least one day in the week for a public
audience, when he shall listen with patience and kindness to all, especially the poor and
oppressed, and shall grant their prayers as much as he can with God’s help, and shall assist all
with kind advice and help as each one has need and as a father does for his children. If he is
prevented by some bodily need, he shall entrust this task to some cardinal or other
noteworthy person who will report everything to him, and he shall order all officials of the
curia, especially the vice-chancellor, the penitentiary and the chamberlain, to expedite
business for the poor with speed and free of charge, bearing in mind the apostolic charity of
Peter and Paul, who pledged themselves to remember the poor . He should attend a public
mass on Sundays and feast-days, and after it for a while he should give audience to the needy.
He should hold a public consistory each week, or at least twice a month, to treat of the
business of cathedral churches, monasteries, princes and universities and other important
affairs. But he should refer lawsuits and lesser matters to the vice-chancellor. He should keep
himself free of lawsuits and lesser business as far as he can, so as to be freer to attend to
major issues. Since the cardinals of the holy Roman church are considered to be part of the
body of the Roman pontiff, it is extremely expedient for the common good that, following
ancient custom, serious and difficult questions should hereafter be settled on their advice and
direction after mature deliberation, especially the following: decisions on matters of faith;
canonizations of saints, erections, suppressions, divisions, subjections or unions of cathedral
churches and monasteries; promotions of cardinals; confirmations and provisions relating to
cathedral churches and monasteries; deprivations and translations of abbots, bishops and
superiors; laws and constitutions; legations a latere or commissions or envoys and nuncios
functioning with the authority of legates a latere; foundations of new religious orders; new
exemptions for churches, monasteries and chapels, or the revocation of those already granted

358
without prejudice to the decree of the holy council of Constance about not transferring
prelates against their will.

[On the number and qualities of cardinals]

Since the cardinals of the holy Roman church assist the supreme pontiff in directing the
Christian commonweal, it is essential that such persons be appointed as may be, like their
name, real hinges on which the doors of the universal church move and are upheld. The
sacred synod therefore decrees that henceforth their number shall be so adjusted that it is not
a burden to the church which now, owing to the malice of the times, is afflicted by many
serious inconveniences) or cheapened by being too large. They should be chosen from all the
regions of Christianity, as far as this is convenient and possible, so that information on new
things in the church may be more easily available for mature consideration. They should not
exceed twenty-four in number, including the present cardinals. Not more than a third of them
at any given time shall be from one nation, not more than one from any city or diocese. None
shall be chosen from that nation which now has more than a third of them, until its share has
been reduced to a third. They should be men outstanding in knowledge, good conduct and
practical experience, at least thirty years old, and masters, doctors or licentiates who have
been examined in divine or human law. At least a third or a quarter of them should be masters
or licentiates in holy scripture. A very few of them may be sons, brothers or nephews of kings
or great princes; for them an appropriate education will suffice, on account of their
experience and maturity of behaviour.

Nephews of the Roman pontiff, related to him through his brother or sister, or of any living
cardinal shall not be made cardinals; nor shall bastards or the physically handicapped or those
stained by a reputation of crime or infamy. There can, however, be added to the aforesaid
twenty-four cardinals, on account of some great necessity or benefit for the church, two
others who are outstanding in their sanctity of life and excellence of virtues, even if they do
not possess the above-mentioned degrees, and some distinguished men from the Greeks,
when they are united to the Roman church. The election of cardinals shall not be made by
oral votes alone, rather only those shall be chosen who, after a genuine and publicized ballot,
obtain the collegial agreement, signed with their own hands, of the majority of the cardinals.
For this purpose let an apostolic letter be drawn up with the signatures of the cardinals. The
decree of this sacred council beginning Also since the multiplication of cardinals, etc., which
was published in the fourth session, is to remain in force. When cardinals receive the insignia
of their dignity, whose meaning is readiness to shed their blood if necessary for the good of
the church, they shall take the following oath in a public consistory, if they are in the curia, or
publicly in the hands of some bishop commissioned for this purpose by an apostolic letter
containing the oath, if they are not in the curia.

I,N., recently chosen as a cardinal of the holy Roman church, from this hour henceforward
will be faithful to blessed Peter, to the universal and Roman church and to the supreme
pontiff and his canonically elected successors. I will labour faithfully for the defense of the
catholic faith, the eradication of heresies errors and schisms, the reform of morals and the

359
peace of the Christian people. I will not consent to alienations of property or goods of the
Roman church or of other churches or of any benefices, except in cases allowed by law, and I
will strive to the best of my ability for the restoration of those alienated from the Roman
church. I will give neither advice nor my signature to the supreme pontiff except for what is
according to God and my conscience. I will faithfully carry out whatever I am commissioned
to do by the apostolic see. I will maintain divine worship in the church of my title and will
preserve its goods: so help me God.

For the preservation of the titular churches of the cardinals, some of which have sadly
deteriorated both in divine worship and in their buildings, to the shame of the apostolic see
and of the cardinals themselves, this holy synod decrees that from the revenues and incomes
of the territories of the Roman church — half of which belongs to the cardinals in accordance
with the constitution of Pope Nicholas, as was said above — a tenth of what each cardinal
receives shall be applied each year to his titular church. Moreover, each cardinal shall leave
to his titular church, either in his lifetime or at his death, enough for the upkeep of one
person. If he fails to do so, regarding both this and the said tenth, all his goods shall be
sequestrated until due satisfaction has been made. We place the burden of carrying this out on
the first cardinal of the order in which he died. Each cardinal present in the curia should make
an annual visitation of his titular church in person; each one not present should make it
through a suitable deputy. He should also inquire carefully concerning the clergy and the
people of his dependent churches, and make useful provision with regard to the divine
worship and the goods of these churches as well as the life and conduct of the clergy and
parishioners, about whom, since they are his sheep, he will have to render an account at the
severe judgment of God. As regards the time of the visitation and other things, let him
observe what is laid down in our decree on synodal councils.

Although both the dignity itself and the cardinal’s own promise urge him to toil at the holy
tasks just mentioned, yet results will be greater if the tasks are spread among individuals.
Therefore cardinal-bishops shall inquire about what regions are infected with new or old
heresies, errors and superstitions; cardinal-priests shall inquire about where conduct,
observance of the divine commandments and ecclesiastical discipline are lax; cardinal-
deacons shall inquire about which kings, princes and peoples are troubled by actual or
possible wars. Like busy bees, both with the supreme pontiff and among themselves, they
should promote these holy works with diligence and in detail, striving to provide a remedy
where this is needed. The supreme pontiff for his part, as the common father and pastor of all,
should have investigations made everywhere not only when requested to do so but also on his
own initiative and he should apply salutary medicines, as best he can, for all the illnesses of
his children. If the cardinals ever notice that a pope is negligent or remiss or acting in a way
unbefitting his state, though may this never happen, with filial reverence and charity they
shall beg him as their father to live up to his pastoral office, his good name and his duty.
First, let one or some of them warn him that if he does not desist they will delate him to the
next general council, and if he does not amend they shall all do this as a college together with
some notable prelates. For the well-being of the supreme pontiff and the common good they
should not fear the hostility of the supreme pontiff himself or anything else, provided they act

360
with reverence and charity. Much more so, if it comes to the pope’s notice that some cardinal
is acting wrongly and reprehensibly, he should correct him, always with paternal charity and
according to evangelical teaching. Thus, acting in charity towards each other, one to another,
a father to his sons and sons to their father, let them direct the church with exemplary and
salutary government.

Let the cardinals both publicly and privately treat with kindness and respect prelates and all
others, especially distinguished persons who come to the Roman curia, and let them present
their business to the supreme pontiff freely and graciously. Since the cardinals assist him who
is the common father of all, it is very unseemly for them to become accepters of persons or
advocates. Hence this holy synod forbids them to exercise any favouritism as collateral
judges, even if they take their origin from a favoured region. Neither should they be biased
protectors or defenders of princes or communities or others against anyone, whether paid or
unpaid, but putting aside all sentiment let them assist the pope in pacifying quarrels with
harmony and justice. The holy synod urges and commends them to promote the just business
of princes and anybody else, especially religious and the poor, without charge and without
seeking reward, as an act of charity. Let them preserve with readiness and kindness the
gravity and modesty that befits their dignity. Let them maintain towards all people godliness
which, according to the Apostle, is profitable in every way. Although they should not neglect
their kinsfolk, especially if they are deserving and poor, they should not load them with a
mass of goods and benefices to the scandal of others. Let them beware of pouring out on flesh
and blood, beyond the bounds of necessity, goods coming from the churches. If the pontiff
notices such strutting among the great, he should reprimand and object, as is fitting, and he
will be blameworthy if he fails to correct, in keeping with his office, whatever needs
correction.

The household, table, furniture and horses of both pope and cardinals should not be open to
blame as regards quantity, state, display or any other excess. The house and its contents
should be on a moderate scale, a model of frugality and not a source of scandal. Both the
supreme pontiff and the cardinals, as well as other bishops, should strive to observe the
constitution of blessed Gregory which was published at a general synod and which this holy
synod now renews the sense of which is as follows: Though the life of a pastor should be an
example to disciples, the clergy for the most part do not know the private life-style of their
pontiff, even though secular youths know it; we therefore declare by this present decree that
certain clerics and even monks should be selected to minister in the pontifical chamber, so
that he who is in the seat of government may have witnesses who will observe his true private
behaviour and will draw an example of progress from this regular sight.

Let them also pay attention to the words of Pope Paschal: “Let bishops spend their time in
reading and prayer and always have with them priests and deacons and other clerics of good
reputation, so that, following the Apostle and the instructions of holy fathers, they may be
found without blame.”3 It does not profit the commonweal for cases other than those
concerning elections to cathedral churches or monasteries, or princes or universities or
similar matters, to be assigned by the pope or the chancery to cardinals, since they should

361
devote themselves to the greater problems of the universal church. Lesser cases, therefore,
should be sent to the court of the Rota, which was instituted for this purpose. Neither the
pope nor cardinals should in future send their officials to prelates who have been confirmed
or provided, as it were to accept gifts, lest they allow others to do what is unfitting for
themselves to do. Something that has happened in the past — namely a sum of money or
something else is subtracted from the goods of a dead cardinal, as a charge for the ring given
to him on the assignment of his titular church — is not to occur in the future, since the
labours of cardinals for the commonweal merit rather obsequies from public funds, if they are
poor.

[On elections]

Already this holy synod, with its abolition of the general reservation of all elective churches
and dignities, has wisely decreed that provision should be made for them by canonical
elections and confirmations. It wishes also to forbid special and particular reservations of
elective churches and dignities, whereby free elections and confirmations can be prevented;
and to ensure that the Roman pontiff will attempt nothing against this decree, except for an
important, persuasive and clear reason, which should be expressed in detail in an apostolic
letter. However, much has been done against the intention of this decree and without the
required reason, resulting in serious scandals already and the likelihood of even more serious
ones in the future. This holy synod wishes to prevent this and does not want the purpose of
the decree, which was to remove every obstacle to canonical elections and confirmations, to
be deprived of its effect. It therefore decrees that elections should assuredly be held in the
said churches without any impediment or obstacle and that, after they have been examined in
accordance with common law and the dispositions of our decree, they shall be confirmed.
However, if perhaps on occasion it should happen that an election is made which in other
respects is canonical but which, it is feared, will lead to trouble for the church or the country
or the common good, the supreme pontiff, when the election is referred to him for
confirmation, if he is convinced that there exists such a most pressing reason, after mature
discussion and then with the signed votes of the cardinals of the Roman church or the
majority of them declaring that the reason is true and sufficient, may reject the election and
refer it back to the chapter or convent for them to institute another election, from which such
consequences are not to be feared, within the legal time or otherwise according to the
distance of the place.

[On reservations]

The numerous reservations of churches and benefices hitherto made by supreme pontiffs have
turned out to be burdensome to churches. Therefore this holy synod abolishes all of them
both general and special or particular — for all churches and benefices whatsoever that were
customarily provided for by an election or a collation or some other disposition — which
were introduced either by the additional canons Ad regimen and Execrabilis or by rules of the
chancery or by other apostolic constitutions, and it decrees that never again shall they exist,
with the exception only of reservations expressly contained in the corpus of law and those

362
which occur in the lands mediately or immediately subject to the Roman church by reason of
direct or beneficial dominion.

[On Clementine “Letters”]3

Although apostolic and other letters may state that someone has renounced, or been deprived
of, a dignity, benefice or right, or has done something for which a right of his has been taken
away, nevertheless letters of this sort should not prejudice him, even though they are based
on the status or the intention of the person making the statement, unless proof is forthcoming
from witnesses or other legitimate documents.

SESSION 24 14 April 1436

[About business with the Greeks and about indulgences, etc.]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. Our ambassadors to the most serene emperor of
the Romans and the most reverend lord patriarch of Constantinople, who were sent to
Constantinople on behalf and in the name of this holy synod, for various reasons promised to
present the terms which were concluded and signed by the two sides on another occasion in
this holy synod regarding the manner of holding a universal and ecumenical council of both
churches, and to exhibit them with effect, under the customary leaden seal of this holy synod,
with the present date and containing the following text word for word. This holy synod,
unwilling to omit anything that might help the union of Christ’s churches, accepts, approves,
ratifies and confirms by this present decree the said promise of its ambassadors and includes
in this document the said terms word for word as was promised by the said ambassadors, as
follows.

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. Among the various works necessary for the whole
Christian people for which this holy council was assembled, the union of the western and
eastern churches of Christ is the chief and greatest. Rightly, therefore, from the very start of
its proceedings, this holy synod has made every effort to achieve this. For, as quickly as
possible it sent its ambassadors with letters to the most serene emperor of the Greeks and the
most reverend patriarch of Constantinople, to exhort them with all charity and insistence that
they should send some persons with full authority to treat with us on the way to achieve the
said holy union. As soon as they were asked, they appointed to this holy synod three
outstanding men from those who seem to be of great authority among them — the first of
whom was indeed a blood-relative of the emperor — with a sufficient commission from the
emperor himself signed by his own hand and with a golden seal, and furnished with letters of
the patriarch. Both in a general congregation and in the presence of our commissaries they
expressed the most fervent desire of the emperor, the patriarch and the whole eastern church
for this union. They urge and daily stimulate us in a wonderful way to pursue this holy work,
strongly and persistently affirming two things: that union is only possible in a universal synod
in which both the western church and the eastern church meet, and that it is to be hoped that

363
this union will follow if matters proceed in that synod in the way that is agreed below. We
were filled with joy and gladness when we heard this. Therefore we venerable cardinals of
the holy Roman church, presidents of the apostolic see, casting all our thoughts on God, who
alone does great wonders, deputed the patriarch of Antioch and a suitable number of
archbishops, bishops, abbots, masters and doctors to treat of this question with the
ambassadors of the Greeks and to look for a way to reach a solution. After these men had
frequently met and discussed among themselves and with the ambassadors, they reached the
conclusions given below. These conclusions, in accordance with the custom of this council,
were seriously debated by the deputations and ratified by a general congregation. Their
contents, together with the chrysobull of the lord emperor, are as follows: The ambassadors
of the most serene lord emperor, etc., which is given at length in the council’s decree which is
included above. But because the period of time mentioned above, within which the aforesaid
things should have been fulfilled, has elapsed, not through the fault of either party but
because of various intervening negotiations, this holy synod therefore accepts the period of
time agreed by the most serene emperor of the Greeks and the most reverend patriarch of
Constantinople on the one side, and by the ambassadors of this sacred council on the other,
namely the year beginning this coming month of May, so that for the whole of this May until
the following year each of the two parties is prepared to carry out the aforesaid points, and
each accepts and promises that it will fulfill for its part, within the said time, whatever is
included in the above-mentioned terms.

[Safe-conduct for the Greeks given by the sacred council of Basel to the lord emperor of the
Greeks and the patriarch of Constantinople]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church. In our western region and the obedience of the Roman church, a universal
and ecumenical synod is to be held, under God’s inspiration, at which both the western
church and the eastern church will meet in accordance with the agreement reached at this
holy synod and later ratified in Constantinople. In order that the sincerity of our intention
towards the eastern church may be manifest to all, and that all possible suspicion as regards
the security and freedom of those coming to it may be removed, this holy synod of Basel by
this present decree, in the name and on behalf of the entire western church and of all in that
church of every status, including those of imperial, regal or pontifical rank or of any lower
spiritual or secular dignity, authority or office, decrees, gives and concedes a full and free
safe-conduct to the most serene emperor of the Greeks, the most reverend patriarchs of
Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, and others up to the number of seven
hundred persons, whether of imperial, regal, archiepiscopal or any other rank, dignity or
condition, who are coming or shall come to the aforesaid universal and ecumenical council in
the west. This holy synod, by this decree, receives and has received into its safe-keeping each
and all of the said people, as regards their persons, honours and everything else, in the
kingdoms, provinces, lordships, territories, communities, cities, castles, towns, vills and
places of our obedience of the western church in which they shall stay or through which they
shall pass. It promises and concedes to each and all of them, by this present synodal edict,
free and safe permission to approach and enter the city or place in which the said holy

364
universal council will be held; to stay, remain, reside and dwell there with all the immunities,
liberties and securities which those of the obedience of the western church dwelling there will
have; of debating, arguing and alleging rights and authorities and of saying, doing and
treating of, freely and without hindrance from anyone, anything else that may seem to them
useful and apt for the union of the churches of Christ.

They may at will go out and return from the said town or place safely, freely and without
restraint, once or often or as many times as any of them may wish, singly or together, with or
without their goods and money, with every real or personal obstacle ceasing and being put
aside, even if the said union does not come about, though may that not be so. In the latter case
and in every other outcome, the most serene emperor, the lord patriarchs and other aforesaid
persons will be taken back to Constantinople, at our expense and in our galleys, without any
delay or obstacle, with the same honours, good will and friendship with which they were
brought to the said universal council, whether or not union resulted from the council.

All this is notwithstanding any differences, disagreements or dissensions about the aforesaid
matters, or any of them in particular, which exist at present or could arise in the future
between the said western and eastern churches, that is, between the Roman church and those
subject and attached to it, and the aforesaid most serene emperor and others attached to the
church of Constantinople; notwithstanding any judgments, decrees, condemnations, laws or
decretals of any kind that have been or shall be made or issued; notwithstanding any crimes,
excesses, faults or sins that may be committed by any of the aforesaid persons; and
notwithstanding anything else, even if it is something for which a special mention in this
decree is necessary. If one or some of ours should harm one or more of them, though may it
not happen, or should molest them in their persons, honour, property or anything else, the
miscreant shall be sentenced by us or ours to make adequate and reasonable satisfaction to
the injured party. And conversely, if any of them harms any of ours, he shall be sentenced by
them to make adequate and reasonable satisfaction to the injured party, in accordance with
the customs of both parties. As regards other crimes, excesses and faults, each party will
institute proceedings and pass judgment on its own members.

This holy synod exhorts all Christ’s faithful and furthermore commands, by the authority of
the universal church and in virtue of the holy Spirit and of holy obedience, all prelates, kings,
dukes, princes, officials, communities and other individuals, of whatever status, condition or
dignity, who are members of our western church, to observe inviolably each and all of the
above things and, far as they can, to have them observed; and to honour and treat with favour
and reverence, and to have so honoured and treated, both individually and together, the most
serene emperor, the patriarch and each and all of the other aforesaid persons on their way to
and from the said council. If any doubt arises about the safe-conduct and its contents, it shall
be decided by a declaration of the universal synod which is to be held. This holy synod, for
its part, wishes the safe-conduct to remain in force until the most serene emperor, the
patriarch and other aforesaid persons with their nobles and suites to the number of seven
hundred persons, as was stated, and with their goods and chattels, have returned to

365
Constantinople. If anyone attempts to act in any way contrary to the aforesaid or any part of
it, let him know that he will incur the indignation of almighty God and of the said holy synod.

SESSION 25 7 May 1437

[On the places for the future ecumenical council for the Greeks]

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. Recently this holy synod among the various tasks
for which the inscrutable providence of the divine majesty has deigned, by the invocation of
the holy Spirit the paraclete, to bring it together and to employ it in the cultivation of the
Lord’s field, turning its mind like a watchful farmer and clearly perceiving how deplorable
and abiding has been the division in God’s church over the profession of the same faith by
the eastern and western churches, conceived high hope and confidence in the most merciful
goodness of him with whom nothing is impossible, and who generously and without restraint
gives to all who duly ask him, to bring about the unity of the catholic faith between these
churches. It decided, therefore, to apply the resources of its diligence more fully, grudging no
labour or expense, because it was convinced that thence would follow the greater praise and
glory of almighty God, a more fruitful salvation of souls and a greater increase of the faith.
Desirous of undertaking this most salutary project of union, with the help of the grace of the
holy Spirit it invited and exhorted to come to the project, through various envoys and letters,
the most serene emperor of the Romans, the venerable patriarch of Constantinople, the other
prelates and the rest of the Greek people.

The emperor, the patriarch and others of the Greeks received these exhortations with
eagerness, their hearts inclined and influenced by the grace of the most High. Sincerely
zealous to embark on this project of union, they decided to send to this holy synod their
solemn envoys and spokesmen, who were furnished with an adequate mandate with the
golden seal and signature of the emperor and the leaden seal of the patriarch, devoutly
expressing their most fervent desire for this unity of faith. This holy synod concluded with
them, in various preliminary meetings and deliberations about the execution of this salutary
task of union, certain mutually agreed decrees and terms highly useful and necessary for this
purpose, which were recorded above and were promulgated in a session of this holy synod in
the cathedral of Basel. Thereafter this holy synod wished to implement these decrees and
terms by all necessary and suitable means, and therefore to proceed to choosing a place for
the coming ecumenical council, to which the aforesaid emperor, the patriarch and others of
the Greeks could and should come. After many propositions about these and other topics
relevant to this holy matter had been considered by the various deputations of this holy
synod, and after the votes of their members on these points had been counted, finally in a
general congregation summoned for this purpose in the said cathedral, as is customary, in
which the votes of the individuals were again counted, it was found that more than two-thirds
of them had voted for Basel, Avignon or Savoy. After they had invoked the grace of the holy
Spirit and celebrated a mass, they agreed that due and earnest pressure should be exerted on
the emperor, the patriarch and other aforesaid Greeks, with the many good reasons being put
before them, so that they might agree to Basel as the place for the ecumenical council, and

366
that if they rejected Basel, it should be held at Avignon. If Avignon proved impossible, it
should be held in Savoy.

Therefore, in order that each and all of the aforesaid points might be brought to fruition, with
all the solemnity normally employed in this sacred council of Basel in expediting matters of
importance, while the fathers are seated in the cathedral of Basel after the mass, this holy
synod decrees, wishes, ordains and declares that the future ecumenical council ought to be
held at the due and agreed time in the city of Basel or, if that is rejected, in the city of
Avignon or otherwise in Savoy, in accordance with the above-mentioned agreement; and that
the emperor, the patriarch and other aforesaid Greeks, as detailed in the said terms and
decrees, and all other persons of whatever rank, status, dignity or pre-eminence who ought by
right or custom to take part in general councils, including those of episcopal rank, are bound
and obliged to come to and take part in that ecumenical council, especially so that this
salutary work might be completed. This holy synod wishes, declares and decrees this
nomination and choice to be firm, fixed and unchangeable. Any modification, ordinance,
disposition, nomination or choice to the contrary that may be made by this holy council or by
one or more other persons, whatever their authority, even if it be papal, is utterly invalid; and
this holy synod from its certain knowledge as from now quashes, revokes and annuls any
such measures, and denounces them as quashed, null and of no effect, and it wishes them to
be of no effect and holds them so now, in so far as they impede or oppose in whole or in part
the said choice. Also this holy synod from its certain knowledge supplies for any defect that
may exist in the aforesaid things or in any of them in particular. Furthermore, since this very
difficult undertaking, which will bear great fruit in God’s church, as well as the transport and
maintenance of the aforesaid Greeks, cannot be accomplished without heavy expenses, it is
right and fitting that all of Christ’s faithful, especially ecclesiastics, should contribute
generously from the substance of the patrimony of our lord Jesus Christ entrusted to them, for
the conclusion of so happy a venture. This holy synod therefore imposes on each and every
ecclesiastical person, both exempt and non-exempt under whatever form or words, even the
order of St John of Jerusalem, of whatever status, dignity, rank, order or condition, even if
they are cardinals or bishops, a tenth of all their ecclesiastical fruits and revenues — only
daily distributions being excepted — from their churches, monasteries, dignities, offices and
other ecclesiastical benefices. This tenth has already been imposed and agreed upon in a
general congregation of this holy synod, and this holy synod now decrees and declares that it
is to be imposed, and by this decree it imposes it. Furthermore, the said holy synod decrees,
wishes, ordains and declares that the venerable bishops John of Luebeck, Luis of Viseu,
Delfino of Parma and Louis of Lausanne, envoys of this holy synod, have full power for
bringing the Greeks to the place of the ecumenical council, and for the majority of them then
present to choose and nominate the Latin port which is most suitable and nearest to the places
chosen and nominated above, and to which the said Greeks ought to direct themselves. The
synod concedes this power to them by this present decree in accordance with the form of the
other letters granted to them in this affair. Finally the same holy synod wishes, ordains and
decrees, for the due and desired execution of the aforesaid points and what follows from
them, and for the fuller security of the said envoys and of the council, that, at the request of
these envoys or of their agents, any other suitable, useful and necessary letters shall be

367
granted, drawn up and despatched in due and correct form by the synod’s chancery under the
synod’s seal.

The holy general synod of Basel, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, representing the
universal church, for an everlasting record. This holy synod from its outset, in order that
those things might be accomplished which general councils are instituted to achieve with the
assistance of the holy Spirit, devoted very great care to promoting union between the western
and eastern peoples so that, as the church of God has suffered innumerable disasters from the
long-standing dissension, the greatest profit might ensue from fraternal union. Therefore it
sent envoys to Constantinople for the promotion of this holy work. They returned with the
ambassadors of the most serene emperor of the Romans and of the venerable patriarch of
Constantinople. After many meetings and mature deliberation on this subject, certain terms
were agreed between this sacred council and those ambassadors and were confirmed by a
decree in a public session. By these terms this holy synod bound itself to send envoys with
certain sums of money, two large and two smaller galleys and three hundred crossbowmen
within a fixed time, and to nominate through these envoys one of the places mentioned in the
decree for the ecumenical council, where the emperor and the patriarch with seven hundred
persons would meet with us to bring about this holy union.

However, since the time-limit for accomplishing the above is imminent, this holy synod,
desirous of fulfilling its promises completely and of bringing to its desired goal this holy
endeavour which is the most salutary of all works in these times, came to the following
conclusion in its discussions and then in a general congregation: namely, that Florence or
Udine in Friuli should be put into the council’s hands, or else that there should be chosen for
the ecumenical council some other safe place which is mentioned in the decree and is
convenient for the pope and the Greeks, that is to say whichever of the aforesaid places shall
be quickest to collect and send the galleys, the sums of money and other requisites with the
necessary securities. The port would be Venice, Ravenna or Rimini; whichever of them the
emperor and the patriarch of Constantinople prefer. Also, so that the clergy are not burdened
uselessly, the tenth shall not be decreed or exacted until the Greeks have arrived at one of the
above-mentioned ports. Also, that the sacred council should remain in this city during the
whole time covered by the decree. Also, that the legates and presidents of the apostolic see,
after they have summoned such fathers as shall seem good to them, shall choose the envoys
for accompanying the Greeks and for carrying out the aforesaid things; these envoys ought to
urge forcibly the choice of this city of Basel. Therefore, in order that each and all of the
above may attain due effect, with the assistance of divine grace, in this public and solemn
session this holy synod wishes, decrees and declares that the aforesaid decision is definite and
valid, to be adhered to and to be implemented. It quashes, voids and annuls, and declares to
be quashed, void and null, whatever has been or shall be done, or may be attempted, by any
person or persons contrary to the above or its consequences or whatever could in any way
impede their execution. And it wishes that the aforesaid apostolic legates and presidents shall
compose in due form and under the seal of the council suitable letters for the execution of the
above, and shall expedite whatever else may be necessary and appropriate for this holy
enterprise.

368
SESSION 1 8 January 1438
[Declaration of cardinal Nicholas Albergati, president of the council]

We, Nicholas, legate of the apostolic see, announce that we preside on behalf of our most
holy lord pope Eugenius IV in this sacred synod which was translated from Basel to the city
of Ferrara and is already legitimately assembled, and that the continuation of this translated
synod has been effected today 8 January, and that the synod is and ought to be continued
from today onwards for all the purposes for which the synod of Basel was convened,
including being the ecumenical council at which the union of the western and the eastern
church is treated and with God’s help achieved.

SESSION 2 10 January 1438 [On the legitimate continuation of the council of Ferrara,
against the assembly at Basel]

For the praise of almighty God, the exaltation of the catholic faith and the peace, tranquillity
and unity of the whole Christian people. This holy universal synod, through the grace of God
authorized by the most blessed lord pope Eugenius IV, legitimately assembled in the holy
Spirit in this city of Ferrara, represents the universal church. Its president, on behalf and in
the name of the said most holy lord Eugenius, is the most reverend father and lord in Christ
lord Nicholas, cardinal-priest of the holy Roman church of the title of holy Cross in
Jerusalem, legate of the apostolic see. It adheres to the firm foundation of him who said to the
prince of the apostles: You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church. It is eager to
preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, so that we might be one body and one
spirit, just as we were called in the one hope of our calling. It records that much was done in
days past both at the former council of Basel and after its translation by some staying on there
without any authority, and also by the said most blessed pope lord Eugenius, especially in
respect of the business of the most holy union of the western and the eastern church, namely
the following: the decree of the nineteenth session of the former council of Basel beginning
As a dutiful mother, to which the most holy lord Eugenius gave his assent by his letter; also
an agreed proposal on the choice of a place to which the council of Basel should be translated
which was agreed upon and confirmed by all the fathers in common and which led to the
decree of the twenty-fifth session of the former council, which begins This holy synod from
its outset etc. and which the pope himself, urged on by the envoys of the Greeks, accepted
and confirmed by his letter given in a general consistory at Bologna and published in the
presence of these envoys, also the letter of the same most blessed Eugenius dated 18
September last, issued in a general consistory at Bologna and solemnly read out at the
beginning of the continuation of this synod, by which the pope with the counsel and consent
of the most reverend cardinals of the holy Roman church and with the approval of the
prelates then in the curia, transferred the council to this city of Ferrara; also the letter of the
declaration of the same, dated 30 December, immediately following the said translation; all
of which this holy synod has ordered to be registered verbatim in its acts as a permanent
record, as is contained in these same acts.

369
All these facts and many more have been duly pondered and maturely discussed in various
meetings. This holy synod declares that the aforesaid translation and declaration were and are
legitimate, just and reasonable, and were and are made from urgent necessity so as to remove
an obstacle to the most holy union of the western and the eastern church, to prevent a schism
already threatening in God’s church, and for the manifest benefit of the whole Christian
commonwealth, and that therefore this holy synod was legitimately assembled and
established in the holy Spirit in this city of Ferrara for all the purposes for which the said
former council of Basel was instituted at its beginning, and especially to be the future
ecumenical council for the aforesaid most holy union; and that it ought to continue and to
proceed to all the aforesaid matters. This holy synod therefore praises, accepts and approves
the translation and the consequent declaration, as mentioned above. It exhorts in the Lord and
requires of each and all of the present and future members of the holy synod to apply
themselves to the above things with earnest care and serious study. By the generosity of him
who has begun in us a good work, may everything be directed and done for his glory and the
salvation of the whole Christian people.

This holy synod further declares that, since the well known necessity of the above reasons
demanded and impelled the said most holy lord Eugenius to that translation, the matter in no
way falls within the decrees of the eighth, the eleventh or any other session of the former
council of Basel.

It decrees that the assembly at Basel, and every other assembly which may perchance
convene there or elsewhere under the name of a general council, rather is and ought to be
considered a spurious gathering and conventicle, and can in no way exist with the authority of
a general council.

It quashes, invalidates and annuls, and declares to be invalid, quashed, null and of no force or
moment, each and all of the things done in the city of Basel in the name of a general council
after the said translation, and whatever may be attempted there or elsewhere in the future in
the name of a general council.

But if in the matter of the Bohemians something useful has been achieved by the said people
assembled at Basel after the said translation, it intends to approve that and supply for defects.

In order that each and all of the members of the holy synod may be kept safe from every
annoyance and may serve God in good works without anxiety, free from all fear, harassment
and injury, this holy synod absolves, frees and dispenses, and declares to be absolved and
freed, and the oaths to be dispensed from, each and all of those who, under whatsoever plea
or cause, bound themselves to the former synod of Basel by oaths, with obligations and
commitments, whereby their full and free right to obey this present holy synod and to
promote its honour and good might be impeded and they might have scruples of some kind.

This holy synod also ordains and decrees that nobody of whatsoever rank or dignity, by any
ordinary or delegated jurisdiction for any cause or occasion, except by the jurisdiction of the

370
apostolic see, shall dare to disturb, harass or molest, in their dignities, offices,
administrations, privileges, honours, benefices and other goods, each and all of those, both
seculars and religious, including members of mendicant orders, who are or shall be at this
present synod, or who follow the Roman curia and will soon be at this synod on account of
the move of the most holy lord Eugenius with his curia to this city, which has been
announced by the posting up of notices in accordance with the ancient custom of the curia.

But if, under any pretext, directly or indirectly, any should presume to molest any of the said
persons in their dignities, offices, administrations, honours, privileges, benefices or other
goods, or to prevent them from freely enjoying their jurisdiction, fruits and emoluments as
they did before, or to confer on others their dignities, offices, administrations, honours and
benefices, on the plea of some deprivation, this holy synod intends that each and all of them,
even if they are cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops or persons with some other
dignity, or chapters, colleges, convents or universities, shall incur automatically and without
the need for a previous warning sentences of excommunication, suspension and interdict,
absolution from which is reserved to the Roman pontiff alone, except at the hour of death.

Moreover the synod decrees that those who do not repent within three days after making
these conferrals or placing these obstacles, by fully restoring those whose dignities, offices,
administrations, honours and benefices they conferred, or whom they impeded in other ways,
as stated above, to all their churches and benefices as they held them before, whether they
held them by title, in commendam or in administration; and also each and all of those who
presume to accept collation to the aforesaid dignities, offices, administrations, honours and
benefices, even if they were made motu proprio, or to take possession of them in person or
through others, or to hold such action as valid; all these persons are automatically deprived by
law, if they previously had any claim in them, of all their other benefices, whether they held
them by title, in commendam or in administration, and they are rendered perpetually
disqualified from them and all other benefices, and they can be restored and habilitated only
by the Roman pontiff.

This holy synod, moreover, warns and requires each and all of those who are obliged by law
or custom to take part in general councils, to come as soon as possible to this present synod at
Ferrara, which will continue, as noted above, for the speedy attainment of the aforesaid
purposes.

SESSION 31 15 February 1438

[Ecclesiastical penalties against members of the Basel synod]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. The duties of the
pastoral office over which we preside by divine mercy, despite our lack of merit, demand that
we repress by opportune remedies the nefarious excesses of evil-minded persons, especially
those who, unless prevented, strive to force the peaceful state of the church into various
dangerous storms and disturbances and who endeavour to overturn the barque of Peter, and
that we inflict due retribution for their excesses, lest boasting of their malice they give

371
occasion to others to commit mischief. For it is a crime to be slack in punishing crimes that
harm many people, as canonical regulations state.

Thus, the former council of Basel debated the choice of a place for the future ecumenical
council. Those on whom the power of choosing the place devolved, passed a decree which
was accepted by the ambassadors of our most dear son in Christ John, emperor of the Greeks,
and of our venerable brother Joseph, patriarch of Constantinople. Some persons chose
Avignon or another place, but the said ambassadors protested that most assuredly they did not
want to go there, declaring as certain that the said emperor and patriarch would by no means
go to the said sacred council unless we attended in person. Those who asked for Avignon,
afraid that the Greeks certainly would not come to them, dared to concoct a certain decree or
notorious pamphlet, which they call a monition, against us, even though it is null and indeed
leads to serious scandal and a split in the church, disrupting this holy work of union with the
Greeks.

In order to preserve the unity of the church and to promote the said union with the Greeks,
we, for just, necessary and pressing reasons, with the advice and assent of our venerable
brothers the cardinals of the holy Roman church, and with the advice and approval of very
many of our venerable brothers the archbishops, bishops, beloved chosen sons and abbots
who were present at the apostolic see, translated the said council of Basel, by our apostolic
authority and in a fixed manner and form, to the city of Ferrara, which is suitable for the
Greeks and for us, so that those at Basel might duly recoil from their scandalous actions, as is
contained at greater length in the letter composed for the occasion’ . But they, spurning every
avenue of peace, persevering in their obstinate purpose, scorning the letter of the said
translation and everything contained in it, and piling evil upon evil, not only rejected our
reasonable translation made for the said most just and urgent reasons, as stated above, but
even dared with renewed obstinacy to warn us to withdraw the said translation within a fixed
time and under pain of suspension. Yet this would have been nothing less than to force us to
abandon the prosecution of such a holy work so much desired by all Christians.

When we realized this, with grief of heart, since we saw that everything tended to the
destruction of the holy task of union and to an open split in the church, as was said above, we
declared that the translation had been made by us from necessity, that the conditions attached
to it had been regularized, and that the council at Ferrara ought to begin and legitimately
continue, as is stated more fully in another letter of ours .

To open this council at Ferrara we sent our beloved son Nicholas, cardinal-priest of the holy
Roman church of the title of holy Cross, legate of us and the apostolic see.

This council at Ferrara, legitimately assembled and with many prelates, solemnly declared in
a public session that the said translation and declaration were and are legitimate, just and
reasonable, and were made from urgent necessity so as to remove an obstacle to the said most
holy union between the western and the eastern church and to avoid an impending split in

372
God’s church for the evident benefit of the whole Christian commonwealth, as is crystal clear
from the decree made about it.

Meanwhile, informed that the aforesaid emperor, patriarch and Greeks were approaching the
shores of Italy, under God’s guidance we came to this council at Ferrara with the firm
intention and purpose of effectively pursuing, with God’s help, not only the work of holy
union but also the objectives for which the council of Basel had assembled.

In view of all this, our beloved son Julian, cardinal-priest of the title of St Sabina, legate of
the apostolic see, strongly urged the aforesaid people at Basel to withdraw from such flagrant
scandals. But because of their obstinacy of mind he was without effect. Then, seeing them
ready to precipitate still worse scandals in God’s church, he departed so as not to appear to
approve their impiety. They, for their part, paid no attention to this. Ignorant of how to direct
their steps in the way of peace and justice, although they were already aware that the Greeks
were utterly unwilling to come to them and were approaching the shores of Italy, they
persevered in their hardness of heart. Since they could in no other way prevent and disrupt
the union with the Greeks, for which they should have been labouring with us with all their
strength and mind and assisting us, they added bad to worse and went to such a pitch of
rashness and insolence that, even though many of the envoys of kings and princes who were
at Basel execrated so wicked a deed and protested against it, they dared to declare with
sacrilegious arrogance that we were suspended from the administration of the papacy and to
proceed to various other things, albeit everything was null.

So we, conscious that their excesses are so notorious that they cannot be hidden by any
subterfuge, and that error that is not resisted appears to be approved and throws wide open to
delinquents a door that no longer guards against their intrusions, and unable without grave
offence to our lord Jesus Christ and his holy church to tolerate further so many grievous
excesses which are seen especially to impede, disrupt and utterly destroy the holy and most
desired union with the Greeks, we decree against the aforesaid remnant at Basel, in virtue of
the most High and with the approval of this holy council, the steps that should be taken with
justice.

Hence we decree and declare, after mature deliberation with this holy synod and with its
approval, that each and all of those meeting in Basel, in spite of the aforesaid translation and
declaration, under the pretended name of a council which more accurately should be called a
conventicle, and daring to perpetrate such scandalous and nefarious deeds, whether they are
cardinals, patriarchs archbishops, bishops or abbots or of some other ecclesiastical or secular
dignity, have already incurred the penalties instanced in our said letter of translation, namely
excommunication, privation of dignities and disqualification from benefices and offices in the
future.

We also decree and declare to be null and void and of no force or moment, whatever has been
attempted by them in the name of a council or otherwise since the day of the translation made

373
by us, or shall be attempted in the future, in respect of the aforesaid matters or against those
who follow our curia or are at this sacred council at Ferrara.

We also command, with the approval of this council, under the same penalties and censures
and in virtue of their oath by which they are bound to the holy apostolic see, each and all of
the cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, elected persons, abbots and all others of
whatsoever condition, status or rank who are meeting in the said city of Basel under the
pretext of a council, really and effectively to leave the said city within thirty days of the date
of this decree. We also order the mayor of the citizens, the councillors and the magistrates
ruling the city of Basel and the governors and other officials, whatever name they go under,
to expel the aforesaid persons who have not left the city within the said thirty days and really
and effectively to eject them.

If they fail to do this within the said thirty days, we decree that each and all of the said rulers
and officials automatically incur sentence of excommunication, and the people and the city
automatically incur sentence of ecclesiastical interdict; we specially reserve to ourself
absolution from the sentences of excommunication, except at the hour of death, and the
lifting of the interdict. We order and command, in virtue of holy obedience and under pain of
excommunication, each and all of those to whom this notice shall come that, if the aforesaid
persons meeting in Basel and the citizens are obstinately disobedient towards us, nobody
should approach the city of Basel after the said thirty days and they should deny them all
commerce and all articles needed for human use.

Merchants of all kinds, who have gone to Basel on account of the former council, shall depart
under the same pain of excommunication. If there are some who ignore these orders of ours,
daring perhaps to convey goods after the time-limit to those at Basel persisting in contumacy,
since it is written that the righteous plundered the ungodly, such persons may be despoiled
without penalty by any of the faithful and their goods shall be ceded to the first takers.

However, because the church never closes its bosom to returning sons, if the said people
meeting in Basel, or some of them, repent and depart from the said city within the said
interval of thirty days from the date of this present decree, then with the approval of this
sacred council we remit and fully cancel the aforesaid penalties as for obedient sons and we
wish, decree and order that they and their consequences are to be regarded as without force
from the date of their imposition, and we supply with the council’s approval for all defects, if
perhaps there are any in respect of solemnity of the law or of omission. Let nobody therefore
… If anyone however …

SESSION 42 9 April 1438

[Eugenius IV and the fathers of the council at Ferrara declare the council at Ferrara to be
legitimate and ecumenical]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. It befits us to
render thanks to almighty God who, mindful of his past mercies, always bestows on his

374
church even richer growth and, although he allows her to be tossed on occasions by the
waves of trials and tribulations, yet never permits her to be submerged but keeps her safe
amid the mountainous waters, so that by his mercy she emerges from the various vicissitudes
even stronger than before. For behold, the western and eastern peoples, who have been
separated for long, hasten to enter into a pact of harmony and unity; and those who were
justly distressed at the long dissension that kept them apart, at last after many centuries, under
the impulse of him from whom every good gift comes, meet together in person in this place
out of desire for holy union.

We are aware that it is our duty and the duty of the whole church to strain every nerve to
ensure that these happy initiatives make progress and have issue through our common care,
so that we may deserve to be and to be called co-operators with God.

Finally, our most dear son John Palacologus, emperor of the Romans, together with our
venerable brother Joseph, patriarch of Constantinople, the apocrisiaries of the other
patriarchal sees and a great multitude of archbishops, ecclesiastics and nobles arrived at their
last port, Venice, on 8 February last. There, the said emperor expressly declared, as he had
often done before, that for good reasons he could not go to Basel to celebrate the ecumenical
or universal council, and he intimated this by a letter to those assembled at Basel. He
exhorted and required all of them to go to Ferrara, which had been chosen for the council, to
carry through the pious task of this holy union.

We have always had this holy union close to our heart and have sought with all our strength
to bring it about. Therefore we intend to carry out with care, as is our duty, the decree of the
council of Basel, to which the Greeks agreed, as well as the choice of a place for the
ecumenical council, which was made at the council of Basel and which was later confirmed
by us at Bologna at the urging of the envoys of the said emperor and patriarch, and any other
things pertaining to this work of holy union.

Therefore we decree and declare, in every way and form as best we can, with the assent of the
said emperor and patriarch and of all those in the present synod, that there exists a holy
universal or ecumenical synod in this city of Ferrara, which is free and safe for all; and
therefore it should be deemed and called such a synod by all, in which this holy business of
union will be conducted without any quarrelsome contention but with all charity and, as we
hope, will be brought by divine favour to a happy conclusion together with the other holy
tasks for which the synod is known to have been instituted.

SESSION 5′ 10 January 1439

[Decree translating the council of Ferrara to Florence]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. It is fitting that
the site of an ecumenical council, in which men chosen from the whole Christian world meet
together, should be such that in it, among other human necessities, there should be the most
important of all, namely healthy air. Otherwise, because of the pest-laden contagion of

375
infected air which all people naturally fear and flee, those present at the council may be
forced to depart with nothing accomplished and the absent will refuse to attend. Assuredly it
is right that those who come together at synods to treat of difficult questions should be free
from every anxiety and fear, so that they may be able in greater peace and freedom to give
their attention to the matters of public concern.

We would, indeed, have preferred that the universal council which we initiated in this city
should continue here, and that the union of the eastern and western churches should be
brought to its happy and desired conclusion in this city, where we initiated it. When the
plague afflicted this city last autumn, pressure was exerted by some for the transferral of the
synod to a non-infected locality. Nothing was done, however, because it was hoped that the
plague would cease with the advent of winter, as it usually does.

Since in fact the plague continues from day to day and it is feared that it will gain strength
when spring and summer come, all judge and advise that a move must be made without delay
to some non-infected place. For this and several other good reasons, with the agreement of
our dear son John Palaeologus, emperor of the Romans, and of our venerable brother Joseph,
patriarch of Constantinople, and with the approval of the council:

In the name of the Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, with the full securities and safe-
conducts which we gave to all at the beginning of the sacred council, we transfer and declare
to be transferred as from now this ecumenical or universal synod from this city of Ferrara to
the city of Florence, which is manifestly free for all, safe, peaceful and tranquil, and enjoying
healthy air, and which, situated as it is between the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic seas, is
excellently situated for easy access for both easterners and westerners. Let nobody therefore .
.. If anyone however . . .

SESSION 6 6 July 1439

[Definition of the holy ecumenical synod of Florence]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. With the
agreement of our most dear son John Palaeologus, illustrious emperor of the

Romans, of the deputies of our venerable brothers the patriarchs and of other representatives
of the eastern church, to the following.

Let the heavens be glad and let the earth rejoice. For, the wall that divided the western and
the eastern church has been removed, peace and harmony have returned, since the corner-
stone, Christ, who made both one, has joined both sides with a very strong bond of love and
peace, uniting and holding them together in a covenant of everlasting unity. After a long haze
of grief and a dark and unlovely gloom of long-enduring strife, the radiance of hoped-for
union has illuminated all.

376
Let mother church also rejoice. For she now beholds her sons hitherto in disagreement
returned to unity and peace, and she who hitherto wept at their separation now gives thanks to
God with inexpressible joy at their truly marvellous harmony. Let all the faithful throughout
the world, and those who go by the name of Christian, be glad with mother catholic church.
For behold, western and eastern fathers after a very long period of disagreement and discord,
submitting themselves to the perils of sea and land and having endured labours of all kinds,
came together in this holy ecumenical council, joyful and eager in their desire for this most
holy union and to restore intact the ancient love. In no way have they been frustrated in their
intent. After a long and very toilsome investigation, at last by the clemency of the holy Spirit
they have achieved this greatly desired and most holy union. Who, then, can adequately thank
God for his gracious gifts?’ Who would not stand amazed at the riches of such great divine
mercy? Would not even an iron breast be softened by this immensity of heavenly
condescension?

These truly are works of God, not devices of human frailty. Hence they are to be accepted
with extraordinary veneration and to be furthered with praises to God. To you praise, to you
glory, to you thanks, O Christ, source of mercies, who have bestowed so much good on your
spouse the catholic church and have manifested your miracles of mercy in our generation, so
that all should proclaim your wonders. Great indeed and divine is the gift that God has
bestowed on us. We have seen with our eyes what many before greatly desired yet could not
behold.

For when Latins and Greeks came together in this holy synod, they all strove that, among
other things, the article about the procession of the holy Spirit should be discussed with the
utmost care and assiduous investigation. Texts were produced from divine scriptures and
many authorities of eastern and western holy doctors, some saying the holy Spirit proceeds
from the Father and the Son, others saying the procession is from the Father through the Son.
All were aiming at the same meaning in different words. The Greeks asserted that when they
claim that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, they do not intend to exclude the Son; but
because it seemed to them that the Latins assert that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father
and the Son as from two principles and two spirations, they refrained from saying that the
holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The Latins asserted that they say the holy
Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son not with the intention of excluding the Father
from being the source and principle of all deity, that is of the Son and of the holy Spirit, nor
to imply that the Son does not receive from the Father, because the holy Spirit proceeds from
the Son, nor that they posit two principles or two spirations; but they assert that there is only
one principle and a single spiration of the holy Spirit, as they have asserted hitherto. Since,
then, one and the same meaning resulted from all this, they unanimously agreed and
consented to the following holy and God-pleasing union, in the same sense and with one
mind.

In the name of the holy Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, we define, with the approval of
this holy universal council of Florence, that the following truth of faith shall be believed and
accepted by all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the holy Spirit is eternally from the

377
Father and the Son, and has his essence and his subsistent being from the Father together with
the Son, and proceeds from both eternally as from one principle and a single spiration. We
declare that when holy doctors and fathers say that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father
through the Son, this bears the sense that thereby also the Son should be signified, according
to the Greeks indeed as cause, and according to the Latins as principle of the subsistence of
the holy Spirit, just like the Father.

And since the Father gave to his only-begotten Son in begetting him everything the Father
has, except to be the Father, so the Son has eternally from the Father, by whom he was
eternally begotten, this also, namely that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.

We define also that the explanation of those words “and from the Son” was licitly and
reasonably added to the creed for the sake of declaring the truth and from imminent need.

Also, the body of Christ is truly confected in both unleavened and leavened wheat bread, and
priests should confect the body of Christ in either, that is, each priest according to the custom
of his western or eastern church. Also, if truly penitent people die in the love of God before
they have made satisfaction for acts and omissions by worthy fruits of repentance, their souls
are cleansed after death by cleansing pains; and the suffrages of the living faithful avail them
in giving relief from such pains, that is, sacrifices of masses, prayers, almsgiving and other
acts of devotion which have been customarily performed by some of the faithful for others of
the faithful in accordance with the church’s ordinances.

Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well
as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or
outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly
behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the
difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in
original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. We
also define that the holy apostolic see and the Roman pontiff holds the primacy over the
whole world and the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter prince of the apostles,
and that he is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole church and the father and teacher
of all Christians, and to him was committed in blessed Peter the full power of tending, ruling
and governing the whole church, as is contained also in the acts of ecumenical councils and
in the sacred canons.

Also, renewing the order of the other patriarchs which has been handed down in the canons,
the patriarch of Constantinople should be second after the most holy Roman pontiff, third
should be the patriarch of Alexandria, fourth the patriarch of Antioch, and fifth the patriarch
of Jerusalem, without prejudice to all their privileges and rights.

SESSION 7 4 September 1439

[Decree of the council of Florence against the synod at Basel]

378
Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. Moses, the man of
God, was zealous for the well-being of the people entrusted to him. He feared that God’s
wrath would be roused against them if they followed Korah, Dathan and Abiram in their
seditious schism. Therefore he said to the whole people, at the Lord’s command: depart from
the tents of these wicked men and touch nothing of theirs, lest you be involved in their sins.
For he had perceived, under the Lord’s inspiration, that those seditious and schismatic men
would incur a grievous retribution, as was demonstrated afterwards when even the earth
could not bear with them but by God’s just judgment swallowed them up, so that they fell
alive into hell.

Similarly we too to whom, though unworthy, the lord Jesus Christ has deigned to entrust his
people, as we hear of the abominable crime that certain wicked men dwelling in Basel have
plotted in these days so as to breach the unity of holy church, and since we fear that they may
seduce some of the unwary by their deceits and inject them with their poisons, are forced to
proclaim in like words to the people of our lord Jesus Christ entrusted to us, depart from the
tents of these wicked men, particularly since the Christian people is far more numerous than
the Jewish people of those days, the church is holier than the synagogue, and the vicar of
Christ is superior in authority and status even to Moses.

This impiety of those at Basel we began to foresee long ago, when we observed the council of
Basel already lapsing into tyranny; when many, including those of lower status, were forced
to go to it and to stay at the whim of that faction of agitators; when the votes and decisions of
some of them were being extorted by various tricks and others were being suborned by lies
and deceits, as they abandoned almost everything to conspiracies, cabals, monopolies and
cliques, and from a long-standing rivalry with the papacy sought to prolong the duration of
the council; when, finally, innumerable novelties, irregularities, deformities and ills were
perpetrated, to which there concurred even clerics in lower orders, the ignorant and
inexperienced, vagabonds, quarrelers, fugitives, apostates, condemned criminals, escapees
from prison, those in rebellion against us and their own superiors, and other such human
monsters, who brought with them every stain of corruption from those teachers of evil-doing.

We directed our attention also to that most holy work of union with the eastern church, which
seemed to us to be greatly endangered by the deceit of certain factious persons, and we
wished to provide as best we could for so many evils. For these and other just and necessary
reasons which are stated in full in the decree of translation, with the advice of our venerable
brothers the cardinals of the holy Roman church, and with the approval of very many
venerable

brothers and sons, archbishops, bishops, elected persons, abbots and other prelates of
churches, masters and doctors, we transferred the aforesaid council of Basel to this city of
Ferrara, where we established with the Lord’s help an ecumenical council of the western and
the eastern church.

379
Afterwards, when the plague came and continued unabated, under the inspiration of grace
and with the approval of the same holy council, we transferred the council to this city of
Florence. Here the most gracious and merciful God showed his wonders. For, the most
disastrous schism, which had endured in God’s church for almost five hundred years to the
immense harm of the whole of Christianity, and for the elimination of which very many of
our predecessors as Roman pontiffs and many kings and princes and other Christians in past
times had laboured very hard, at last, after public and private discussions in both places and
many other labours, was removed and the most holy union of the Greeks and the Latins was
happily achieved, as is described more fully in the decree about this which was drawn up and
solemnly promulgated.

Returning fervent thanks for this to the eternal God and sharing our joy with all the faithful,
we offered to God a sacrifice of jubilation and praise. For we saw that not just one nation like
the Hebrew people was being summoned to the promised land, but peoples of many races,
nations and tongues were hastening to the one utterance and merit of the divine truth.
Through this, great hope is forthcoming that the sun of justice, rising in the east, will spread
the beams of its light to pierce the darkness of many other races, even of infidels, and the
salvation of the Lord may reach to the ends of the earth.

Already indeed, by God’s providence, we have excellent pledges of this. For almighty God
has granted that, by our means, representatives of the Armenians with full powers have
recently come from most distant northern parts to us and the apostolic see and to this holy
council. They regard and venerate us as no other than blessed Peter, prince of the apostles,
they recognize the holy see as mother and mistress of all the faithful, and they profess that
they have come to the holy see and to the aforesaid council for spiritual food and the truth of
sound doctrine. For this too we have given many thanks to our God.

But the mind recoils from recording what troubles, attacks and persecutions we have suffered
in the course of this divine undertaking until now, not indeed from Turks or Saracens but
from those who call themselves Christians. Blessed Jerome reports that from the time of
Hadrian until the reign of Constantine there was set up and worshipped by the pagans at the
place of the Lord’s resurrection an image of Jupiter and on the rock of the crucifixion a
marble statue of Venus, since the authors of persecution thought that they could take away
from us our faith in the resurrection and the cross if they polluted the holy places with their
idols.

Much the same has happened in these days against us and the church of God, at the hands of
those desperate men at Basel, except that what was then done by pagans ignorant of the true
God is now the work of men who have known him and hated him Their pride, then,
according to the prophet, is ever rising, all the more dangerously in that it is under the cloak
of reform, which in truth they have always abhorred, that they spread their poisons.

In the first place, those who were the authors of all the scandals in Basel have failed in their
promises to the Greeks. For they knew from the envoys of the Greeks and the eastern church

380
that our most dear son in Christ John Palaeologus, illustrious emperor of the Romans, and
Joseph, patriarch of Constantinople of happy memory, and the other prelates and persons of
the eastern church wished to proceed to the place which had been legally chosen for the
ecumenical council by our legates and presidents and other notable persons present there,
whose right it was to choose the site in accordance with the agreement which had been
approved by the common consent of the council after serious disagreements among its
members. Whereupon we, for our part, confirmed the choice of place in a general consistory
at Bologna and we sent to Constantinople, at great labour and expense, the galleys and other
things necessary for this holy work of union.

When they learnt of this, they dared to decree against us and the aforesaid cardinals a
detestable admonition or citation, so as to block the holy work, [and to send it to the aforesaid
emperor and patriarch of Constantinople, so that they and all others] might be deterred from
coming. Yet they knew full well that there was no chance of them going to any place other
than the one which had been chosen for the site, as stated above.

Then, when they realized that the aforesaid emperor and patriarch and others were already on
their way to us for this work of holy union, they tried to lay another wicked snare to catch this
divine project. That is, they produced against us a sacrilegious sentence of suspension from
the administration of the papacy. Finally, those leaders of scandal, very few in number, most
of them of the lowest rank and reputation, in their intense hatred of true peace, piling iniquity
on top of iniquity lest they should enter into the justice of the Lord, when they saw that the
grace of the holy Spirit was working in us towards union with the Greeks, swerving away
from the straight line into paths of error, held a so-called session on 16 May last asserting that
they were obeying certain decrees, although these were passed at Constance by only one of
the three obediences after the flight of John XXIII, as he was called in that one obedience, at
a time of schism.

Alleging obedience to those decrees, they proclaimed three propositions which they term
truths of the faith, seemingly to make heretics of us and all princes and prelates and other
faithful and devout adherents of the apostolic see. The propositions are the following.

“The truth about the authority of a general council, representing the universal church, over a
pope and anyone else whatsoever, declared by the general councils of Constance and this one
of Basel, is a truth of the catholic faith. The truth that a pope cannot by any authority, without
its consent, dissolve a general council representing the universal church, legitimately
assembled for the reasons given in the above-mentioned truth or for any of them, or prorogue
it to another time or transfer it from place to place, is a truth of the catholic faith. Anyone
who persists in opposing the aforesaid truths is to be considered a heretic.”

In this, those utterly pernicious men, masking their malice with the rosy colour of a truth of
the faith, gave to the council of Constance an evil and mischievous meaning completely
opposed to its true teaching, imitating in this the teaching of other schismatics and heretics

381
who always amass for their support fabricated errors and impious dogmas drawn from their
perverse interpretation of the divine scriptures and the holy fathers.

Finally, completely perverting their mind and turning away their eyes from looking to heaven
or remembering righteous judgments, after the manner of Dioscorus and the infamous synod
of Ephesus, they proceeded to a declaratory sentence of deprivation, as they claimed, from
the dignity and office of the supreme apostolate, a poisonous and execrable pronouncement
involving an unforgivable crime. Here we will take the tenor of that sentence, abhorrent to
every pious mind, as sufficiently expressed. They omitted nothing, as far as was in their
power, that might overthrow this incomparable good of union.

O miserable and degenerate sons! O wicked and adulterous generation! What could be more
cruel than this impiety and iniquity? Can anything more detestable, more dreadful and more
mad be imagined? Earlier on they were the ones who said that nothing better, nothing more
glorious and fruitful had ever been seen or heard of in the Christian people, from the very
birth of the church, than this most holy union, and that to further it there should be no
contention about the place, but rather to achieve it the wealth of this world as well as body
and soul should be hazarded, proclaiming this aloud to the whole world and urging the
Christian people to it, as their decrees and letters fully state. But now they persecute exactly
this as furiously and as impiously as they can, so that the devils of the entire world seem to
have flocked together to that conventicle of brigands at Basel.

So far almighty God has not allowed their iniquity and its lying inconsistencies to prevail.
But seeing that they are striving with all their strength to bring it to success, even to the point
of setting up the abomination of desolation in God’s church, we can in no way pretend to
ignore these things without most serious offence to God and imminent danger of confusion
and abomination in God’s church. In keeping with our pastoral office, at the urging of many
who are fired with zeal for God, we wish to put a stop to such evils and, as far as we can, to
take appropriate and salutary measures to eliminate from God’s church this execrable impiety
and most destructive pestilence.

Following in the steps of our predecessors who, as Pope Nicholas of holy memory writes,
were accustomed to annul councils which had been conducted improperly, even those of
universal pontiffs, as occurred at the second universal synod at Ephesus, inasmuch as the
blessed pope Leo summoned it but later established the council of Chalcedon.

We renew by our apostolic authority, with the approval of this holy council of Florence, the
solemn and salutary decree against those sacrilegious men, which was issued by us in the
sacred general council of Ferrara on 15 February. By that decree we declared among other
things, with the approval of the said sacred council of Ferrara, that each and every person at
Basel who, in the name of a pretended council which we called more accurately a
conventicle, dared to perpetrate those scandalous and wicked deeds in contravention of our
translation and declaration, whether they are cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops,
abbots or of some other ecclesiastical or secular dignity, has incurred the penalties of

382
excommunication, privation of dignities, benefices and offices and disqualification for the
future, which are instanced in our letter of translation.

Now we decree and declare again that all the things done or attempted by those impious men
presently in Basel, which were mentioned in our said decree of Ferrara, and each and all of
the things done, performed or attempted by the same men since then, especially in the two so-
called sessions or rather conspiracies which have just been mentioned, and whatever may
have followed from these things or from any of them, or may follow in the future, as coming
from impious men who have no authority and have been rejected and reprobated by God,
were and are null, quashed, invalid, presumptuous and of no effect, force or moment.

With the approval of the sacred council we condemn and reject, and we proclaim as
condemned and rejected, those propositions quoted above as understood in the perverse sense
of the men at Basel, which they demonstrate by their deeds, as contrary to the sound sense of
sacred scripture, the holy fathers and the council of Constance itself; and likewise the
aforesaid so-called sentence of declaration or deprivation, with all its present and future
consequences, as impious and scandalous and tending to open schism in God’s church and to
the confusion of all ecclesiastical order and Christian government. Also, we decree and
declare that all of the aforesaid persons have been and are schismatics and heretics, And that
as such they are assuredly to be punished with suitable penalties over and above the penalties
imposed at the aforesaid council of Ferrara, together with all their supporters and abettors, of
whatever ecclesiastical or secular status, condition or rank they may be, even cardinals,
patriarchs, archbishops, bishops or abbots or those of any other dignity, so that they may
receive their deserts with the aforesaid Korah, Dathan and Abiram Let nobody therefore … If
anyone however …

SESSION 8 22 November 1439 [Bull of union with the Armenians]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. All people
everywhere who go by the name of Christian: Exult in God our helper, rejoice in the God of
Jacob. Behold the Lord once again, mindful of his mercy had deigned to remove from his
church another stumbling block which has endured for more than nine centuries. He who
makes peace in the heavens and is peace on earth for people of good will, has granted in his
inexpressible mercy that most desired union with the Armenians. Blessed be the God and
Father of our lord Jesus Christ, the father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us
in all our tribulation. For the most merciful Lord, seeing his church buffeted about by strong
whirlwinds, some times at the hands of those who are outside, at other times at the hands of
those within, deigns in many ways every day to console and strengthen her so that she may be
able to breathe freely in the midst of her troubles and to rise more robust to resist.

Some time ago God established that great union with the Greeks, who include many races
and tongues spread far and wide. Today God has confirmed in the same bond of faith and
charity with the apostolic see this union with the Armenians, who are a very numerous people
spread over the north and east. These indeed are such great and wondrous benefactions of

383
divine providence that the human mind cannot render worthy thanks for either of them, still
less for both together. Who would not be overwhelmed with admiration at the achievement in
this council, within so short a time, of two such brilliant feats which have been longed for
over centuries ? Truly this is the Lord’s doing and it is wonderful in our eyes. For how could
human prudence or diligence have brought to completion such great exploits as these are,
unless the favour of God had given them their beginning and end? Let us, then, together and
with all our hearts bless the Lord who alone does great wonders, let us sing with the spirit, let
us sing with our minds and our mouths and let us give thanks in deeds, as far as human
weakness allows, for such great gifts. Let us pray and beseech that, as the Greeks and the
Armenians have been made one with the Roman church, so also may other nations be,
especially those signed with the seal of Christ, and that finally the whole Christian people,
after all hatreds and wars have been extinguished, may rest and rejoice together in mutual
peace and brotherly love. Rightly we hold that the Armenians deserve great praise. As soon
as they were invited by us to this synod, in their eagerness for ecclesiastical unity, at the cost
of many labours and much toil and perils at sea, they sent to us and this council from very
distant parts, their notable, dedicated and learned envoys with sufficient powers to accept,
namely whatever the holy Spirit should inspire this holy synod to achieve.

We, for our part, with all our attention as befits our pastoral office and desiring to bring this
holy work to a successful conclusion, frequently conversed with their envoys about this holy
union. To avoid even the slightest delay in this holy project, we nominated from every rank
of this sacred council experts in divine and human law to treat of the matter with the envoys
with all care, study and diligence, closely inquiring of them about their faith in respect of the
unity of the divine essence and the Trinity of divine persons, also about the humanity of our
lord Jesus Christ, the seven sacraments of the church and other points concerning the
orthodox faith and the rites of the universal church.

So, after many debates, conferences and disputations, after a thorough examination of the
written authorities which were produced from fathers and doctors of the church, and after
discussion of the questions at issue, at length, so that in future there could be no doubt about
the truth of the faith of the Armenians and that they should think in every way like the
apostolic see and that the union should be stable and lasting with no cause for hesitation
whatsoever we judged it advantageous, with the approval of this sacred council of Florence
and the agreement of the said envoys, to give in this decree a summary of the truth of the
orthodox faith that the Roman church professes about the above.

In the first place, then, we give them the holy creed issued by the hundred and fifty bishops in
the ecumenical council of Constantinople, with the added phrase and the Son, which for the
sake of declaring the truth and from urgent necessity was licitly and reasonably added to that
creed, which runs as follows: I believe . . . I We decree that this holy creed should be sung or
read within the mass at least on Sundays and greater feasts, as is the Latin custom, in all
Armenian churches.

384
In the second place, we give them the definition of the fourth council of Chalcedon about two
natures in the one person of Christ, which was later renewed in the fifth and sixth universal
councils. It runs as follows: This wise and saving creed … Thirdly, the definition about the
two wills and two principles of action of Christ promulgated in the above-mentioned sixth
council, the tenor of which is This pious and orthodox creed, and the rest which follows in
the above-mentioned definition of the council of Chalcedon until the end, after which it
continues thus: And we proclaim

Fourth, apart from the three synods of Nicaea, Constantinople and the first of Ephesus, the
Armenians have accepted no other later universal synods nor the most blessed Leo, bishop of
this holy see, by whose authority the council of Chalcedon met. For they claim that it was
proposed to them that both the synod of Chalcedon and the said Leo had made the definition
in accordance with the condemned heresy of Nestorius. So we instructed them and declared
that such a suggestion was false and that the synod of Chalcedon and blessed Leo holily and
rightly defined the truth of two natures in the one person of Christ, described above, against
the impious tenets of Nestorius and Eutyches. We commanded that for the future they should
hold and venerate the most blessed Leo, who was a veritable pillar of the faith and replete
with all sanctity and doctrine, as a saint deservedly inscribed in the calendar of the saints; and
that they should reverence and respect, like the rest of the faithful, not only the three above-
mentioned synods but also all other universal synods legitimately celebrated by the authority
of the Roman pontiff.

Fifthly, for the easier instruction of the Armenians of today and in the future we reduce the
truth about the sacraments of the church to the following brief scheme. There are seven
sacraments of the new Law, namely baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, extreme
unction, orders and matrimony, which differ greatly from the sacraments of the old Law. The
latter were not causes of grace, but only prefigured the grace to be given through the passion
of Christ; whereas the former, ours, both contain grace and bestow it on those who worthily
receive them. The first five of these are directed to the spiritual perfection of each person in
himself, the last two to the regulation and increase of the whole church.

For, by baptism we are reborn spiritually; by confirmation we grow in grace and are
strengthened in faith. Once reborn and strengthened, we are nourished by the food of the
divine Eucharist. But if through sin we incur an illness of the soul, we are cured spiritually by
penance. Spiritually also and bodily as suits the soul, by extreme unction. By orders the
church is governed and spiritually multiplied; by matrimony it grows bodily.

All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as
the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of
doing what the church does. If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected.

Three of the sacraments, namely baptism, confirmation and orders, imprint indelibly on the
soul a character, that is a kind of stamp which distinguishes it from the rest. Hence they are

385
not repeated in the same person. The other four, however, do not imprint a character and can
be repeated.

Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual
life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the church. Since death
came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the spirit, we
cannot, as Truth says, enter the kingdom of heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and
natural water, either hot or cold. The form is: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the holy Spirit. But we do not deny that true baptism is conferred by the
following words: May this servant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father and of the
Son and of the holy Spirit; or, This person is baptized by my hands in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. Since the holy Trinity is the principle cause from which
baptism has its power and the minister is the instrumental cause who exteriorly bestows the
sacrament, the sacrament is conferred if the action is performed by the minister with the
invocation of the holy Trinity. The minister of this sacrament is a priest, who is empowered
to baptize in virtue of his office. But in case of necessity not only a priest or a deacon, but
even a lay man or a woman, even a pagan and a heretic, can baptize provided he or she uses
the form of the church and intends to do what the church does. The effect of this sacrament is
the remission of all original and actual guilt, also of all penalty that is owed for that guilt.
Hence no satisfaction for past sins is to be imposed on the baptized, but those who die before
they incur any guilt go straight to the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God.

The second sacrament is confirmation. Its matter is chrism made from oil and balsam blessed
by a bishop, the oil symbolizing the gleaming brightness of conscience and balsam
symbolizing the odour of a good reputation. The form is: I sign you with the sign of the cross
and I confirm you with the chrism of salvation in the name of the Father and of the Son and
of the holy Spirit. The ordinary minister is a bishop. Whereas a simple priest can use other
unctions, only a bishop ought to confer this one, because it is said only of the apostles, whose
place is held by bishops, that they gave the holy Spirit by the imposition of hands, as this text
from the Acts of the Apostles shows: Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria
had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed
for them that they might receive the holy Spirit; for it had not yet come down upon any of
them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the lord Jesus. Then they laid their
hands on them and they received the holy Spirit’. In place of this imposition of hands
confirmation is given in the church. We read that sometimes for a reasonable and really
urgent cause, by dispensation of the apostolic see, a simple priest has conferred this
sacrament of confirmation with chrism prepared by a bishop. The effect of this sacrament is
that a Christian should boldly confess the name of Christ, since the holy Spirit is given in this
sacrament for strengthening just as he was given to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.
Therefore the candidate is enjoined on the forehead, which is the seat of shame, not to shrink
from confessing the name of Christ and especially his cross, which is a stumbling block for
Jews and a folly for gentiles, according to the Apostle, and for this reason he is signed with
the sign of the cross. The third is the sacrament of the Eucharist. Its matter is wheat bread and
wine from the vine, to which a very little water is added before the consecration. Water is

386
added thus because it is believed, in accordance with the testimony of holy fathers and
doctors of the church manifested long ago in disputation, that the Lord himself instituted this
sacrament in wine mixed with water, and because it befits the representation of the Lord’s
passion. For the blessed pope Alexander, fifth after blessed Peter, says: “In the oblations of
the sacraments which are offered to the Lord within the solemnities of masses, only bread and
wine mixed with water are to be offered in sacrifice. There should not be offered in the
chalice of the Lord either wine only or water only but both mixed together, because both
blood and water are said to have flowed from Christ’s side’; also because it is fitting to
signify the effect of this sacrament, which is the union of the Christian people with Christ.
For, water signifies the people according to those words of the Apocalypse: many waters,
many peoples. And Pope Julius, second after blessed Silvester, said: The chalice of the Lord,
by a precept of the canons, should be offered mixed of wine and water, because we see that
the people is understood in the water and the blood of Christ is manifested in the wine; hence
when wine and water are mingled in the chalice, the people are made one with Christ and the
mass of the faithful are linked and joined together with him in whom they believe. Since,
therefore, both the holy Roman church taught by the most blessed apostles Peter and Paul and
the other churches of Latins and Greeks, in which the lights of all sanctity and doctrine have
shone brightly, have behaved in this way from the very beginning of the growing church and
still do so, it seems very unfitting that any other region should differ from this universal and
reasonable observance. We decree, therefore, that the Armenians should conform themselves
with the whole Christian world and that their priests shall mix a little water with the wine in
the oblation of the chalice, as has been said. The form of this sacrament are the words of the
Saviour with which he effected this sacrament. A priest speaking in the person of Christ
effects this sacrament. For, in virtue of those words, the substance of bread is changed into
the body of Christ and the substance of wine into his blood. In such wise, however, that the
whole Christ is contained both under the form of bread and under the form of wine, under any
part of the consecrated host as well as after division of the consecrated wine, there is the
whole Christ. The effect of this sacrament, which is produced in the soul of one who receives
it worthily, is the union of him or her with Christ. Since by grace a person is incorporated in
Christ and is united with his members, the consequence is that grace is increased by this
sacrament in those who receive it worthily, and that every effect that material food and drink
produce for corporal life — sustaining, increasing, repairing and delighting — this sacrament
works for spiritual life. For in it, as Pope Urban said, we recall the gracious memory of our
Saviour, we are withdrawn from evil, we are strengthened in good and we receive an increase
of virtues and graces.

The fourth sacrament is penance. Its matter is the acts of the penitent, which are threefold.
The first is contrition of heart, which includes sorrow for sin committed, with the resolve not
to sin again. The second is oral confession, which implies integral confession to the priest of
all sins that are remembered. The third is satisfaction for sins in accordance with the
judgment of the priest which is ordinarily done by prayer, fasting and almsgiving. The form
of this sacrament are the words of absolution which the priest pronounces when he says: I
absolve you. The minister of this sacrament is a priest with authority to absolve, which is
either ordinary or by commission of a superior.

387
The fifth sacrament is extreme unction. Its matter is olive oil blessed by a priest. This
sacrament should not be given to the sick unless death is expected. The person is to be
anointed on the following places: on the eyes for sight, on the ears for hearing, on the nostrils
for smell, on the mouth for taste or speech, on the hands for touch, on the feet for walking, on
the loins for the pleasure that abides there. The form of this sacrament is: Through this
anointing and his most pious mercy may the Lord pardon you whatever you have done wrong
by sight, and similarly for the other members. The minister of the sacrament is a priest. Its
effect is to cure the mind and, in so far as it helps the soul, also the body. Blessed James the
apostle said of this sacrament: Any one of you who is sick should send for the elders of the
church, and they shall pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. The
prayer of faith will save the sick person and the Lord will raise him up again: and if he is in
sins, they will be forgiven him.

The sixth is the sacrament of orders. Its matter is the object by whose handing over the order
is conferred. So the priesthood is bestowed by the handing over of a chalice with wine and a
paten with bread; the diaconate by the giving of the book of the gospels; the subdiaconate by
the handing over of an empty chalice with an empty paten on it; and similarly for the other
orders by allotting things connected with their ministry. The form for a priest is: Receive the
power of offering sacrifice in the church for the living and the dead, in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. The forms for the other orders are contained in full in
the Roman pontifical. The ordinary minister of this sacrament is a bishop. The effect is an
increase of grace to make the person a suitable minister of Christ.

The seventh is the sacrament of matrimony, which is a sign of the union of Christ and the
church according to the words of the apostle: This sacrament is a great one, but I speak in
Christ and in the church. The efficient cause of matrimony is usually mutual consent
expressed in words about the present. A threefold good is attributed to matrimony. The first is
the procreation and bringing up of children for the worship of God. The second is the mutual
faithfulness of the spouses towards each other. The third is the indissolubility of marriage,
since it signifies the indivisible union of Christ and the church. Although separation of bed is
lawful on account of fornication, it is not lawful to contract another marriage, since the bond
of a legitimately contracted marriage is perpetual.

Sixthly, we offer to the envoys that compendious rule of the faith composed by most blessed
Athanasius, which is as follows:

Whoever wills to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holds the catholic faith.
Unless a person keeps this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish eternally.
The catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity,
neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the
Father, another of the Son, and another of the holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of
the Son and of the holy Spirit is one, the glory equal, and the majesty co-eternal. Such as the
Father is, such is the Son, and such is the holy Spirit. The Father uncreated the Son uncreated

388
and the holy Spirit uncreated. The Father infinite, the Son infinite and the holy Spirit infinite.
The Father eternal, the Son eternal and the holy Spirit eternal. Yet they are not three eternals,
but one eternal. As also they are not three uncreateds nor three infinites, but one uncreated
and one infinite. Likewise the Father is almighty, the Son is almighty and the holy Spirit is
almighty. Yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty. Likewise the Father is God, the
Son is God and the holy Spirit is God. Yet they are not three gods, but one God. Likewise the
Father is Lord, the Son is Lord and the holy Spirit is Lord. Yet they are not three lords, but
one Lord. For just as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge each person by
himself to be God and Lord, so we are forbidden by the catholic religion to say there are three
gods or three lords. The Father is made by none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is
from the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten. The holy Spirit is from the Father
and the Son; not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not
three fathers; one Son, not three sons; one holy Spirit, not three holy spirits. And in this
Trinity nothing is before or after, nothing is greater or less; but the whole three persons are
co-eternal together and co-equal. So that in all things, as has been said above, the unity in
Trinity and the Trinity in unity is to be worshipped. Whoever, therefore, wishes to be saved,
let him think thus of the Trinity.

It is also necessary for salvation to believe faithfully the incarnation of our lord Jesus Christ.
The right faith, therefore, is that we believe and confess that our lord Jesus Christ, Son of
God, is God and man. God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the ages; and man,
of the substance of his mother, born in the world. Perfect God, perfect man, subsisting of a
rational soul and human flesh. Equal to the Father according to his Godhead, less than the
Father according to his humanity. Although he is God and man, he is not two, but one Christ.
One, however, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by the taking of humanity
into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For as a
reasoning soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ. He suffered for our
salvation and descended into hell. On the third day he rose from the dead. He ascended into
heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty. Thence he shall come to judge
the living and the dead. At his coming all shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give an
account of their own deeds. Those who have done good shall go into eternal life, but those
who have done evil shall go into eternal fire.

This is the catholic faith. Unless a person believes it faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

Seventhly, the decree of union concluded with the Greeks, which was promulgated earlier in
this sacred ecumenical council of Florence and which is as follows: Let the heavens be glad .
..‘

Eighthly, there was discussion with the Armenians about, among other things, the days on
which the following feasts should be kept: the annunciation of the blessed virgin Mary, the
birth of blessed John the Baptist and, in consequence, the birth and the circumcision of our
lord Jesus Christ and his presentation in the temple (or the purification of the blessed virgin
Mary). The truth was made quite clear by the testimonies of fathers and by the custom of the

389
Roman church and all other churches among Latins and Greeks. Therefore, lest the rites of
Christians be at variance in such great celebrations, whence a threat to charity could arise, we
decree that, as something consonant with truth and reason, the Armenians too should
solemnly celebrate, according to the observance of the rest of the world, the following feasts
on the following days: the annunciation of the blessed virgin Mary on 25 March, the birth of
blessed John the Baptist on 24 June, the birth of our Saviour on 25 December, his
circumcision on 1 January, the epiphany on 6 January, and the presentation of our Lord in the
temple (or the purification of the mother of God) on 2 February.

After all these matters had been explained, the aforesaid Armenians, in their own name and in
the name of their patriarch and of all Armenians, with all devotion and obedience accept,
admit and embrace this salutary synodal decree with all its chapters, declarations, definitions,
traditions, precepts and statutes and all the doctrine contained in it, and also whatever the
holy apostolic see and the Roman church holds and teaches. They also accept with reverence
all those doctors and holy fathers approved by the Roman church. Indeed, they hold as
reprobated and condemned whatever persons and things the Roman church reprobates and
condemns. They promise that as true sons of obedience, in the name as above, they will
faithfully obey the ordinances and commands of the apostolic see.

When the aforesaid decree had been solemnly read out in our and the holy synod’s presence,
straightaway our beloved son Narses, an Armenian, in the name of the said envoys, publicly
recited the following in Armenian and thereupon our beloved son Basil of the order of friars
Minor, the interpreter between us and the Armenians, publicly read it out in Latin as follows.

Most blessed father and most holy synod. Recently the whole of this holy decree, which has
now been read out in Latin in your presence, was clearly explained and interpreted to us word
by word in our language. It was and is completely acceptable to us. To disclose our
understanding more fully, however, we repeat its contents in summary.

The following is contained in it. First, you give to our people of the Armenians the holy creed
of Constantinople, with the added phrase and the Son, to be sung or read within the mass in
our churches at least on Sundays and greater feasts. Secondly, the definition of the fourth
universal council of Chalcedon about two natures in the one person of Christ. Thirdly, the
definition about the two wills and principles of action of Christ which was promulgated in the
sixth universal council.

Fourthly, you declare that the synod of Chalcedon and most blessed pope Leo rightly defined
the truth about two natures in the one person of Christ against the impious doctrines of
Nestorius and Eutyches. You order that we should venerate most blessed Leo as holy and a
pillar of the faith and that we should reverently accept not only the synods of Nicaea,
Constantinople and the first of Ephesus, but also all other synods legitimately celebrated . .
authority of the Roman pontiff.

390
Fifthly, a short scheme of the seven sacraments of the church, namely baptism, confirmation,
Eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders and matrimony indicating the matter, the form
and the minister of each; and that while the chalice is being offered in the sacrifice of the altar
a little water should be mixed with the wine.

Sixthly, a compendious rule of the faith of most blessed Athanasius, which begins: Whoever
wills to be saved etc.

Seventhly, the decree of union concluded with the Greeks, which was promulgated earlier in
this sacred council, recording how the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the
Son, and that the phrase and the Son was licitly and reasonably added to the creed of
Constantinople. Also that the body of the Lord is effected in leavened or unleavened wheat
bread; and what is to be believed about the pains of purgatory and hell, about the life of the
blessed and about suffrages offered for the dead. In addition, about the plenitude of power of
the apostolic see given by Christ to blessed Peter and his successors, . . . . . about the order of
the patriarchal sees.

Eighthly, you decree that the following feasts should be kept on the following days, in
accordance with the custom of the universal church: the annunciation of the blessed virgin
Mary on 25 March, the birth of blessed John the Baptist on 24 June, the birth of our Saviour
on 25 December, his circumcision on I January, the epiphany on 6 January, and the
presentation of the Lord in the temple (or the purification of blessed Mary) on 2 February.

Therefore we envoys, in our own name and in the name of our reverend patriarch and of all
Armenians, with all devotion and obedience accept, admit and embrace, just as your holiness
affirms in the decree, this most salutary synodal decree with all its chapters, declarations,
definitions, traditions, precepts and statutes and all the doctrine contained in it, and also
whatever the holy apostolic see and the Roman church holds and teaches. We accept with
reverence all those doctors and holy fathers approved by the Roman church. Indeed we hold
as reprobated and condemned whatever persons and things the Roman church reprobates and
condemns. We promise that as true sons of obedience, in the name of the above, we will
faithfully obey the ordinances and commands of this apostolic see.

SESSION 9 23 March 1440

[Monition of the council of Florence against the antipope Felix V]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. Many examples
of holy fathers of the old and the new Testament warn us that we should not pass over in
silence or leave completely unpunished specially grave crimes which lead to the scandal and
public division of the people entrusted to us. For if we delay to pursue and avenge what is
grievously offensive to God, we thereby provoke the divine patience to wrath. For, there are
sins for which it is a sin to be slack about their retribution. It is indeed right and eminently
reasonable, in the opinion of holy fathers, that those who despise divine commands and
disobey paternal enactments should be corrected with really severe penalties, so that others

391
may fear to commit the same faults and that all may rejoice in fraternal harmony and take
note of the example of severity and probity. For if — though may it never be — we are
negligent about ecclesiastical vigilance and activity, idleness ruins discipline and the souls of
the faithful will suffer great harm. Therefore, rotting flesh should be cut away and mangy
sheep driven out

He cannot have God as his father If he does not hold the unity of the church i he who does
not agree with the body of the church and the whole brotherhood, cannot agree with anyone.
Since Christ suffered for the church and since the church is the body of Christ, without doubt
the person who divides the church is convicted of lacerating the body of Christ. Hence the
avenging will of the Lord went forth against schismatics like Korah, Dathan and Abiram,
who were swallowed up together by an opening in the ground for instigating schism against
Moses, the man of God, and others were consumed by fire from heaven; idolatry indeed was
punished by the sword; and the burning of the book was requited by the slaughter of war and
imprisonment in exile.

Finally, how indivisible is the sacrament of unity! How bereft of hope, and how punished by
God’s indignation with the direst loss, are those who produce schism and, abandoning the
true spouse of the church, set up a pseudo-bishop! Divine scripture declares this in the book
of Kings, which says that when ten tribes had separated themselves from the tribe of Judah
and Benjamin and abandoned their king, setting up for themselves another king: the Lord was
indignant with all the descendants of Israel and gave them over to destruction till he cast them
away from his face. It says that the Lord was indignant and gave over to destruction those
who split off from unity and set up for themselves another king. Indeed, so great was the
wrath of God against those who had brought about a schism that even when the man of God
had been sent to Jeroboam to reprove his sins and to predict a future vengeance, the man of
God was forbidden to eat bread with them or to drink water and when he did not obey this
order of the Lord and dined, straightaway the divine retribution struck him and he was killed
by a lion on his return journey. Hence, as blessed Jerome declares, nobody should doubt that
the crime of schism is very wicked since it is avenged so severely.

In days gone by, in the holy general council of Constance, that chronic and disastrous schism,
which had cruelly and daily afflicted God’s church and the Christian religion with great loss
of souls, not only of individual persons but also in entire cities and provinces, was at last
settled by the ineffable mercy of God and the unbounded labours and hardships of many
kings and princes, both ecclesiastical and secular, many universities and others of Christ’s
faithful, and at great expense. With the election of lord Martin of happy memory and, after
his death, the undisputed, genuine, unanimous and canonical elevation of your holiness to the
summit of the apostolate, the universal church seemed to be enjoying a greatly desired peace.
But behold! Again we are compelled with copious tears to say with Jeremiah the prophet: we
looked for peace, but behold disturbance. And again with Isaiah: we looked for light, but
behold darkness. Some sons of perdition and disciples of iniquity, who were few in numbers
and of little authority, tried at Basel with all their strength, guile and cunning, even after the
translation of the former council which had been made canonically and legitimately by your

392
holiness for just, evident, urgent and necessary reasons, to prevent the most holy union with
the Greeks and the whole eastern church, which was ardently desired by the whole Christian
people.

For after the said authors of the scandals who remained in Basel had failed to fulfil their
promise to the Greeks, when they learnt from the envoys of the Greeks and the eastern church
that the most serene prince lord John Palaeologus, emperor of the Romans, and Joseph,
patriarch of Constantinople of happy memory, with many other prelates and men of the
eastern church were about to come to the place chosen for the ecumenical council, and that
your holiness had dispatched many prelates and envoys with galleys at great expense and
outlay, they dared to decree, with a view to preventing the arrival of the said emperor and
Greeks, a detestable monition against your holiness and my most reverend lords, the lord
cardinals of the holy Roman church.

Afterwards, when they learnt that the said emperor and patriarch and other easterners were
coming, they issued against your holiness a kind of sacrilegious decree of suspension from
the administration of the papacy.

Despite these and other wicked attempts and sacrilegious acts, on account of the constant
solicitude displayed by you and this sacred council and after great labours and many
disputations, at last the divine mercy granted that the above-mentioned schism of the Greeks
and the eastern church, which had lasted for almost five hundred years to the great harm of
the whole Christian people, should be removed from the midst of the church and that the
most desired union of the western and the eastern church, which was hardly thought possible,
should follow with the utmost harmony from your and this sacred council’s holy work. This
ought to be greatly admired and venerated with the highest praise and the joy of exultation, as
all the rest of the Christian religion had done, and thanks should be returned to the most High
for so admirable a gift. But they became more hard-hearted and obstinate, preferring even at
the cost of ruining the whole Christian world to fan into flames the conflagration, which they
had already begun, of their aforesaid most wicked monster. They adopted an attitude of
opposition and, prodigal of their good name and enemies to their own honour, they strove to
their utmost with pestilential daring to rend the unity of the holy Roman and universal church
and the seamless robe of Christ’, and with serpentlike bites to lacerate the womb of the pious
and holy mother herself.

The leader and prince of these men and the architect of the whole nefarious deed was that
first-born son of Satan, the most unfortunate Amadeus, once duke and prince of Savoy. He
meditated this scheme for long. Several years ago, as is widely said, he was seduced by the
trickery, soothsayings and phantoms of certain unfortunate men and women of low reputation
(commonly called wizards or witches or Waldensians and said to be very numerous in his
country), who had forsaken their Saviour to turn backwards to Satan and be deceived by
demonic illusions, to have himself raised up to be a monstrous head in God’s church. He
adopted the cloak of a hermit, or rather of a most false hypocrite, so that in sheep’s clothing,
like a lamb he might assume the ferocity of a wolf. Eventually he joined the people at Basel.

393
By force, fraud, bribery, promises and threats he prevailed on the majority of those at Basel,
who were subject to his sway and tyranny, to proclaim him as an idol and Beelzebub, the
prince of these new demons, in opposition to your holiness, the true vicar of Christ and the
undoubted successor of Peter in God’s church.

Thus that most ill-starred Amadeus, a man of insatiable and unheard of greed, whom avarice
(which, according to the Apostle, is the service of idols) has always blinded, was set up as an
idol and like a statue of Nebuchadnezzar in God’s church by that most wicked synagogue,
those offscourings of forsaken men, that shameful cesspool of all Christianity, from among
whom certain heinous men, or rather demons hiding under the form of men, had been
deputed as electors or rather as profaners. He himself, agitated by the furies of his own crimes
and sinking into the depth of all evils, said after the manner of Lucifer: I will set my throne in
the north and I shall be like the most High. He grasped with avid and detestable greed at the
above-mentioned election, or rather profanation made of him, which he had earlier sought
with intense fever of mind and anguish of heart. He did not shrink from adopting and wearing
papal robes, ornaments and insignia, from behaving, holding himself and acting as Roman
and supreme pontiff, and from having himself venerated as such by the people. Further, he
was not afraid to write and despatch to many parts of the world letters which were sealed
with a leaden seal after the manner of the Roman pontiffs. By these letters, in which he calls
himself Felix even though he is the most unhappy of mortals, he tries to spread the poisons of
his faction among the people of Christ.

What complaint or accusation am I to make first, most blessed father and most holy synod?
With what force of speech, grief of mind or outpouring of words am I to deplore so great a
crime? What rich discourse could suitably bewail or express this most foul deed? Assuredly
no account can equal the grossness of the act, for the magnitude of so heinous a crime
transcends the power of speech.

But, as I see it, most blessed father and most reverend and reverend fathers, now is the hour
not for lament but for remedy.

For behold, holy mother church was basking in true unity and peace, in the person of your
holiness her undoubted spouse, when the fountain of tears was opened. To you, her spouse,
and to you most reverend and reverend fathers, who share in solicitude and have been
summoned to this sacred and ecumenical council, she is forced to cry and shout with many
sighs and sobs: Have pity on me, have pity on me, at least you my fiends’. For my bowels are
full of bitterness. For the foxes destroy the vineyard of the God of hosts, and the impious rend
the seamless robe of Christ. Let God therefore arise, let all his enemies be scattered. And you,
most blessed father, since all these things are so manifest, public and notorious that they
cannot be hidden by any evasion or defended by excuses, arise in the power of the most High,
together with this sacred council, and judge the cause of your spouse and be mindful of your
sons. Gird your sword upon your thigh, O mighty one. Set out, proceed prosperously and
reign, and say with the psalmist: I will pursue my enemies and crush them, and I shall not
return until I consume them. I shall consume and crush them and they will not rise; they will

394
fall at my feet. For it is wrong that so wicked a deed and so detestable a precedent should be
allowed to pass by disguised, lest perhaps unpunished daring and malice find an imitator, but
rather let the example of punished trangressions deter others from offending.

Therefore your holiness and this sacred synod, following the example of Moses the man of
God, must say to the whole Christian people: Depart from the tents of these impious men.
Follow also the example of blessed pope Leo, your predecessor, who moved the second
council of Ephesus and Dioscorus with his supporters to Chalcedon, where he instituted a
synod which condemned them, and of your other predecessors as supreme pontiff, who
continuously rising up in God’s church have eliminated heresies and schisms, with their
instigators, followers and supporters, from the church of God and the communion of the
faithful, which is the most sacred body of Christ, and have afflicted them with many other
condign penalties at the demand of justice.

With the approval and help of this sacred ecumenical council, avenge with condign penalties
this new frenzy which has become inflamed to your injury and that of the holy Roman
church, your spouse, and to the notorious scandal of the whole Christian people. By the
authority of almighty God and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul and by your own
authority, remove and separate from God’s holy church, by a perpetual anathema, the
aforesaid wicked perpetrators of this prodigious crime and their unfortunate heresiarch and
veritable antichrist in God’s church together with all their supporters, adherents and followers
and especially his execrable electors or rather profaners.

May he and all the aforesaid be cast out like an antichrist and an invader and a destroyer of
the whole of Christianity. Let no appeal in this matter ever be allowed to him or to them. Let
them and their posterity and successors be deprived without appeal of every ecclesiastical or
secular rank and dignity whatsoever. Let all of them be condemned by a perpetual anathema
and excommunication and may they be counted among the wicked who will not rise at the
judgment. May they feel the anger of God against them. May they feel the rage of saints Peter
and Paul, whose church they dare to throw into confusion, both in this life and in the next.
May their dwelling be a desolation, let no one dwell in their tents. May their children be
orphans and their wives be widows. May the world fight against them and all the elements be
opposed to them, so that they may be cast out, destroyed and eliminated by all and so that, as
they grovel in permanent penury, death may deservedly be their refuge and life their
punishment. May the merits of all the saints cast them into confusion and display open
vengeance on them in their lifetime. May they receive a deserved fate with Korah, Dathan
and Abiram. Finally, unless they repent from their hearts, perform deeds worthy of
repentance and make worthy satisfaction to your holiness and the universal church for the
enormity of their sins, may they be thrust with the wicked into the everlasting darkness,
doomed by the just judgment of God to eternal torments.

May the grace of almighty God protect all of us and all Christ’s faithful who execrate with
merited blasphemies the aforesaid heresiarchs and their abominable idol and antichrist, who
acknowledge you as Christ’s vicar and spouse of his most worthy church, and who venerate

395
you with devout reverence and constant faith and obedience. By the authority of blessed Peter
and Paul and your authority, may we and they be absolved from all bonds of sins, be filled
with all blessings on our pilgrimage and finally be led by his ineffable mercy to eternal joys.
Amen.

For our part, as soon as we were aware from the reports of trustworthy people that so great an
impiety had been committed, we were afflicted with grief and sadness, as was to be expected,
both for the great scandal to the church and for the ruin of the souls of its perpetrators,
especially Amadeus that antichrist whom we used to embrace in the depths of charity and
whose prayers and wishes we always strove to meet in so far as we could in God. Already for
some time we had it in mind to provide salutary remedies, in accordance with our pastoral
office, against an abomination of this sort. Now, however, challenged publicly before the
church to confront these evils, we propose to rise to the defense of the church and tackle this
great crime more quickly and more urgently. Therefore, in order that so enormous and
execrable a deed may, with the help of God whose cause is at stake, be destroyed from its
very roots, we are applying, in conjunction with this holy council and with the least possible
delay, a remedy in accordance with the holy canons.

We are aware that the above petition of the promoter and the procurator is just and in
conformity with both divine and human law, and although the aforesaid crimes and excesses
are so very public and notorious that nothing can conceal them and no further information is
required; Nevertheless, for greater precaution and certainly about the above, we
commissioned, with the approval of this sacred council, some noteworthy persons from every
rank in the council to seek information about the above and to refer their findings to us and
the sacred council. Those so commissioned fulfilled their task of investigation with the care
demanded by a schismatical depravity of this kind and faithfully reported to us and the sacred
council in a synodal congregation what they had found out by the interrogation of trustworthy
persons. In such public, manifest and notorious matters, action could have been taken against
the said infamous and scandalous men without waiting further, by means of severe penalties
in accordance with canonical sanctions. Nevertheless we and this holy synod, imitating the
mercy of God who desires not the death of the sinner but rather that he be converted and live,
have decided to show all possible mercy and to act, in so far as we can, in such a way that the
proposed mildness may recall them to heart and lead them to recoil from the above-
mentioned excesses, and so that when at last they return to the bosom of the church like the
prodigal son, we may receive them with kindness and embrace them with fatherly love.

Therefore, through the tender mercy of our God and by the shedding of the precious blood of
our lord Jesus Christ, in whom and by whom the redemption of the human race and the
foundation of holy mother church were effected, from the depths of our hearts we exhort, beg
and beseech the antichrist Amadeus and the aforesaid electors, or rather profaners, and
whoever else believes in, adheres to, receives or in any way supports him, straightaway to
stop violating the church’s unity for which the Saviour prayed so earnestly to the Father, and
to cease from rending and lacerating the fraternal charity and peace which the same
Redeemer, as he was about to leave this world, repeatedly and so insistently commended to

396
his disciples and without which neither prayers nor fasts nor alms are acceptable to God, and
utterly to desist as quickly as possible from the aforesaid destructive and scandalous excesses,
and so to find with us and this sacred council, if they really obey as they are bound to do, the
affection of a father in respect of everything.

However, so that fear of penalties and harshness of discipline may force them if perchance
love of justice and virtue does not withdraw them from sin, with the approval of this sacred
council we demand and warn the antichrist Amadeus and the aforesaid electors, or rather
profaners, and believers, adherents, receivers and supporters, and we strictly enjoin and order
him and them in virtue of holy obedience and under the penalties of anathema, heresy, schism
and treason which have been inflicted in any ways against such persons, whether by men or
by the law:

That within fifty days immediately following the publication of this letter, the antichrist
Amadeus should cease from acting any more and designating himself as the Roman pontiff
and should not, in so far as he can, allow himself to be held and called such by others, and
should not dare hereafter in any way to use papal insignia and other things belonging in any
way to the Roman pontiff; And that the aforesaid electors, or rather profaners, and adherents,
receivers and supporters should no longer, either in person or through others, directly or
indirectly or under any pretext, aid, believe in, adhere to or support the said Amadeus in this
crime of schism.

Rather, both Amadeus himself and the aforesaid electors, believers, adherents and supporters
should hold, recognize and reverence us as the true Roman pontiff and vicar of Christ and
legitimate successor of Peter, and should reverently obey and maintain us as father and pastor
of their souls, and should take care legitimately to notify us and this sacred council about
these matters within the appointed interval of time, so that no scruple of doubt may remain
about their genuine obedience.

If Amadeus and the said electors, believers, adherents, receivers and supporters shall act
otherwise — though may it not be so — and do not effectively fulfil each and all of the
aforesaid points within the appointed time, we wish and decree that from then as from now
they automatically incur the stated penalties.

Moreover, on the fifteenth day after the aforesaid interval of time, if it is not a feast,
otherwise on the following non-feast day, the aforesaid supporters all together or singly shall
appear in person before us and the aforesaid council where we shall then be, to be seen and
heard individually and even by name. Thus we now cite them for that day, to be declared
schismatics, blasphemers and as heretics, to be punished as traitors, and to have incurred the
aforesaid censures and penalties, and others to be inflicted, according as it shall seem good
and justice shall persuade:

Notifying the same people and any of them individually, whether or not they come, that if
they shall not have shown that they have obeyed, we shall proceed with justice to declaring

397
the aforesaid penalties, notwithstanding their contumacy or absence, with the intention of
proceeding further to aggravation and re-aggravation, as the rigour of justice shall demand
and their merits require. In order that this monition and citation of ours may be brought to the
attention of the authors of their monition and citation and of other interested persons, we shall
have sheets of paper or membranes of parchment containing it affixed to the doors or gates of
the church of St Mary Novella in Florence, of our palace situated near that church and of the
cathedral church of Florence. These will make known this monition as if by a sonorous town-
crying and a public notice, in order that after such notification these people may not be able
to pretend that it did not reach them or that they were ignorant of it, since it is unlikely that
what is made known so obviously to all should remain unknown or hidden to them.

We wish and we decree by our apostolic authority that this our monition promulgated on the
said doors and gates shall have as much value and be as immutable and as binding on the said
warned people, notwithstanding any contrary constitution, as if it had been intimated and
disclosed to each and all of the warned people in person and in their presence.

Finally, lest the aforesaid warned and cited persons allege as a cloak of excuse that the
council and the Roman curia, the common fatherland of all, is an unsafe place for them and
that, because of the above-mentioned things or other enmities or other reasons, danger
threatens them in their coming, staying and returning, we reassure them by this present letter
and we require and exhort by the same letter all patriarchs, archbishops, bishops and other
prelates of churches and monasteries, clerics and ecclesiastical persons as well as dukes,
marquises, princes, rulers, captains and any other officials and their lieutenants, as also the
communities and corporations of cities, castles, towns, vills and other places, and we strictly
command the patriarchs, archbishops, bishops and other prelates and our other subjects that
they are not to inflict any injury or harm on the aforesaid warned persons and their goods and
property nor, to the best of their power, to allow such to be inflicted by others. Let nobody
therefore . . . If anyone however . . .

SESSION 10 27 May 1440

[Eugenius IV exhorts the members of the synod at Basel to desist from their opposition]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. In the opinion of
holy fathers, public sinners ought to be publicly censured so that others may stand in fear.
Accordingly, we and this sacred council of Florence recently censured and denounced in
public before the church, in synodal form, the authors and abettors of the pestilential sin of
schism against the holy apostolic see and the holy Roman church, the mother and mistress of
all Christians, which was perpetrated by Amadeus, once duke of Savoy, and his accomplices.
It would have been in conformity with the sacred canons to have passed a sentence of due
severity straightaway on those notoriously sacrilegious persons. However, desiring their
conversion and salvation rather than their punishment, we begged, warned and required of
them, with all the charity and mildness we could, to reflect and to recoil from such great
iniquity, promising them pardon and favour and a father’s affection. But if they refused to
heed these dutiful admonitions, we decreed that they should be punished with penalties

398
proportionate to so great an outrage, as is contained in the monition promulgated against
them, which is as follows.

SESSION 11 4 February 1442

[Bull of union with the Copts]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. Sing praises to the
Lord for he has done gloriously; let this be known in all the earth. Shout, and sing for joy, O
inhabitant of Zion, for great in your midst is the holy one of Israel. To sing and to exult in the
Lord certainly befits the church of God for his great magnificence and the glory of his name,
which the most merciful God has deigned to bring about on this very day. It is right, indeed,
to praise and bless with all our hearts our Saviour, who daily builds up his holy church with
new additions. His benefactions to his Christian people are at all times many and great and
manifest more clearly than the light of day his immense love for us. Yet if we look more
closely at the benefactions which the divine mercy has deigned to effect in most recent times,
we shall assuredly be able to judge that in these days of ours the gifts of his love have been
more in number and greater in kind than in many past ages.

For in less than three years our lord Jesus Christ by his indefatigable kindness, to the
common and lasting joy of the whole of Christianity, has generously effected in this holy
ecumenical synod the most salutary union of three great nations. Hence it has come about that
nearly the whole of the east that adores the glorious name of Christ and no small part of the
north, after prolonged discord with the holy Roman church, have come together in the same
bond of faith and love. For first the Greeks and those subject to the four patriarchal sees,
which cover many races and nations and tongues, then the Armenians, who are a race of
many peoples, and today indeed the Jacobites, who are a great people in Egypt, have been
united with the holy apostolic see.

Nothing is more pleasing to our Saviour, the lord Jesus Christ, than mutual love among
people and nothing can give more glory to his name and advantage to the church than that
Christians, with all discord between them banished, should come together in the same purity
of faith. Deservedly all of us ought to sing for joy and to exult in the Lord; we whom the
divine clemency has made worthy to see in our days such great splendour of the Christian
faith. With the greatest readiness we therefore announce these marvellous facts to the whole
Christian world, so that just as we are filled with unspeakable joy for the glory of God and
the exaltation of the church, we may make others participate in this great happiness. Thus all
of us with one voice may magnify and glorify God and may return abundant and daily thanks,
as is fitting, to his majesty for so many and so great marvellous benefits bestowed on his holy
church in this age. He who diligently does the work of God not only awaits merit and reward
in heaven but also deserves generous glory and praise among people. Therefore we consider
that our venerable brother John, patriarch of the Jacobites, whose zeal for this holy union is
immense, should deservedly be praised and extolled by us and the whole church and
deserves, together with his whole race, the general approval of all Christians. Moved by us,
through our envoy and our letter, to send an embassy to us and this sacred synod and to unite

399
himself and his people in the same faith with the Roman church, he sent to us and this synod
the beloved son Andrew, an Egyptian, endowed in no mean degree with faith and morals and
abbot of the monastery of St Anthony in Egypt, in which St Anthony himself is said to have
lived and died. The patriarch, fired with great zeal, ordered and commissioned him reverently
to accept, in the name of the patriarch and his Jacobites, the doctrine of the faith that the
Roman church holds and preaches, and afterwards to bring this doctrine to the patriarch and
the Jacobites so that they might acknowledge and formally approve it and preach it in their
lands.

We, therefore, to whom the Lord gave the task of feeding Christ’s sheep’, had abbot Andrew
carefully examined by some outstanding men of this sacred council on the articles of the
faith, the sacraments of the church and certain other matters pertaining to salvation. At
length, after an exposition of the catholic faith to the abbot, as far as this seemed to be
necessary, and his humble acceptance of it, we have delivered in the name of the Lord in this
solemn session, with the approval of this sacred ecumenical council of Florence, the
following true and necessary doctrine.

First, then, the holy Roman church, founded on the words of our Lord and Saviour, firmly
believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son
and holy Spirit; one in essence, three in persons; unbegotten Father, Son begotten from the
Father, holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son; the Father is not the Son or the
holy Spirit, the Son is not the Father or the holy Spirit, the holy Spirit is not the Father or the
Son; the Father is only the Father, the Son is only the Son, the holy Spirit is only the holy
Spirit. The Father alone from his substance begot the Son; the Son alone is begotten of the
Father alone; the holy Spirit alone proceeds at once from the Father and the Son. These three
persons are one God not three gods, because there is one substance of the three, one essence,
one nature, one Godhead, one immensity, one eternity, and everything is one where the
difference of a relation does not prevent this. Because of this unity the Father is whole in the
Son, whole in the holy Spirit; the Son is whole in the Father, whole in the holy Spirit; the
holy Spirit is whole in the Father, whole in the Son. No one of them precedes another in
eternity or excels in greatness or surpasses in power. The existence of the Son from the
Father is certainly eternal and without beginning, and the procession of the holy Spirit from
the Father and the Son is eternal and without beginning. Whatever the Father is or has, he has
not from another but from himself and is principle without principle. Whatever the Son is or
has, he has from the Father and is principle from principle. Whatever the holy Spirit is or has,
he has from the Father together with the Son. But the Father and the Son are not two
principles of the holy Spirit, but one principle, just as the Father and the Son and the holy
Spirit are not three principles of creation but one principle. Therefore it condemns, reproves,
anathematizes and declares to be outside the body of Christ, which is the church, whoever
holds opposing or contrary views. Hence it condemns Sabellius, who confused the persons
and altogether removed their real distinction. It condemns the Arians, the Eunomians and the
Macedonians who say that only the Father is true God and place the Son and the holy Spirit
in the order of creatures. It also condemns any others who make degrees or inequalities in the
Trinity.

400
Most firmly it believes, professes and preaches that the one true God, Father, Son and holy
Spirit, is the creator of all things that are, visible and invisible, who, when he willed it, made
from his own goodness all creatures, both spiritual and corporeal, good indeed because they
are made by the supreme good, but mutable because they are made from nothing, and it
asserts that there is no nature of evil because every nature, in so far as it is a nature, is good. It
professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is,
the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under
the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as
follows.

Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua,
Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith,
Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus,
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel,
Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi;
two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen
letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to
the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to
Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts
of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John.

Hence it anathematizes the madness of the Manichees who posited two first principles, one of
visible things, the other of invisible things, and said that one was the God of the new
Testament, the other of the old Testament. It firmly believes, professes and preaches that one
person of the Trinity, true God, Son of God begotten by the Father, consubstantial and
coeternal with the Father, in the fullness of time which the inscrutable depth of divine counsel
determined, for the salvation of the human race, took a real and complete human nature from
the immaculate womb of the virgin Mary, and joined it to himself in a personal union of such
great unity that whatever is of God there, is not separated from man, and whatever is human
is not divided from the Godhead, and he is one and the same undivided, each nature
perduring in its properties, God and man, Son of God and son of man, equal to the Father
according to his divinity, less than the Father according to his humanity, immortal and eternal
through the nature of the Godhead, passible and temporal from the condition of assumed
humanity. It firmly believes, professes and preaches that the Son of God was truly born of the
virgin in his assumed humanity, truly suffered, truly died and was buried, truly rose from the
dead, ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father and will come at the end of
time to judge the living and the dead. i It anathematizes, execrates and condemns every
heresy that is tainted with the contrary. First it condemns Ebion, Cerinthus, Marcion, Paul of
Samosata, Photinus and all similar blasphemers who, failing to see the personal union of the
humanity with the Word, denied that our lord Jesus Christ was true God and professed him to
be simply a man who by a greater participation in divine grace, which he had received
through the merit of his holier life, should be called a divine man.

401
It anathematizes also Manes and his followers who, imagining that the Son of God took to
himself not a real body but a phantasmal one completely rejected the truth of the humanity in
Christ, Valentinus, who declared that the Son of God took nothing from his virgin mother but
that he assumed a heavenly body and passed through the virgin’s womb like water flowing
down an aqueduct; Arius, who by his assertion that the body taken from the virgin had no
soul, wanted the Deity to take the place of the soul; and Apollinarius who, realizing that if the
soul informing the body were denied there would be no true humanity in Christ, posited only
a sensitive soul and held that the deity of the Word took the place of the rational soul. It
anathematizes also Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius, who asserted that the humanity
was united to the Son of God through grace, and hence that there are two persons in Christ
just as they profess there are two natures, since they could not understand that the union of
the humanity to the Word was hypostatic and therefore they denied that he had received the
subsistence of the Word. For according to this blasphemy the Word was not made flesh but
the Word dwelt in flesh through grace, that is, the Son of God did not become man but rather
the Son of God dwelt in a man. It also anathematizes, execrates and condemns the
archimandrite Eutyches who, when he understood that the blasphemy of Nestorius excluded
the truth of the incarnation, and that it was therefore necessary for the humanity to be so
united to the Word of God that there should be one and the same person of the divinity and
the humanity; and also because, granted the plurality of natures, he could not grasp the unity
of the person, since he posited one person in Christ of divinity and humanity; so he affirmed
that there was one nature, suggesting that before the union there was a duality of natures
which passed into a single nature in the act of assumption, thereby conceding a great
blasphemy and impiety that either the humanity was converted into the divinity or the
divinity into the humanity. It also anathematizes, execrates and condemns Macarius of
Antioch and all others of similar views who, although they are orthodox on the duality of
natures and the unity of person, yet have gone enormously wrong on Christ’s principles of
action by declaring that of the two natures in Christ, there was only one principle of action
and one will. The holy Roman church anathematizes all of these and their heresies and
affirms that in Christ there are two wills and two principles of action.

It firmly believes, professes and preaches that never was anyone, conceived by a man and a
woman, liberated from the devil’s dominion except by faith in our lord Jesus Christ, the
mediator between God and humanity, who was conceived without sin, was born and died. He
alone by his death overthrew the enemy of the human race, cancelling our sins, and unlocked
the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, which the first man by his sin had locked against
himself and all his posterity. All the holy sacrifices sacraments and ceremonies of the old
Testament had prefigured that he would come at some time.

It firmly believes, professes and teaches that the legal prescriptions of the old Testament or
the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, holy sacrifices and sacraments, because
they were instituted to signify something in the future, although they were adequate for the
divine cult of that age, once our lord Jesus Christ who was signified by them had come, came
to an end and the sacraments of the new Testament had their beginning. Whoever, after the
passion, places his hope in the legal prescriptions and submits himself to them as necessary

402
for salvation and as if faith in Christ without them could not save, sins mortally. It does not
deny that from Christ’s passion until the promulgation of the gospel they could have been
retained, provided they were in no way believed to be necessary for salvation. But it asserts
that after the promulgation of the gospel they cannot be observed without loss of eternal
salvation. Therefore it denounces all who after that time observe circumcision, the sabbath
and other legal prescriptions as strangers to the faith of Christ and unable to share in eternal
salvation, unless they recoil at some time from these errors. Therefore it strictly orders all
who glory in the name of Christian, not to practice circumcision either before or after
baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed
without loss of eternal salvation.

With regard to children, since the danger of death is often present and the only remedy
available to them is the sacrament of baptism by which they are snatched away from the
dominion of the devil and adopted as children of God, it admonishes that sacred baptism is
not to be deferred for forty or eighty days or any other period of time in accordance with the
usage of some people, but it should be conferred as soon as it conveniently can; and if there is
imminent danger of death, the child should be baptized straightaway without any delay, even
by a lay man or a woman in the form of the church, if there is no priest, as is contained more
fully in the decree on the Armenians.

It firmly believes, professes and teaches that every creature of God is good and nothing is to
be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because according to the word of the Lord not
what goes into the mouth defiles a person, and because the difference in the Mosaic law
between clean and unclean foods belongs to ceremonial practices, which have passed away
and lost their efficacy with the coming of the gospel. It also declares that the apostolic
prohibition, to abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what
is strangled, was suited to that time when a single church was rising from Jews and gentiles,
who previously lived with different ceremonies and customs. This was so that the gentiles
should have some observances in common with Jews, and occasion would be offered of
coming together in one worship and faith of God and a cause of dissension might be
removed, since by ancient custom blood and strangled things seemed abominable to Jews,
and gentiles could be thought to be returning to idolatry if they ate sacrificial food. In places,
however, where the Christian religion has been promulgated to such an extent that no Jew is
to be met with and all have joined the church, uniformly practicing the same rites and
ceremonies of the gospel and believing that to the clean all things are clean, since the cause of
that apostolic prohibition has ceased, so its effect has ceased. It condemns, then, no kind of
food that human society accepts and nobody at all neither man nor woman, should make a
distinction between animals, no matter how they died; although for the health of the body, for
the practice of virtue or for the sake of regular and ecclesiastical discipline many things that
are not proscribed can and should be omitted, as the apostle says all things are lawful, but not
all are helpful.

It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church,
not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will

403
go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are
joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical
body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments
contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the
Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much
he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he
has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.

It embraces, approves and accepts the holy synod of 318 fathers at Nicaea, which was
convened in the time of our predecessor most blessed Silvester and the great and most pious
emperor Constantine. In it the impious Arian heresy and its author was condemned and there
was defined that the Son of God is consubstantial and coeternal with the Father. It also
embraces, approves and accepts the holy synod of 150 fathers at Constantinople, which was
convoked in the time of our predecessor most blessed Damasus and the elder Theodosius and
which anathematized the impious error of Macedonius, who asserted that the holy Spirit is
not God but a creature. Those whom they condemn, it condemns; what they approve, it
approves; and in every respect it wants what was defined there to remain unchanged and
inviolate.

It also embraces, approves and accepts the first holy synod of 200 fathers at Ephesus, which
is third in the order of universal synods and was convoked under our predecessor most
blessed Celestine and the younger Theodosius. In it the blasphemy of the impious Nestorius
was condemned, and there was defined that the person of our lord Jesus Christ, true God and
true man, is one and that the blessed ever-virgin Mary should be preached by the whole
church not only as Christ-bearer but also as God-bearer, that is as mother of God as well as
mother of the man.

But it condemns, anathematizes and rejects the impious second synod of Ephesus, which was
convened under our predecessor most blessed Leo and the aforesaid emperor. In it Dioscorus,
bishop of Alexandria, defender of the heresiarch Eutyches and impious persecutor of holy
Flavian, bishop of Constantinople, with cunning and threat led the execrable synod to an
approval of the Eutychian impiety.

It also embraces, approves and accepts the holy synod of 630 fathers at Chalcedon, which is
fourth in the order of universal synods and was held in the time of our predecessor most
blessed Leo and the emperor Marcian. In it the Eutychian heresy and its author Eutyches and
its defender Dioscorus were condemned, and there was defined that our lord Jesus Christ is
true God and true man and that in the one and same person the divine and human natures
remain entire, inviolate, incorrupt, unconfused and distinct, the humanity doing what befits
man, the divinity what befits God. Those whom they condemn, it condemns; those whom
they approve, it approves.

It also embraces, approves and accepts the fifth holy synod, the second of Constantinople,
which was held in the time of our predecessor most blessed Vigilius and the emperor

404
Justinian. In it the definition of the sacred council of Chalcedon about the two natures and the
one person of Christ was renewed and many errors of Origen and his followers, especially
about the penitence and liberation of demons and other condemned beings, were refuted and
condemned.

It also embraces, approves and accepts the third holy synod of 150 fathers at Constantinople,
which is sixth in the order of universal synods and was convened in the time of our
predecessor most blessed Agatho and the emperor Constantine IV. In it the heresy of
Macarius of Antioch and his adherents was condemned, and there was defined that in our lord
Jesus Christ there are two perfect and complete natures and two principles of action and also
two wills, although there is one and the same person to whom the actions of each of the two
natures belong, the divinity doing what is of God, the humanity doing what is human.

It also embraces, approves and accepts all other universal synods which were legitimately
summoned, celebrated and confirmed by the authority of a Roman pontiff, and especially this
holy synod of Florence, in which, among other things, most holy unions with the Greeks and
the Armenians have been achieved and many most salutary definitions in respect of each of
these unions have been issued, as is contained in full in the decrees previously promulgated,
which are as follows: Let the heavens be glad . . . 1; Exult in God . 2

However, since no explanation was given in the aforesaid decree of the Armenians in respect
of the form of words which the holy Roman church, relying on the teaching and authority of
the apostles Peter and Paul, has always been wont to use in the consecration of the Lord’s
body and blood, we concluded that it should be inserted in this present text. It uses this form
of words in the consecration of the Lord’s body: For this is my body. And of his blood: For
this is the chalice of my blood, of the new and everlasting covenant, the mystery of faith1,
which will be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins .

Whether the wheat bread, in which the sacrament is confected, has been baked on the same
day or earlier is of no importance whatever. For, provided the substance of bread remains,
there should be no doubt at all that after the aforesaid words of consecration of the body have
been pronounced by a priest with the intention of consecrating, immediately it is changed in
substance into the true body of Christ.

It is asserted that some people reject fourth marriages as condemned. Lest sin is attributed
where it does not exist, since the apostle says that a wife on her husband’s death is free from
his law and free in the Lord to marry whom she wishes, and since no distinction is made
between the deaths of the first, second and third husbands, we declare that not only second
and third marriages but also fourth and further ones may lawfully be contracted, provided
there is no canonical impediment. We say, however, that they would be more commendable
if thereafter they abstain from marriage and persevere in chastity because we consider that,
just as virginity is to be preferred in praise and merit to widowhood, so chaste widowhood is
preferable to marriage.

405
After all these explanations the aforesaid abbot Andrew, in the name of the aforesaid
patriarch and of himself and of all the Jacobites, receives and accepts with all devotion and
reverence this most salutary synodal decree with all its chapters, declarations, definitions
traditions, precepts and statutes and all the doctrine contained therein, and also whatever the
holy apostolic see and the Roman church holds and teaches. He also reverently accepts those
doctors and holy fathers whom the Roman church approves, and he holds as rejected and
condemned whatever persons and things the Roman church rejects and condemns, promising
as a son of true obedience, in the name of the above persons, faithfully and always to obey
the regulations and commands of the said apostolic see.

SESSION 12 14 October 1443

[Eugenius IV convokes the Lateran council, that is, the continuation of the council of
Florence]

Eugenius. Convocation of the Lateran council. For an everlasting record. By the infinite
clemency and pity of the redeemer of the human race, our God and lord Jesus Christ, by
whose ineffable providence the whole body of the church is sanctified and ruled and through
whose aid — which surpasses our merits and exceeds what we recognise ourselves as worthy
either to seek or to solicit — gifts and favours of his mercy daily come to us, we have
returned to bountiful Rome, the see of most blessed Peter, to the holy of holies, the Lateran of
the patriarchs. With great trust we are embracing and earnestly pursuing the things which
seem to be promoted and revealed by divine rather than by human wisdom. Hence it is that
because of various just, reasonable and necessary causes which then moved our mind, by
apostolic authority and the plenitude of power and with the approval of the council, we
transferred the holy ecumenical council of Florence, over which we were then presiding, to
this bountiful city of Rome and the Lateran basilica, to be re-established and continued on the
first day following the fifteenth day after our arrival, as is contained in more detail in the
letter composed for that purpose, whose text is word for word as follows:

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record The
compassionate and merciful Lord ordained that his only-begotten Son should assume a
human nature and should so join it to himself into a single person that not only would fallen
nature be repaired by virtue of that ineffable union, but also by his embrace as spouse and by
the kiss of his mouth his bride the holy church would be brought forth, her members would
be joined together by a solid bond of love, and the Christian people would acquire peace in
harmony, salvation in a unity of spirit, and glory in the bond of charity.

In so far as it is granted to us by the mercy of our lord and saviour Jesus Christ, whose place
we though unworthy take on earth, we, following in his footsteps, ardently desire and
intensely pursue the salvation, unity and peace of the Christian people. Therefore we are
intent, with a deserved watchfulness, on the conservation of this holy ecumenical council. In
it, by the marvelous kindness and mercy of the same Saviour, very many most noteworthy
works have been achieved for his praise and glory, the increase of the catholic faith, the unity
of the Christian people and the exaltation of the holy apostolic see and the Roman church.

406
For in our own days we have seen Greeks, Armenians, Jacobites and other almost
innumerable peoples, some of whom have been separated from the rite and the holy teaching
of the Roman church for almost five hundred or even seven hundred years, joined with us in
this sacred council, by God’s mercy, under one divine law of truth and embracing us with due
reverence as the true vicar of Christ, the successor of Peter and the shepherd of the universal
church.

There are no limits to the kindness of our Saviour, who works for the unity of the Christian
people and his mystical body, for which he prayed: I wish, Father, that they may be one even
as we are one. Indeed we are experiencing his kindness particularly in these times. For his
infinite mercy has granted that we are now awaiting the arrival of envoys, furnished with full
power to accept in this holy council the doctrine of the orthodox faith from which their
peoples have gone astray in many points, from our most dear son in Christ Zar’a Ya’qob,
king of Ethiopia, commonly called Prester John, to whom very many kings and almost
innumerable peoples are subject and who is impelled, as we trust, by divine inspiration. To
foster and hasten such a holy and divine proposal, which is so necessary for the whole of
Christianity, we have sent our own nuncios and envoys, who are full of zeal for this holy task
and have considerable influence with the said most powerful king.

Many more works have been proposed to us for the praise of God and the increase of the faith
and the Christian people. We wish to give careful attention to them. Frightened by neither the
heavy expenses nor the many labours, we put our trust in the power of him whose inspiration
motivates us. Let us hope, moreover, that in the course of time many other desirable and
salutary fruits will accrue to the catholic faith and the church of Christ, especially if this holy
synod is held in a place of greater importance and in a royal and sacerdotal city. To the genial
city of Rome, which is particularly our city and which, as is right, we want to participate and
help in these salutary and divine tasks, we have turned our attention, a city which we consider
to be abounding in all spiritual and temporal goods and more holy and outstanding than all
other cities for carrying out these holy tasks and bringing them to a religious and happy
conclusion. For in it our Saviour in his eternal providence settled the apostolic see in blessed
Peter, prince of all the apostles, and on his right in fellowship the wondrous foresight of the
same Saviour added the blessed apostle Paul. They are two bulwarks of the faith through
whom the gospel shone in Rome; they are true fathers and true pastors; they are those who
suffered on one day for merit, in one place for grace, under one persecutor for equal virtue,
and made this city sacerdotal and royal and the capital of the world, as being the holy seat of
Peter, and consecrated it to the lord Christ with the glorious blood of martyrdom. “For the
Roman church founded all, whether the eminence of a patriarch or the seats of metropolitan
primacy or of bishoprics or the dignities of churches of whatever rank; he alone, who
entrusted to blessed Peter, the key-bearer of eternal life, the rights of the heavenly as well as
of the earthly kingdom, founded the Roman church and straightaway set it on the rock of
nascent faith.” Since, then, the city of Rome has been ennobled and distinguished by so many
and so great divine gifts and is resplendent with so much authority and also draws the faithful
to itself from all sides by the relics and sanctity of apostles, martyrs and confessors; since
Christian nations and peoples even in the furthest parts of the world flock to the said city and

407
are seen to desire greatly that we return to our see, which has been divinely constituted for
Roman pontiffs, in order that a greater veneration and devotion may grow in the Christian
people towards both us, through the authority of the said see, and the said see, through our
presence and authority, and since we are informed that, on account of our residence in Rome,
subjects and faithful of ours and of the Roman church, whose peace and tranquility we are
bound to procure and preserve with special zeal, will enjoy much greater peace and unity and
that in this way, with God’s blessing, we shall be more expeditious and effective in pursuing
works of peace and harmony and in arranging and confirming, as we ardently desire, peace
and unity among other catholic kings and princes and peoples; Therefore to Rome, which is a
suitable and safe place fulfilling all human needs as regards fertility of the soil and sea
transport; under the influence of the above-mentioned necessary causes and many other just
and reasonable ones which direct our mind to the praise and glory of almighty God, the
extirpation of heresies and errors, the reform of morals, the peace, salvation and increase of
the Christian people and the prosecution of other holy works, under the Lord’s leadership, for
which the said council was originally convened;

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, with the approval
of the said general council given on 5 January last, in a general congregation under our
presidency, by apostolic authority and by this present letter, we translate as from now this
holy ecumenical council of Florence, and by the same authority and the same letter we have
decreed and declared it to be translated to the Lateran basilica, which is the first and proper
seat of the supreme pontiff and the vicar of Jesus Christ, to be resumed, continued and
prosecuted on the day following the fifteenth day after our entry into bountiful Rome. In
addition, by an inviolable constitution and decree we ordain that each and all of the securities
and safe-conducts, which we granted at the beginning of this sacred council and which we are
extending anew and prolonging, are to be considered as included in this present letter and as
having the same force and effect as if they had been mentioned word for word in this our
synodal constitution and had been inserted and denoted in it. Let nobody therefore . . . If
anyone however . . .

Now that the appointed day has come and all the reasons for which it had then seemed
necessary to resume the council are recognized to be more than ever necessary, with the said
necessary reasons and many other just and reasonable ones impelling us, for the praise and
glory of almighty God, the extirpation of heresies and errors, the reform of morals, the peace,
salvation and increase of the Christian people, and the completion of other holy works, under
the Lord’s leadership, for which the aforesaid council was originally convened;

In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, by the same
authority and power, with the same approval and by this present letter; We resume, continue
and carry forward the aforesaid ecumenical council of Florence, which was translated as
above, and we decree and declare by this present letter that this continuation, resumption and
prosecution is taking place in this council hall of the sacred Lateran patriarchate. We warn
and require each and all of those who are bound by law or custom to take part in general
councils that they should come as quickly as possible to this present holy ecumenical Lateran

408
council, as referred to above, which is continuing for the attainment of the above-mentioned
ends. In addition, we ordain again by this constitution and decree that each and all of the
securities and safe-conducts, which we granted at the beginning of the sacred ecumenical
council of Ferrara and which we are extending anew and prolonging, are to be considered as
included in this present letter and as having the same force and effect as if they had been
mentioned word for word in this our synodal constitution and had been inserted and denoted
in

Let nobody therefore . . . if anyone however . . .

SESSION 13 30 November 1444

[Bull of union with the Syrians]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. In these our days
the ineffable clemency of divine mercy bestows on his holy church many and marvellous
gifts which are much greater than we could have asked for or envisaged. Hence we see that
the orthodox faith is expanded, new peoples daily return to the obedience of the apostolic see
and reasons for joy and exaltation are daily being multiplied for us and all Christ’s faithful, in
such wise that we are deservedly incited time and again to say in jubilation with the prophet
to the faithful peoples: Come, let us exult in the Lord, let us hail the God who saves us, for
the Lord is great and most worthy of praise in the city of our God, on his holy mountain. It is
true that in the catholic church, which is the city of God on the holy mountain and is founded
on the authority of the apostolic see and Peter, God, whose omnipotence and wisdom knows
no limits, has always worked great and inscrutable deeds. But the singular and special gift
which the ineffable providence of its founder bestowed on it is that the orthodox faith, which
alone gives life to and sanctifies the human race, should abide for ever on that holy mountain
in a unique and unchangeable profession of faith and that dissents, which arise against the
church from the variety of earthly opinions and separate people off from the firmness of that
rock, should return to that mountain and be exterminated and eradicated. Whence it comes
about that the peoples and nations thronging to its bosom agree with it in one truth of faith.
Assuredly it is not from our merit that the immensity of divine goodness has granted us to
behold these great sublime and marvellous gifts of God. His benevolence and condescension
alone have granted that after the union of the Greeks in the sacred ecumenical council of
Florence, who were seen to differ from the Roman church in some articles, and after the
return of the Armenians and the Jacobites, who were entangled in various opinions, they
should at last, having abandoned all dissent, come together into the one right way of truth.
Behold now again with the Lord’s help other nations have gathered from afar, inhabitants of
Mesopotamia between the Tigris and the Euphrates, whose thinking about the procession of
the holy Spirit and some other articles had gone astray.

Great, then, for us and for all Christ’s faithful is the reason for rejoicing. For with the Lord’s
approval the most illustrious profession of the Roman church about the truth of the faith,
which has always been pure from all stain of error shines with new beams also in the east
beyond the bounds of the Euphrates inasmuch as it has drawn our venerable brother Abdala,

409
archbishop of Edessa and legate of our venerable brother Ignatius, patriarch of the Syrians,
and of his whole nation, to us here in bountiful Rome and to this sacred ecumenical Lateran
council and has bidden him humbly and devoutly to petition that we give to them the rule of
faith which the holy Roman church professes. Among all the preoccupations of the holy
apostolic see, we hold, as we have always done, our first and chiefest care to be the defence
of the faith, the extermination of heresies and the propagation of the orthodox faith. Therefore
we selected some of our venerable brethren, cardinals of the holy Roman church, who in turn
co-opted from this sacred council some masters in holy scripture, to confer with the aforesaid
archbishop about the difficulties, doubts and errors of that nation, to examine him in person
and to open to him the rule of catholic truth, and finally to instruct and inform him fully about
the integrity of the faith of the Roman church.

They found him orthodox on all points of faith and practice except three articles: namely, the
procession of the holy Spirit, the two natures in Jesus Christ our saviour, the two wills and
principles of action in him. They laid before him the truth of the orthodox faith, opened up
the meaning of the sacred scriptures, adduced the testimonies of holy doctors and added
telling and pertinent reasons.

When the archbishop had understood the doctrine on these points, he affirmed that all his
doubts had been completely answered. He professed that he thought he fully understood the
truth of the faith as regards both the procession of the holy Spirit and the two natures, two
wills and two principles of action in our lord Jesus Christ. Moreover he declared that he
would accept, in the name of the aforesaid patriarch and of the whole nation and of himself,
the whole faith and all the teaching which we, with the approval of this sacred council, would
propose to him.

For this reason we were filled with exultation in Christ and poured out immense gratitude to
our God, since we are seeing our desire for the salvation of that nation fulfilled.

After careful discussion with our brethren and the sacred council, we decided, with the
approval of the same council, to propose and assign to the said archbishop, who will accept it
in the name of the above persons, the faith and doctrine which the holy Roman mother church
holds.

This, then, is the faith which the holy Roman mother church has always held, preached and
taught and which she now holds, preaches, professes and teaches. This is the faith, as regards
those three articles, which we decree that the said archbishop Abdala, on behalf and in the
name of the said patriarch of the Syrians and of all that nation and of himself, shall accept
and shall keep for ever. First, that the holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son, and
has his essence and his subsistent being from the Father together with the Son, and proceeds
from both eternally as from one principle and a single spiration.

Also it holds, professes and teaches that one and the same Son of God and of man, our lord
Jesus Christ, is perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity; true God and true man, of a

410
rational soul and a body; consubstantial with the Father as regards his divinity, consubstantial
with us as regards his humanity; like us in all respects except for sin; begotten before the ages
from the Father, and in the last days the same born according to his humanity for us and our
salvation from Mary the virgin mother of God; one and the same Christ true only-begotten
Son of God, acknowledged in two natures which undergo no confusion, no change, no
division, no separation; at no point was the difference between the natures taken away
through the union, but rather the property of both natures is preserved and comes together
into a single person and a single subsistent being; he is not parted or divided into two persons,
but is one and the same Son of God and of man, our lord Jesus Christ.

Also it believes, professes and teaches in the one lord Jesus Christ two natural principles of
action which undergo no division, no change, no separation, no confusion, in accordance with
the teaching of the holy fathers; and two natural wills one divine, the other human, not in
opposition, but his human will subject to his divine and all powerful will. For in the same
way that his most holy animate flesh was made divine, not destroyed, but remained in its own
limit and category, so his human will was made divine, not destroyed, but rather was
preserved and perfected.

We decree that the said archbishop Abdala ought, in the name of the above persons, to accept
this faith, to hold it in his heart and to profess it with his mouth. Further we ordain and decree
that he ought to receive and embrace, in the name of the above persons, whatever has been
defined and established at various times by the holy Roman church, especially the decrees on
the Greeks, the Armenians and the Jacobites, which were issued in the sacred ecumenical
council of Florence and which, since Archbishop Abdala has carefully read them translated
into Arabic and praised them, we have given to him, in the name of the above persons, for a
wider and more complete instruction on everything; that whatever doctors and holy fathers
the holy Roman church approves and accepts, he should, in the name of the above persons,
approve and accept; and that whatever persons and other things she condemns and rejects, he
should, in the name of the above persons, hold as condemned and rejected; promising on oath
as a true son of obedience, in the name of the above persons, always devoutly and faithfully
to obey the regulations and orders of the said apostolic see. If anyone however . . . Let
nobody therefore . . .

SESSION 14 7 August 1445

[Bull of union with the Chaldeans and the Maronites of Cyprus]

Eugenius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. Blessed be the
God and Father of our lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all consolation,
who daily promotes with many great favours, and accompanies with happy results far beyond
our deserts, our aims and pious desires, whereby in fulfillment of our pastoral duties we long
for and foster with many works, in so far as this allowed us from on high, the salvation of the
Christian people.

411
Indeed, after the union of the eastern church with the western church in the ecumenical
council of Florence, and after the return of the Armenians, the Jacobites and the people of
Mesopotamia, we despatched our venerable brother Andrew, archbishop of Kalocsa, to
eastern lands and the island of Cyprus. He was to confirm in the faith which had been
accepted the Greeks, Armenians and Jacobites living there, by his sermons and his
expositions and explanations of the decrees issued for their union and return. He was also to
try to bring back to the truth of the faith, using our warnings and exhortations, whoever else
he might find there to be strangers to the truth of faith in other sects, whether they are
followers of Nestorius or of Macarius.

He pursued this task with vigour, thanks to the wisdom and other virtues with which the
Lord, the giver of graces, has enriched him. He finally eliminated from their hearts, after
many discussions, first all the impurity of Nestorius, who asserted that Christ is only a man
and that the blessed Virgin is the mother of Christ but not of God, then that of the most
impious Macarius of Antioch who, although he confessed that Christ is true God and man,
asserted that there is in him only the divine will and principle of action, thereby diminishing
his humanity.

With divine assistance he converted to the truth of the orthodox faith our venerable brothers
Timothy, metropolitan of the Chaldeans, who have been called Nestorians in Cyprus until
now because they used to follow Nestorius, and Elias, bishop of the Maronites, who with his
nation in the same realm was infected with the teachings of Macarius, together with a whole
multitude of peoples and clerics subject to him in the island of Cyprus. To these prelates and
all their subjects there, he delivered the faith and doctrine that the holy church has always
cherished and observed. The said prelates, moreover, accepted this faith and doctrine with
much veneration in a great public assembly of different peoples living in that realm, which
was held in the metropolitan church of St Sophia.

After that, the Chaldeans sent to us the aforesaid metropolitan Timothy, and Bishop Elias of
the Maronites sent an envoy, to make to us a solemn profession of the faith of the Roman
church, which by the providence of the Lord and the aid of blessed Peter and the apostle has
always remained immaculate . Timothy, the metropolitan, reverently and devoutly professed
this faith and doctrine to us, in this sacred general congregation of the ecumenical Lateran
council, first in his own Chaldean tongue, which was interpreted in Greek and then translated
from Greek into Latin, as follows: I, Timothy, archbishop of Tarsus and metropolitan of the
Chaldeans who are in Cyprus, on behalf of myself and all my peoples in Cyprus, profess,
vow and promise to almighty God, Father and Son and holy Spirit, and then to you, most holy
and blessed father pope Eugenius IV, to this holy apostolic see and to this holy and venerable
congregation, that henceforth I will always remain under the obedience of you and your
successors and of the holy Roman church as under the unique mother and head of all other
churches. Also, in future I will always hold and profess that the holy Spirit proceeds from the
Father and the Son, as the holy Roman church teaches and holds. Also, in future I will always
hold and approve two natures, two wills, one hypostasis and two principles of action in
Christ.

412
Also, in future I will always confess and approve all seven sacraments of the Roman church,
just as she holds, teaches and preaches.

Also, in future I will never add oil in the sacred Eucharist.

Also, in future I will always hold, confess, preach and teach whatever the holy Roman church
holds, confesses, teaches and preaches and I reject, anathematize and condemn whatever she
rejects, anathematizes and condemns; in future I will always reject, anathematize and
condemn especially the impieties and blasphemies of the most wicked heresiarch Nestorius
and every other heresy raising itshead against this holy catholic and apostolic church.

This is the faith, holy father, that I vow and promise to hold and observe and to see that it is
held and observed by all my subjects. I engage myself and solemnly promise to deprive of all
his goods and benefices, to excommunicate and to denounce as heretical and condemned,
whoever rejects it and raises himself up against it and, if he is obstinate, to degrade him and
to hand him over to the secular arm.

Then our beloved son in Christ Isaac, envoy of our venerable brother Elias, bishop of the
Maronites, on his behalf and in his name, rejecting the heresy of Macarius about one will in
Christ, made with great veneration a profession that was similar in all details.

For the devotion of these professions and for the salvation of so many souls we offer
immense thanks to God and our lord Jesus Christ, who is in our times so greatly enlarging the
faith and bestowing benefits on so many Christian peoples. We receive and approve these
professions; we receive into the bosom of holy mother church the metropolitan and the
bishop in Cyprus and their subjects; and while they remain in the aforesaid faith, obedience
and devotion, we honour them with the following favours and privileges.

First, nobody shall in future dare to call the said metropolitan of the Chaldeans and the said
bishop of the Maronites, or their clerics and peoples or any individual among them, heretics,
or to call Chaldeans, Nestorians. If anyone despises this ordinance, we order him to be
excommunicated until such time as he offers a worthy satisfaction or has been punished, in
the judgment of the ordinary, by some other temporal penalty.

Also, the said metropolitan and bishop and their successors are forthwith to be preferred in
each and every honour to bishops who are separated from the communion of the holy Roman
church.

Also, in future they can lay censures on their subjects, and those whom they rightly
excommunicate in future shall be held by all as excommunicated, and those whom they
absolve shall be held by all as absolved.

413
Also, the said prelates and priests and their clerics can freely celebrate divine services in the
churches of Catholics, and Catholics can freely celebrate them in their churches.

Also, in future the said prelates and clerics and their lay men and women, who have accepted
this union and faith, can choose to be buried in the churches of Catholics, to contract
marriages with Catholics, but in the rite of Latin Catholics, and to enjoy and utilize all
benefits, immunities and liberties which other Catholics, both lay and clerical, possess and
enjoy in the said realm. Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone however . . .

414
Fifth Lateran Council 1512-17 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1512-1517 A.D.

INTRODUCTION

This council was summoned by pope Julius II by the bull Sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae,
issued at Rome on 18 July 1511, after several schismatic cardinals, officially supported by
Louis XII, king of France, had assembled a quasi-council at Pisa. Twice postponed, the
council held its first session in full solemnity at Rome in the Lateran residence on 10 May
1512, at which session an elaborate address on the evils of the church was made by Giles of
Viterbo, general of the order of Augustinian hermits.

There were twelve sessions. The first five of them, held during Julius II’s pontificate, dealt
primarily with the condemnation and rejection of the quasi-council of Pisa, and with the
revoking and annulment of the French “Pragmatic Sanction”. After the election of pope Leo
X in March 1513, the council had three objectives: first, achieving a general peace between
christian rulers; second, church reform; and third, the defence of the faith and the rooting out
of heresy. The seven sessions after Leo’s election gave approval to a number of constitutions,
among which are to be noted the condemnation of the teaching of the philosopher
Pomponazzi (session 8), and the approval of the agreement completed outside the council
between pope Leo X and king Francis I of France (session 11).

All the decrees of this council, at which the pope presided in person, are in the form of bulls.
At the beginning of them are added the words “with the approval of the sacred council”, and
at the end “in public session solemnly held in the Lateran basilica”. The fathers confirmed all
the decrees by their votes. If anyone wished to reject a proposal, he made his dissenting
opinion known verbally, or briefly in writing. The result was that the matters proposed, after
various debates, were sometimes altered.

The decisions on the reform of the curia produced almost no effect because of the timidity
and inadequacy of the recommendations, especially since the papacy showed slight
inclination to carry the matter through. On the other hand, the council totally suppressed the
Pisan schism. It is clear that bishops were never present in great numbers at the council, and
that prelates who lived outside Italy were notably absent to such an extent that there has been
frequent dispute about whether the council was ecumenical.

The decrees and other acts of the council were first published in Rome shortly after the
council ended, namely on 31 July 1521 by cardinal Antonio del Monte, acting on the orders
of pope Leo X. The title of this edition is: SA. Lateranense concilium novissimum sub Iulio II
et Leone X celebratum (= Lc). It was subsequently used in various conciliar collections from
Cr2 3 (1551) 3-192 to Msi 32 (1802) 649-1002. We have followed this edition of 1521 and
have taken the headings of the constitutions from the summary which precedes it.

415
SESSION 1

10 May 1512

[The bull convoking the council, Sacrosancta Romanae Ecclesiae, and the bulls postponing it,
Inscrutabilis and Romanus pontifex, are read out1{Msi 32, 681-690}. Masses are ordered to
be celebrated, and prayers to be offered, to beg God’s assistance; various arrangements are to
be observed in the council and decrees are set out; advocates, procurators, notaries, guards
and vote-scrutineers are chosen; assigners of places, and the location of places in their due
order, are established.]

SESSION 2

17 May 1512

[The quasi-council of Pisa is condemned, and everything done at it is declared null and void.
The Lateran council and whatever has been rightly done at it are confirmed]

Julius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. We intend, with the help of the most High, to proceed with the holding of
this sacred Lateran council which has now begun for the praise of God, the peace of the
whole church, the union of the faithful the overthrow of heresies and schisms, the reform of
morals, and the campaign against the dangerous enemies of the faith, so that the mouths of all
schismatics and enemies of peace, those howling dogs, may be silenced and Christians may
be able to keep themselves unstained from such pernicious and poisonous contagion.

Accordingly, in this second session lawfully assembled in the holy Spirit, after mature
deliberation held by us with our venerable brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church,
by the advice and unanimous consent of the same brothers from sure knowledge and by the
fullness of apostolic power, we confirm approve and renew, with the approval of the sacred
council, the rejections condemnations, revocations, quashings, invalidations and annulments
of the summoning, convoking and public utterances of that schismatical assembly, the
vaunted quasi-council of Pisa, with its aim of rending and hampering the union of the
aforesaid church, and of the citations, warnings, decrees, pardons, sentences, acts, legacies,
creations, obediences, withdrawals, enjoined censures and applications issuing from it, and of
the transfer of the said quasi-council to the cities of Milan or Vercellae or any other place,
and of each and all of the acts and decisions of the said quasi-council, that have been
expressed in our various letters completed and issued in due order, especially those issued
under the dates of 18 July in the eighth year of our pontificate, and of 3 December and 13
April in the ninth year of our pontificate. Likewise we confirm, approve and renew with the
approval of the sacred council, the letters themselves along with their decrees, declarations,
prohibitions, commands, exhortations, warnings, applications of ecclesiastical interdicts, and
other sentences, censures and penalties, whether by canonical sanctions or by our own act,

416
especially those in the letter summoning this sacred universal council, and each and all of the
other clauses contained in the said letters, the meanings of which we wish to be considered as
expressed as if they were inserted herein word for word, even though, as being definite and
valid, they require no other confirmation or approval for a more extensive guarantee and
demonstration of the truth. We wish, decree and ordain that they be observed without
alteration, and we make good each and all of the defects in them, should there be any.

We condemn and reject the aforesaid quasi-council and its transfer, and each and every thing
done by it, and also those taking part in it or giving support, approval or consent, directly or
indirectly, to whatever extent and in whatever manner, from the day of the summoning of the
quasi-council until the present day, whether the things have already been done or are to be
done in the future, even if they are or have been such that special, specific, definite and
separate mention should be made about them, since we consider their meaning and
characteristics as clearly expressed. We condemn and reject it like other counterfeit councils
which diverge from the truth and whose acts have been condemned and rejected by the law
and sacred canons. We proclaim these things to be null, void and empty, as indeed they are,
to be or to have been of no force or Importance; and, so far as is necessary, we declare them
void, invalid and null, and we wish them to be considered as void, invalid and null.

We decree and declare, with the approval of this same sacred council, that this sacred
ecumenical council, justly, reasonably, and for true and lawful purposes duly and rightly
summoned, has begun to be celebrated, and that each and every thing which has been and
shall be done and executed in it, will be just, reasonable, settled and valid, and that it
possesses and holds the same strength, power, authority and stability which other general
councils approved by the sacred canons, especially the Lateran council, possess and hold.

Moreover, in the arrangement of the seasons, as the summer heats approach, in order to take
account of the convenience and health of the prelates, and so that those may be awaited who
live beyond the mountains and across the sea and who have hitherto been unable to come to
this sacred council, and for other just and reasonable causes known to and approved by the
said sacred council, we are summoning the third session of this same council to take place on
3 November next, with the said council likewise giving approval. And to each and every
prelate and to others present at the same council, we grant and concede the freedom and
permission to withdraw from the Roman curia and to stay wherever they wish, so long as
they are present at the aforesaid Lateran council on the said 3 November, any clearly
legitimate hindrance having been removed, subject to the infliction of the penalties indicated
in the letter summoning the council and in canonical punishments against those failing to
attend to councils, the said sacred council also approving. Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone
however . . .2{2 At this session, on account of the arrival of the bishop of Gurk,
representative of the most serene emperor, a postponement of the third session was made
until 3 November.}

SESSION 3

417
3 December 1512

[Each and all of the measures sponsored by the schismatic cardinals are rejected]

Julius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. To the praise and glory of him whose works are perfect, we are continuing
the sacred council of the Lateran, lawfully assembled by favour of the holy Spirit, in this third
session. We had summoned this session on another occasion, during the second session, for
the third day of the following November. Later, by the advice and unanimous agreement of
our venerable brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church, for reasons then stated and for
other lawful causes, we postponed it and summoned it to be held today, with the same sacred
council giving approval to both the postponement and the summons for the said reasons
which were known to it. This was after the happy and favourable adherence to, and union
with, this most holy Lateran council on the part of our most dear son in Christ, Maximilian,
ever revered emperor-elect of the Romans

We condemn, reject and detest, with the approval of this same sacred council, each and every
thing done by those sons of damnation, Bernard Carvajal, Guillaume Briconnet, Rene de Prie,
and Frederick of San Severino, formerly cardinals, and their supporters, adherents,
accomplices and disciples — who are schismatics and heretics and have worked madly to
their own and others’ ruin, aiming to split asunder the unity of holy mother church at the
quasi-council held at Pisa, Milan, Lyons and elsewhere — whatever the things were in
number and kind that have been enacted, carried out, done, written, published or ordained up
to the present day, including the imposition of taxes carried out by them throughout the
kingdom of France, or shall be done in the future. Even though they are indeed null, useless
and void and have already been condemned and rejected by us with the approval of the
aforesaid sacred council, we nevertheless retain this present condemnation and rejection for
the sake of greater precaution. We wish the meaning and characteristics of the things done, or
to be done, to be considered as expressed herein word for word and not just by general
clauses. We decree and declare them to be and to have been null, without purpose and void,
of no force, efficacy, effect or importance.

We renew our letter dated 13 August 1512, at St Peter’s, Rome, in the ninth year of our
pontificate, by which, on the advice of the Dominicans, on account of the support, favours,
sustenance and help notoriously provided to schismatics and heretics in the promotion of the
said condemned and rejected quasicouncil of Pisa, by the king of France and not a few other
prelates, officials, nobles and barons of the kingdom of France, we placed under ecclesiastical
interdict the kingdom of France and particularly Lyons, excepting the duchy of Brittany, and
we forbade the customary fairs of Lyons to be held in that city and we transferred them to the
city of Geneva. We also renew the decrees, declarations, prohibitions and every clause
contained in the letter, the said sacred council likewise having full information about them
and giving its approval. As stated, we subject the aforesaid kingdom and its cities, lands,
towns and any other territories to this interdict, and we transfer the fairs from Lyons to the
said city of Geneva.

418
In order that this sacred Lateran council may be brought to a fruitful and beneficial
conclusion, and that the many other serious matters due for treatment and discussion in the
council may proceed to the praise of almighty God and the exaltation of the universal church,
we declare, with the full approval of the said sacred council, that the fourth session of the
continuing celebration of the council shall be held on the tenth day of the present month of
December. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however…

SESSION 4

10 December 1512

[The Pragmatic is revoked and the acts of the quasi-council of Pisa regarding the same are
annulled1{Before this constitution, in the same session, there was also read out: A warning
against the Pragmatic and its supporters}

Julius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Giving close attention by paternal and earnest consideration to the safety
of the flock entrusted to us from above, to the reform of morals and the defence of the
church’s liberty, and to the peace and development of the catholic faith, we approve and
renew, with the approval of this holy council, for the praise and glory of almighty God and
the undivided Trinity, the letter recently issued by us, of which the same council is aware, by
which we made a general reform of the Roman curia’s officials and of their imposts. We
ordered the letter to be made public by certain persons, who were afterwards designated, for
the benefit of the faithful, and in accordance with our wishes. We now order it to be made
public in detail by the said designated persons together with other prelates from various
nations who are present in the aforesaid council and are to be appointed. Everything that can
pervert human judgment is to cease, as is right and fitting. We order, moreover, that the
declarations are to be referred to us in other sessions of this sacred council and are to be
approved by the same council, in order that they may be duly carried out.

Moreover, for considerable periods of time there has been great disparagement of the
apostolic see and of the head, the liberty and the authority of the holy Roman universal
church, as well as a limitation of the sacred canons, by a number of prelates of the French
nation and by noble laymen and others supporting them, especially under pretext of a certain
sanction which they call the Pragmatic{2 This Pragmatic Sanction had been promulgated by
king Charles VII of France at Bourges on 7 July 1438, with the aim of removing abuses in the
church, see DThC 12/2 (1935) 2780-2786, DDrC 7 (1958) 109-113, and NCE 11 (1967) 662-
663}. We do not wish to endure further a thing so pernicious and offensive to God, a clear
cheapening of and damage to the said church. For it is only in those regions that the sanction,
carried out by those lacking all lawful power for that end and without the authority of popes
or legitimate general councils, has been introduced and observed by way of an abuse. It must
be rightly, along with its contents, be declared null and void and be repealed. Louis XI, king
of France, of distinguished memory, repealed this sanction, as is clearly contained in his

419
letters patent already made. Therefore, with the approval of the same council, we commit to
the meetings of our venerable brothers, cardinals of the aforesaid church, and of other
prelates, which are to be held in the upper room of the Lateran, insofar as this is necessary,
the business of the declaration and abrogation which we are to make, as well as the report that
is to be made to us and the same sacred council concerning the matters discussed in the first
and other sessions, insofar as this can conveniently be done. We determine and decree that
the prelates of France, chapters of churches and monasteries, and laymen favouring them, of
whatever rank they may be, even royal, who approve or falsely use the said sanction, together
with each and every other person thinking, either individually or in a group, that this sanction
is to his advantage, be warned and cited, within a definite adequate term to be established, by
a public edict — which is to be fixed on the doors of the churches of Milan, Asti and Pavia,
since a safe approach to France is not available — that they are to appear before us and the
aforesaid council and declare the reasons why the said sanction and its corrupting effect and
misuse in matters concerning the authority, dignity and unity of the Roman church and the
apostolic see, and the violation of sacred canons and of ecclesiastical freedom, ought not to
be declared and judged null and void and be abrogated, and why those so warned and cited
should not be restrained and held as if they had been warned and cited in person. Moreover,
with regard to each and all provisions and collations of ecclesiastical benefices, confirmations
of elections and petitions, grants of concessions, mandates and indults, of whatever kind,
concerning both favours and matters of justice or both together, of whatever sense they may
be — which things we wish to be regarded as clearly stated in the present letter — which
were made by the synagogue or quasi-council of Pisa and its schismatic adherents, lacking all
authority and merit, though they are indeed null and void, yet, for greater caution, we decree,
with the approval of the said sacred council, that they are null and of no effect, force or
importance; and that each individual, of whatever rank, status, grade, nobility, order or
condition, to whom they were granted, or to whose convenience, advantage or honour they
pertain, are to give up their fruits, incomes and profits, or to arrange for this to be done, and
they are bound to restore both these things and their benefices and to give up the other
aforesaid concessions, and that unless they have really and completely given up the benefices
themselves and the other things granted to them, within two months from the date of this
present letter, they are automatically deprived of the other ecclesiastical benefices which they
hold by lawful title. Moreover, we apply whatever has been or shall be obtained in the way of
fruits, rents and profits of this kind, and money-taxes imposed by the said quasi-council, to
the campaign which is to be conducted against the infidels.

In order that the declaration of reform, and of the nullity of the said sanction, as well as other
business may be carried out in due season, and so that the prelates who are still to come to
this sacred council (we have received news that some have already set out on their journey to
attend) may be able to arrive without inconvenience, we declare, with the approval of the
council, that the fifth session shall be held on 16 February, which will be Wednesday after the
first Sunday of the coming Lent. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however …

SESSION 5

420
16 February 1513

[Bull renewing and confirming the Constitution against not committing the evil of simony
when electing the Roman pontiff]

Julius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. The supreme maker of things, the creator of heaven and earth, has willed
by his ineffable providence that the Roman pontiff preside over the christian people in the
chair of pastoral supremacy, so that he may govern the holy, Roman, universal church in
sincerity of heart and deeds and may strive after the progress of all the faithful. We therefore
regard it as suitable and salutary that, in the election of the said pontiff, in order that the
faithful may look upon him as a mirror of purity and honesty, all stain and every trace of
simony shall be absent, that men shall be raised up for this burdensome office who, having
embarked in the appropriate manner and order in a due, right and canonical way, may
undertake the steering of the barque of Peter and may be, once established in so lofty a
dignity, a support for right and good people and a terror for evil people; that by their
example, the rest of the faithful may receive instruction on good behaviour and be directed in
the way of salvation, that the things which have been determined and established by us for
this, in accordance with the magnitude and seriousness of the case, may be approved and
renewed by the sacred general council; and that the things so approved and renewed may be
communicated, so that the more frequently they are upheld by the said authority, the more
strongly they shall endure and the more resolutely they shall be observed and defended
against the manifold attacks of the devil. Formerly, indeed, for great and urgent reasons, as a
result of important and mature discussion and deliberation with men of great learning and
authority, including cardinals of the Roman church, excellent and very experienced persons, a
document on the following lines was issued by us.

Inserted constitution

Julius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. From a consideration
that the detestable crime of simony is forbidden by both divine and human law, particularly in
spiritual matters, and that it is especially heinous and destructive for the whole church in the
election of the Roman pontiff, the vicar of our lord Jesus Christ, we therefore, placed by God
in charge of the government of the same universal church, despite being of little merit, desire,
so far as we are able with God’s help, to take effective measures for the future with regard to
the aforesaid things, as we are bound to, in accordance with the necessity of such an
important matter and the greatness of the danger. With the advice and unanimous consent of
our brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church, by means of this our constitution which
will have permanent validity, we establish, ordain, decree and define, by apostolic authority
and the fulness of our power, that if it happens (which may God avert in his mercy and
goodness towards all), after God has released us or our successors from the government of
the universal church, that by the efforts of the enemy of the human race and following the
urge of ambition or greed, the election of the Roman pontiff is made or effected by the person
who is elected, or by one or several members of the college of cardinals, giving their votes in

421
a manner that in any way involves simony being committed — by the gift, promise or receipt
of money, goods of any sort, castles, offices, benefices, promises or obligations — by the
person elected or by one or several other persons, in any manner or form whatsoever, even if
the election resulted in a majority of two-thirds or in the unanimous choice of all the
cardinals, or even in a spontaneous agreement on the part of all, without a scrutiny being
made, then not only is this election or choice itself null, and does not bestow on the person
elected or chosen in this fashion any right of either spiritual or temporal administration, but
also there can be alleged and presented, against the person elected or chosen in this manner,
by any one of the cardinals who has taken part in the election, the charge of simony, as a true
and unquestionable heresy, so that the one elected is not regarded by anyone as the Roman
pontiff.

A further consequence is that the person elected in this manner is automatically deprived,
without the need of any other declaration, of his cardinal’s rank and of all other honours
whatsoever as well as of cathedral churches, even metropolitan and patriarchical ones,
monasteries, dignities and all other benefices and pensions of whatever kind which he was
then holding by title or in commendam or otherwise; and that the elected person is to be
regarded as, and is in fact, not a follower of the apostles but an apostate and, like Simon, a
magicianl and a heresiarch, and perpetually debarred from each and all of the above-
mentioned things. A simoniacal election of this kind is never at any time to be made valid by
a subsequent enthronement or the passage of time, or even by the act of adoration or
obedience of all the cardinals. It shall be lawful for each and all of the cardinals, even those
who consented to the simoniacal election or promotion, even after the enthronement and
adoration or obedience, as well as for all the clergy and the Roman people, together with
those serving as prefects, castellans, captains and other officials at the Castel Sant’ Angelo in
Rome and any other strongholds of the Roman church, notwithstanding any submission or
oath or pledge given, to withdraw without penalty and at any time from obedience and loyalty
to the person so elected even if he has been enthroned (while they themselves,
notwithstanding this, remain fully committed to the faith of the Roman church and to
obedience towards a future Roman pontiff entering office in accordance with the canons) and
to avoid him as a magician, a heathen, a publican and a heresiarch. To discomfort him still
further, if he uses the pretext of the election to interfere in the government of the universal
church, the cardinals who wish to oppose the aforesaid election can ask for the help of the
secular arm against him.

Those who break off obedience to him are not to be subject to any penalties and censures for
the said separation, as though they were tearing the Lord’s garment . However, the cardinals
who elected him by simoniacal means are to be dealt with without further declaration as
deprived of their orders as well as of their titles and honour as cardinals and of any
patriarchal, archiepiscopal, episcopal or other prelacies, dignities and benefices which at that
time they held by title or in commendam, or in which or to which they now have some claim,
unless they totally and effectively abandon him and unite themselves without pretence or
trickery to the other cardinals who did not consent to this simony, within eight days after they
receive the request from the other cardinals, in person if this shall be possible or otherwise by

422
a public announcement. Then, if they have joined themselves in full union with the said other
cardinals, they shall immediately stand reintegrated, restored, rehabilitated and re-established
in their former state, honours and dignities, even of the cardinalate, and in the churches and
benefices which they had charge of or held, and shall stand absolved from the stain of simony
and from any ecclesiastical censures and penalties.

Intermediaries, brokers and bankers, whether clerical or lay, of whatever rank, quality or
order they may have been, even patriarchal or archiepiscopal or episcopal, or enjoying other
secular, worldly or ecclesiastical status, including spokesmen or envoys of any kings and
princes, who had part in this simoniacal election, are by that very fact deprived of all their
churches, benefices, prelacies and fiefs, and any other honours and possessions. They are
debarred from anything of that kind and from making or benefiting from a will, and their
property, like that of those condemned for treason, is immediately confiscated and allotted to
the treasury of the apostolic see. if the aforesaid criminals are ecclesiastics or otherwise
subjects of the Roman church. If they are not subjects of the Roman church, their goods and
fiefs in regions under secular control are immediately allotted to the treasury of the secular
ruler in whose territory the property is located; in such a way, however, that if within three
months from the day on which it was known that they had committed simony, or had part in
it, the rulers have not in fact allotted the said goods to their own treasury, then the goods are
from that date considered as allotted to the treasury of the Roman church, and are
immediately so considered without the need for any further pronouncement to the same
effect.

Also not binding and invalid, and ineffectual for taking action, are promises and pledges or
solemn engagements made at any time for that purpose, even if prior to the election in
question and even if made in any way through persons other than the cardinals, with some
strange solemnity and form, including those made under oath or conditionally or dependent
upon the outcome, or in the form of agreed bonds under whatever inducement, whether it be a
deposit, loan, exchange, acknowledged receipt, gift, pledge, sale, exchange or any other kind
of contract, even in the fuller form of the apostolic camera. Nobody can be bound or under
pressure by the strength of these in a court of justice or elsewhere, and all may lawfully
withdraw from them without penalty or any fear or stigma of perjury.

Moreover, cardinals who have been involved in such a simoniacal election, and have
abandoned the person thus elected, may join with the other cardinals, even those who
consented to the simoniacal election but later joined with the cardinals who did not commit
the said simony, if the latter are willing to join with them. If these cardinals are not willing,
they may freely and canonically proceed without them in another place to the election of
another pope without waiting for another formal declaration to the effect that the election was
simoniacal, though there always remains in force our same current constitution. They may
announce and call together a general council in a suitable place as they shall judge expedient,
notwithstanding constitutions and apostolic orders, especially that of pope Alexander III, of
happy memory, which begins Licet de evitanda discordia, and those of other Roman pontiffs,

423
our predecessors, including those issued in general councils, and any other things to the
contrary that Impose restraint.

Finally, each and every one of the cardinals of the holy Roman church in office at the time,
and their sacred college, are under pain of immediate excommunication, which they
automatically incur and from which they cannot be absolved except by the canonically
elected Roman pontiff, except when in immediate danger of death, not to dare, during a
vacancy in the apostolic see, to contravene the aforesaid, or to legislate, dispose or ordain or
to act or attempt anything in any way, under whatever alleged pretext or excuse, contrary to
the aforesaid things or to any one of them. From this moment we decree it to be invalid and
worthless if there should happen to be, by anyone knowingly or unknowingly, even by us, an
attack on these or any one of the foregoing regulations. So that the meaning of this our
present constitution, decree, statute, regulation and limitation may be brought to the notice of
everyone, it is our will that our present letter be affixed to the doors of the basilica of the
prince of the apostles and of the chancellery and in a corner of the Campo dei Fiori, and that
no other formality for the publication of this letter be required or expected, but the aforesaid
public display suffices for its solemn publication and perpetual force. Let nobody therefore . .
. If anyone however . . Given at Rome at St Peter’s on 14 January 1505/6, in the third year of
our pontificate.

[. . .] As we ponder how heavy is the burden and how damaging the loss to the vicars of
Christ on earth that counterfeit elections would be, and how great the hurt they could bring to
the christian religion, especially in these very difficult times when the whole christian
religion is being disturbed in a variety of ways, we wish to set obstacles to the tricks and traps
of Satan and to human presumption and ambition, so far as it is permitted to us, so that the
aforesaid letter shall be better observed the more clearly it is established that it has been
approved and renewed by the mature and healthy discussion of the said sacred council, by
which it has been decreed and ordained, though it does not need any other approval for its
permanence and validity. For a more ample safeguard, and to remove all excuse for guile and
malice on the part of evil thinkers and those striving to overthrow so sound a constitution,
with a view to the letter being observed with greater determination and being more difficult
to remove, to the extent that it is defended by the approval of so many of the fathers, we
therefore, with the approval of this Lateran council and with the authority and fullness of
power stated above, confirm and renew the said letter together with every statute, regulation,
decree, definition, penalty, restraint, and all the other and individual clauses contained in it;
we order it to be maintained and observed without change or breach and to preserve the
authority of an unchanging firmness; and we decree and declare that cardinals, mediators,
spokesmen, envoys and others listed in the said letter are and shall be bound to the
observance of the said letter and of each and every point expressed in it, under pain of the
censures and penalties and other things contained in it, in accordance with its meaning and
form; notwithstanding apostolic constitutions and ordinances, as well as all those things
which we wished not to prevent in the said letter, and other things of any kind to the contrary.
Let nobody therefore … If anyone however . . .{1 At this session other measures against the

424
Pragmatic Sanction were also recorded, especially Julius II’s constitution Inter alia (Msi 32,
772-773).}

SESSION 6

27 April 1513

[Safeconduct for those who wish and ought to come to the council, for their coming,
residence, exchange of views and return journey]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. By the supreme ordinance of the omnipotent who governs the things of
heaven and of earth by his providence, we preside over his holy and universal church, though
we are unworthy. Instructed by the saving and most holy teaching of the doctor of the
gentiles, we direct our chief attention, among the many anxieties from which we unceasingly
suffer distress, towards those things in particular by means of which unending unity and
unsullied charity may abide in the church; the flock committed to us may go forward along
the right courses towards the way of salvation, and the name of Christians and the sign of the
most sacred cross, in which the faithful have been saved, may be more widely spread, after
the infidels have been expelled with the help of God’s right hand.

Indeed, after the holding of five sessions of the sacred general Lateran council, pope Julius II
of happy memory, our predecessor, by the advice and agreement of our venerable brothers
the cardinals of the holy Roman church, of whose number we then were, in a praiseworthy
and lawful manner and for sound reasons, guided by the holy Spirit, summoned the sixth
session of the council to take place on the eleventh day of this month. But after he had been
taken from our midst, we postponed the sixth session until today, with the advice and consent
of our said brothers, for reasons which were then expressed and for other reasons influencing
the attitude of us and of our said brothers. But since there had always been an inner
determination within us, while we were of lesser rank, to see the general council being
celebrated (as a principal means of cultivating the Lord’s field), now that we have been raised
to the highest point of the apostolate, considering that a duty which results from the office of
pastoral care enjoined on us has coincided with our honourable and beneficial wish, we have
undertaken this matter with a more earnest desire and complete readiness of mind.
Consequently, with the approval of the same sacred Lateran council we approve the
postponement which we made and the council itself, until the aims for which it was
summoned have been completed, in particular that a general and settled peace may be
arranged between christian princes and rulers after the violence of wars has been stilled and
armed conflict set aside. We intend to apply and direct all our efforts to this peace, with
untiring care and leaving nothing untried for so salutary a good. We declare that it is and shall
be our unchangeable attitude and intention that, after those things which affect the praise of
God and the exaltation of the aforesaid church and the harmony of Christ’s faithful have been
achieved, the holy and necessary campaign against the enemies of the catholic faith may be
carried out and may achieve (with the favour of the most High) a triumphant outcome.

425
In order, however, that those who ought to attend so very useful a council may not be held
back in any way from coming, we hereby grant and concede, with the approval of the said
sacred council, to each and every one of those summoned to the council by the said Julius,
our predecessor, or who ought to take part, by right or custom, in the meetings of general
councils, especially those of the French nation, and to those schismatics and others who are
coming to the said Lateran council by common or special right, on account of a declaration or
apostolic letter of our predecessors or of the apostolic see (except, of course, those under
prohibition), and to the attendants and associates of those who come, of whatever status, rank,
condition or nobility they may be, ecclesiastical or secular, for themselves and all their
belongings, a free, guaranteed and fully comprehensive safeconduct, for coming by land or
sea through the states, territories and places that are subject to the said Roman church, to this
Lateran council in Rome, and of residing in the city and freely exchanging views, and of
leaving it as often as they wish, with complete, unrestricted and total security and with a true
and unchallengeable papal guarantee, notwithstanding any impositions of ecclesiastical or
secular censures and penalties which may have been promulgated in general against them, for
whatever reasons, by law or by the aforesaid see, under any forms of words or clauses, and
which they may in general have incurred. By our letters we shall encourage, warn, and
request each and every christian king, prince and ruler that, out of reverence for almighty
God and the apostolic see, they are not to molest or cause to be molested directly or
indirectly, in any way in their persons or goods, those on their way to this sacred Lateran
council, but they are to allow them to come in freedom, security and peace.

In addition, for the carrying out of the celebration of this council, we declare that the seventh
session shall be held on 23 May next. Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone however…

SESSION 7

17 June 1513

The constitution Meditatio cordis nostri1 {Msi 32, 815-818}, postponing the eighth session to
16 November, is read out and approved.]

SESSION 8

19 December 1513

[Condemnation of every proposition contrary to the truth of the enlightened christian faith]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. The burden of apostolic government ever drives us on so that, for the
weaknesses of souls requiring to be healed, of which the almighty Creator from on high has
willed us to have the care, and for those ills in particular which are now seen to be pressing
most urgently on the faithful, we may exercise, like the Samaritan in the gospel, the task of

426
healing with oil and wine, lest that rebuke of Jeremiah may be cast at us: Is there no balm in
Gilead, is there no physician there? Consequently, since in our days (which we endure with
sorrow) the sower of cockle, the ancient enemy of the human race, has dared to scatter and
multiply in the Lord’s field some extremely pernicious errors, which have always been
rejected by the faithful, especially on the nature of the rational soul, with the claim that it is
mortal, or only one among all human beings, and since some, playing the philosopher without
due care, assert that this proposition is true at least according to philosophy, it is our desire to
apply suitable remedies against this infection and, with the approval of the sacred council, we
condemn and reject all those who insist that the intellectual soul is mortal, or that it is only
one among all human beings, and those who suggest doubts on this topic. For the soul not
only truly exists of itself and essentially as the form of the human body, as is said in the
canon of our predecessor of happy memory, pope Clement V, promulgated in the general
council of Vienne, but it is also immortal; and further, for the enormous number of bodies
into which it is infused individually, it can and ought to be and is multiplied. This is clearly
established from the gospel when the Lord says, They cannot kill the soul; and in another
place, Whoever hates his life in this world, will keep it for eternal life and when he promises
eternal rewards and eternal punishments to those who will be judged according to the merits
of their life; otherwise, the incarnation and other mysteries of Christ would be of no benefit to
us, nor would resurrection be something to look forward to, and the saints and the just would
be (as the Apostle says) the most miserable of all people.

And since truth cannot contradict truth, we define that every statement contrary to the
enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be
permitted. We decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this kind, thus
sowing heresies which are wholly condemned, should be avoided in every way and punished
as detestable and odious heretics and infidels who are undermining the catholic faith.
Moreover we strictly enjoin on each and every philosopher who teaches publicly in the
universities or elsewhere, that when they explain or address to their audience the principles or
conclusions of philosophers, where these are known to deviate from the true faith — as in the
assertion of the soul’s mortality or of there being only one soul or of the eternity of the world
and other topics of this kind — they are obliged to devote their every effort to clarify for their
listeners the truth of the christian religion, to teach it by convincing arguments, so far as this
is possible, and to apply themselves to the full extent of their energies to refuting and
disposing of the philosophers’ opposing arguments, since all the solutions are available.

But it does not suffice occasionally to clip the roots of the brambles, if the ground is not dug
deeply so as to check them beginning again to multiply, and if there are not removed their
seeds and root causes from which they grow so easily. That is why, since the prolonged study
of human philosophy — which God has made empty and foolish, as the Apostle says, when
that study lacks the flavouring of divine wisdom and the light of revealed truth — sometimes
leads to error rather than to the discovery of the truth, we ordain and rule by this salutary
constitution, in order to suppress all occasions of falling into error with respect to the matters
referred to above, that from this time onwards none of those in sacred orders, whether
religious or seculars or others so committed, when they follow courses in universities or other

427
public institutions, may devote themselves to the study of philosophy or poetry for longer
than five years after the study of grammar and dialectic, without their giving some time to the
study of theology or pontifical law. Once these five years are past, if someone wishes to
sweat over such studies, he may do so only if at the same time, or in some other way, he
actively devotes himself to theology or the sacred canons; so that the Lord’s priests may find
the means, in these holy and useful occupations, for cleansing and healing the infected
sources of philosophy and poetry.

We command, in virtue of holy obedience, that these canons are to be published each year, at
the beginning of the course, by the local ordinaries and rectors of universities where institutes
of general studies flourish. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however…

[On arranging peace between christian princes and on bringing back the Bohemians who
reject the faith]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. We are continuing the sacred Lateran council for the praise of the
almighty and undivided Trinity and for the glory of him whose place we represent on earth,
who develops peace and harmony in his high heavens, and who, on his departure from this
world, left peace as a lawful inheritance to his disciples. For, in the previous seventh session,
the council was confronting, among other matters, the threatening and very obvious danger
from the infidels and the spilling of christian blood, which even then was being poured out
because of our blatant faults. The quarrels between christian kings and princes and peoples
must also be removed. and we were being compelled to seek with all our strength for peace
between them. This was the reason for having to arrange one of the more important meetings
of the said council: so that peace should follow and be maintained as unbroken and leading to
its due fulfilment, especially in these times when the power of the infidels is recognised to
have grown to a remarkable extent. Therefore, with the approval of the same council, we
have arranged and decided to send to the aforesaid kings, princes and rulers alert legates and
envoys of peace, who are outstanding in learning, experience and goodness, with a view to
negotiating and arranging peace. And, in order that these men may lay aside their arms, we
have called upon their spokesmen who are present at the council, insofar as we were able to
do with God’s help, to devote all their energy and strength, out of reverence for the apostolic
see and the union of the faithful, to giving notice of these matters to their kings, princes and
rulers. These are invited, in our name, to negotiate and listen with good will and honour to the
apostolic legates themselves, and to act in favour of our just and holy desires which are to be
set before them by these messengers.

We were persuading ourself that they will do this, in order that our legates may be able to
take up the task of the embassy as quickly as possible and manfully complete the
undertaking, and so that, by the favour of the Father of lights (from whom comes every best
gift) peace can be negotiated and arranged and, once this has been settled, the holy and
necessary expedition against the frenzy of the infidels, panting to have their fill of christian
blood, can take place and be brought to a favourable conclusion for the safety and peace of

428
the whole of Christianity. After this we were hoping from the depths of our heart, because of
our pastoral office, for peace and union within the whole christian people and in particular
among the same kings, rulers and princes from whose discord it was feared that prolonged
and serious damage could daily affect the christian state. A hope began to rise that the
christian state would be cared for in a useful and salutary way by this peace and unity,
because of the authority of these men. We dispatched our messengers and letters to the
aforesaid kings, princes and rulers — at that time in disunion with each other — for them to
be exhorted, requested and warned. We omitted nothing (so far as lay in our power) to
arrange and produce by our every effort that, once discord and disagreement of any kind had
been removed, they would wish eventually to return, in complete agreement, grace and love,
to universal peace, harmony and union. In this way, further losses would not be inflicted on
Christians from the hands of the savage ruler of the Turks or from other infidels, but there
would be a rallying of forces to crush the terrible fury and the boastful endeavours of those
peoples.

In that situation, as we strive with all thought, care, effort and zeal for everything to be
brought to the desired end, and with confidence in the gift of God, we have decreed that
legates with a special mission from us — who will be cardinals of the holy Roman church
and who are soon to be named by us, on the advice of our brothers, in our secret consistory
— shall be appointed and sent with authority and with the necessary and appropriate
faculties, as messengers of peace, for the arranging, negotiating and settling of this universal
peace among Christians, for the embarking upon an expedition against the infidels, with the
approval of this sacred council, and for inducing the said kings, out of generosity of soul
befitting their rank and out of devotion towards the catholic faith, to move with ready and
eager minds towards the holy tasks of both peace and the expedition, for the total and perfect
protection, defence and safety of the entire christian state.

In addition, since very great offence is given to God from the prolonged and manifold heresy
of the Bohemians, and scandal is caused to the christian people, the charge of bringing back
these people to the light and harmony of the true faith has been wholly entrusted by us for the
immediate future to our dear son, Thomas of Esztergom, cardinal-priest of the title of St
Martin in the Hills, as legate of ourself and the apostolic see to Hungary and Bohemia. We
exhort these people in the Lord not to neglect to dispatch some of their spokesmen, with an
adequate mandate, either to us and this sacred Lateran council or to the same Thomas,
cardinal-legate, who will be nearer to them. The purpose will be to exchange views with
regard to an appropriate remedy by which they may recognise the errors to which they have
long been in thrall and may be led back, with God’s guidance, to the true practice of religion
and into the bosom of holy mother church. With the approval of the sacred council, by the
tenor of the present letter, we grant and bestow on them, by the faith of a pontiff, a public
guarantee and a free safe-conduct as to their coming, going, remaining for as long as the
negotiation of the aforesaid matters shall last, and afterwards for departing and returning to
their own territories; and we shall consent to their wishes so far as we can under God.

429
So that this sacred Lateran council may be brought to the completion of the fruitful benefit
desired, since many other serious subjects remain to be discussed and debated for the praise
of God and the triumph of his church, we declare with the approval of the sacred council, that
the ninth session of the continuing celebration of this sacred Lateran council shall be held on
5 April 1514, in the first year of our pontificate, which will be Wednesday after Passion
Sunday. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however…

[Bull on reform]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Placed by the gift of divine grace at the supreme point of the apostolic
hierarchy, we thought nothing was more in keeping with our official duty than to survey, with
zeal and care, everything which could pertain to the protection, soundness and extension of
the catholic flock entrusted to us. To this purpose we have applied all the force of our activity
and the strength of our mind and talent. Our predecessor of happy memory, pope Julius II,
since he was concerned about the well-being of the faithful and anxious to protect it, had
summoned the ecumenical Lateran council for many other reasons indeed, but also because a
constant complaint was being pressed concerning the officials of the Roman curia. For these
reasons there were appointed a number of committees composed of his venerable brothers,
the cardinals of the holy Roman church, of whose number we were then, and also of prelates,
to investigate carefully into these complaints. In order that those attached to the curia and
others approaching it for favours would not in the meantime be tormented by the excessive
burden of expenses and that, at the same time, the ill-repute by which the said officials were
deeply disturbed might be appeased by a speedy remedy, he issued a bull of reform by which
they were bound anew, under a heavy penalty, to keep the legal terms of their offices.
Because death intervened, he was unable to legislate in particular about the excesses or to
complete the council.

We, as the successor of the concern no less than of the office, right at the beginning of our
pontificate, did not delay to resume the synod, to promote peace between christian princes
and no less, since it is our intention to complete a universal reform, to strengthen by new aids
what was first provided by our predecessor concerning the curial offices, and to follow this
through with the expanded committees. For no more pressing anxiety weighs on us than that
the thorns and brambles be pulled up from the Lord’s field, and if there is anything hindering
its cultivation, it is to be removed root and branch. Therefore, after a careful report had been
received from the committees, with notice of what was being side-tracked by which persons,
we restored to the norm whatever had deviated either from a sound and praiseworthy custom
or from a long-standing institution. We gathered these together into one bull of reform
published on this matter with the approval of the sacred council;{This bull Pastoralis officii
was published on 13 Dec. 1513, but it was never submitted to a vote of the fathers} and we
appointed to execute it those who would insist on the decisions being kept. With the approval
of this sacred council, we order this to be observed without alteration and without deceit by
the officials themselves as well as by others, according as it affects each, under penalty of
immediate excommunication from which they can only be absolved by the Roman pontiff

430
(except in immediate danger of death), in such a way that, in addition to this and other
penalties stated in detail in the bull, those acting against it are automatically suspended for six
months from the office in which they committed the fault. And if they have failed for a
second time in the same office, they are deprived for ever because they have contaminated
the office itself. After they have been brought back to good conduct by means of our
constitution, and the general damage has been checked and removed, we shall proceed to the
remaining stages of the reform.

If the Almighty in his mercy allows us to settle peace among the christian leaders, we shall
press on not only to destroy completely the bad seeds, but also to expand the territories of
Christ, and, supported by these achievements, we shall go forward, with God favouring his
own purposes, to the most holy expedition against the infidels, the desire for which is deeply
fixed in our heart .

Let nobody therefore … If anyone however…

SESSION 9

5 May 1514

[The pope urges christian rulers to make peace among themselves so that an expedition
against the enemies of the christian faith may be possible]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. After we had been called by divine dispensation to the care and rule of the
universal church, even though we are unworthy of so great a responsibility, we began from
the highest point of the apostolate, as from the top of Mount Sion, to turn our immediate gaze
and direct our mind to the things that seem to be of primary importance for the salvation,
peace and extension of the church itself. When we focused all our care, thought and zeal in
this direction, like an experienced and watchful shepherd, we found nothing more serious or
dangerous to the christian state and more opposed to our holy desire than the fierce madness
of armed conflicts. For, as a result of them, Italy has been almost wiped out by internecine
slaughter, cities and territories have been disfigured, partly overturned and partly levelled,
provinces and kingdoms have been stricken, and people cease not to act with madness and to
welter in christian blood. Hence we have judged that nothing should be given more
importance, consideration and attention than the quelling of these wars and the re-ordering of
ecclesiastical discipline in accordance with resources and circumstances, so that with God
appeased by a change of life, after quarrels have been set aside, we may be able to bring
together and gather into one the Lord’s flock entrusted to our care, and to encourage and
arouse this flock more readily, in a union of peace and harmony, as by a very strong binding
force, against the common enemies of the christian faith who are now threatening it .

This our intense desire for this campaign against the evil and implacable enemies of the cross
of Christ is indeed so implanted in our heart that we determined to continue and follow up the

431
sacred Lateran council — which was summoned and begun by our predecessor of happy
memory, Julius II, and interrupted by his death — for that special reason, as is clear from all
the different sessions held by us in the same council. Thus, with the christian princes or their
spokesmen assembled at the same council, and prelates from different parts of the world
coming to it, once peace between these christian princes had been settled and (as is right) the
noxious brambles of heresies had been first uprooted from the Lord’s field, then the things
necessary for the campaign against the same enemies, and what concerns the glory and
triumph of the orthodox faith, and various other matters, could be happily decided upon by
the timely advice and agreement of all.

Although many distinguished men, outstanding in every branch of learning, came from
different parts of Europe to this council, which had been solemnly summoned and duly
proclaimed, many also, legitimately hindered, sent their instructions in official form.
However, because of the difficulties from wars and circumstances as a result of which many
territories have been blocked by hostile arms for a long time, the resources and large numbers
which we desired could not be assembled. Moreover, that we have not as yet sent the
specially appointed legates to kings and princes to promote union and peace between the
same rulers — something that perhaps seems necessary to many and that we too think is
especially opportune — cannot be attributed to us. The reason, of course, why we refrained
from doing so is this: nearly all the princes made it known by letters and messages to us, that
the sending of legates was not at all necessary or expedient. Nevertheless, we sent men of
discretion and proved loyalty, endowed with the rank of bishop, as our envoys to those very
princes who were undertaking serious armed activity among themselves and, as far as could
be guessed, rather bitter wars. It has come about, especially by the action of these envoys,
that truces have been agreed between some of the princes and the rest are thought to be on the
point of giving their consent. Therefore we shall not put off sending the special legates, as we
decided in the last session, whenever this is necessary and profitable for the setting up of a
stable and lasting peace among them, and as we previously proposed. In the meantime, we
shall not cease to act and reflect on what is relevant to the situation, with the spokesmen of
the same princes who are negotiating with us, and to press on and exhort them and their
princes to this action by means of our envoys and letters.

Oh that the almighty and merciful God would assist from on high our plans for peace and our
constant thoughts, would regard the faithful people with more benevolent and favourable
eyes and, for the sake of common safety and peace and for the suppression of the haughty
madness of the wicked enemies of the christian name, would give a propitious hearing to
their devout prayers ! By our apostolic authority, we enjoin on each and every primate,
patriarch and archbishop, on chapters of cathedral and collegiate churches, both secular and
those belonging to any of the religious orders, on colleges and convents, on leaders of
peoples, deans, rectors of churches and others who have charge of souls, and on preachers,
alms-collectors and those who expound the word of God to the people, and we order in virtue
of holy obedience, that within the celebration of masses, during the time that the word of God
is being set before the people or outside that time, and in prayers which they will say in
chapter or as convents, or at some other time in any kind of gathering, they are to keep the

432
following special collects for the peace of Christians and for the confounding of the infidels
respectively: O God, from whom holy desires, and, O God, in whose hands are all power and
authority over kingdoms, look to the help of Christians. And they are no less to enjoin on
members of their dioceses and on any other persons of either sex, whether ecclesiastical or
secular, over whom they have authority by reason of a prelature or any other ecclesiastical
position of authority, and to encourage in the Lord those to whom God’s word is proposed on
their own or another’s responsibility, that they should pour forth in private devout prayers to
God himself and to his most glorious mother, in the Lord’s prayer and the Hail Mary, for the
peace of Christians (as mentioned above) and for the complete destruction of the infidels.

Further, whoever of those mentioned above think that, by influence or favour with secular
princes of any rank, distinction or dignity, or with their advisers, associates, attendants or
officials, or with the magistrates, rectors and lieutenants of cities, towns, universities or any
secular institutions, or with other persons of either sex, ecclesiastical or secular, they can take
steps towards a universal or particular peace between princes, rulers and christian peoples,
and towards the campaign against the infidels, let them use strong encouragement and lead
them on to this peace and the campaign. By the tender mercy of our God and the merit of the
passion of his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, we exhort all of them with all possible
emotion of our heart, and we counsel them by the authority of the pastoral office which we
exercise, to lay aside private and public enmities and to turn to embracing the endeavour for
peace and deciding on the aforesaid campaign.

We strictly forbid each and every prelate, prince or individual, whether ecclesiastical or
secular, of whatever state, rank, dignity, pre-eminence or condition they may be, under threat
of the divine judgment, to presume to introduce in any way, directly or indirectly, openly or
secretly, any obstacle to the said peace which is to be negotiated by us or by our agents,
whether legates or envoys of the apostolic see endowed (as said before) with the episcopal
rank, for the defence of the christian state of the faithful. Those who, in working towards this
peace, think that there is involved something of a private or a public nature that is of
importance to their princes, cities or states, the care for whom or which pertains to them
because of some office or public function should, as far as it will be possible in the Lord, with
due moderation and calm take control of the matter inasmuch as it involves support and
goodwill towards the coming peace. Indeed, those who wish to rouse the faithful by Christ’s
spiritual gifts, when these are duly contrite and absolved, and to pour out devout prayers for
obtaining peace and for deciding on the expedition, so that the said peace and the campaign
against the said enemies of the christian faith may be brought about and be secured from God
himself, will devote worthwhile and well-considered efforts as often as they do this. These
prayers, offered with devotion, should take place in masses, sermons and other divine
services, in collegial, conventual and other public or communal prayers, and among princes,
advisers, officials, governors and other persons named above who seem to have some
influence in making or arranging the peace and in deciding (as said before) on the campaign
against the enemies of the unconquered cross.

433
Trusting in the mercy of God and the authority of his blessed apostles Peter and Paul, we
grant remission of one hundred days of imposed penances to those who, individually and in
private, offer prayers to obtain the foregoing from God; seven times each day if they do it so
often or, if fewer, as often as they shall do it; until the universal peace — which is receiving
our constant attention -between princes and peoples at present in armed dispute has been
established, and the campaign against the infidels has been decreed with our approval. We lay
an obligation on our venerable brothers, primates, patriarchs, archbishops and bishops, to
whom the present letter or copies of it, accurately printed either in Rome or elsewhere, shall
come under official seals, to have it published with all possible speed in their provinces and
dioceses, and to give firm instructions for its due execution.

In the meantime, with the approval of the sacred council, we have decreed, as we proposed
and desired with all our heart, the ecclesiastical reform of our curia and of our venerable
brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church, and of others dwelling in Rome, and many
other necessary things, which will be contained in our other letters due for publication in this
same session. It was Julius, our predecessor, who summoned to this council all those who
were accustomed to attend councils. He gave them a comprehensive safe-conduct so that they
could make the journey and arrive safely and unharmed. However, many prelates who ought
to have come have so far not arrived, perhaps because of the obstacles already stated. In our
desire to go ahead with the more serious business due in the next session, we appeal to in the
Lord, and we ask and counsel by the tender mercy of the same, prelates, kings, dukes,
marquises, counts and others who usually come or send someone to a general council, but
who have not yet provided spokesmen or legitimate instructions, to decide with all possible
speed either to come in person or to send chosen and competent envoys, with valid
instructions, to this sacred Lateran council which is so beneficial to the christian state.

With regard to those venerable brethren, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, abbots and prelates
– especially those bound under oath to visit the place of the apostles Peter and Paul at certain
fixed times, and to attend in person general councils which have been summoned, including
those under that obligation at the time of their promotion — whose obstinacy as being non-
attenders at various sessions became a matter of frequent accusation by the sponsor of the
same council, there is to be found in solemn form both a petition for proceedings against
them and a statement of the censures and penalties incurred. This is notwithstanding any
privileges, concessions and indults that were granted confirmed or renewed by us or our said
predecessors in favour of them and their churches, monasteries and benefices. These we
annul and invalidate through our certain knowledge and fullness of power, considering them
to be fully stated here. We impose in virtue of holy obedience, and we strictly command
under the penalties of excommunication and perjury and others derived from law or custom,
and in particular from the letter which summoned and proclaimed the said Lateran council
and was promulgated by our predecessor, Julius himself that they must attend in person the
said Lateran council and remain in Rome until it has reached its conclusion and been
terminated by our authority, unless they are prevented by some legitimate excuse. And if (as
we said) they have somehow been prevented, they are to send their suitably qualified

434
representatives with a full mandate on the matters that will have to be treated, dealt with and
advised upon.

In order to remove completely all excuse and leave no pretext of any impediment to anyone
who is obliged to attend, in addition to the public guarantee which was clearly granted at the
summoning of this council to all coming to it we give, concede and grant, acting on the
advice and power mentioned above with the same council’s approval, to each and all who
have been accustomed to be present at the meetings of general councils and are coming to the
present Lateran council, as well as to members of their personal staff, of whatever status rank,
order and condition or nobility they may be, ecclesiastical and secular, a free, safe and secure
safe-conduct and, by apostolic authority in the meaning of the present letter, full protection in
all its aspects, for themselves and for all their possessions of any kind as they pass through
cities, territories and places, by sea and land, which are subject to the said Roman church, for
the journey to the Lateran council in Rome, for remaining in the city of freedom, for
exchanging views according to their opinions, for departing therefrom as often as they may
wish and also after four months from the conclusion and dispersal of the said council; and we
promise to give readily other safe-conducts and guarantees to those desiring to have them.
Each and all of these visitors we shall deal with and welcome with kindness and charity.

Under the threat of the divine majesty and of our displeasure, and of the penalties against
those impeding the holding of councils, particularly the said Lateran council, which are
contained and set down in law or in the letter of the aforesaid summons of our predecessor,
we are instructing each and all secular princes, of whatever exalted rank they may be,
including imperial, royal, queenly, ducal or any other, the governors of cities, and citizens
governing or ruling their states, to grant to the prelates and others coming to the said Lateran
council a free permission and licence, a safe-conduct for coming and returning, and a free and
unharmed transit through the dominions, lands and property of theirs through which the said
persons must pass together with their equipment, possessions and horses; all exceptions and
excuses being completely set aside and without force.

In addition we order and command, under pain of our displeasure and of other penalties
which can be inflicted at our will, each and all of our people who bear arms, both infantry and
cavalry, their commanders and captains, the castellans of our fortresses, the legates,
governors, rulers, lieutenants, authorities, officials and vassals of the cities and territories that
are subject to the said Roman church, and any others of whatever rank, status, condition or
distinction they may be, to give permission, and to be responsible for the giving of
permission, to those coming to the Lateran council, to pass through in freedom, safety and
security, to stay, and to return, so that such a holy, praiseworthy and very necessary council
may not be frustrated for any reason or pretext, and that those coming to it may be able to live
in peace and calm and without restraint and to say and develop under the same conditions the
things which concern the honour of almighty God and the standing of the whole church. This
we enjoin notwithstanding any constitutions, apostolic ordinances, imperial laws or municipal
statutes and customs (even those reinforced by oath and apostolic confirmation or by any
other authority) which could modify in any respect or impede in any way the said safe-

435
conduct and guarantee, even if the constitutions etc. were of such a kind that an individual,
precise, clear and distinct form of speech, or some other clearly stated expression, should be
employed regarding them, and not just general clauses which only imply the matter, for we
consider the significance of all the above things to be clearly stated by the present letter, as if
they had been included word for word. Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone however . . .

[Bull on reform of the curia]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. It is eminently fitting for the Roman pontiff to carry out the duty of a
provident shepherd, in order to care for and keep safe the Lord’s flock entrusted to him by
God, since, by the will of the supreme ordinance by which the things of heaven and of earth
are arranged by ineffable providence, he acts on the lofty throne of St Peter as vicar on earth
of Christ, the only-begotten Son of God. When we notice, out of solicitude for our said
pastoral office, that church discipline and the pattern of a sound and upright life are
worsening, disappearing and going further astray from the right path throughout almost all
the ranks of Christ’s faithful, with a disregard for law and with exemption from punishment,
as a result of the troubles of the times and the malice of human beings, it must be feared that,
unless checked by a well-guided improvement, there will be a daily falling into a variety of
faults under the security of sin and soon, with the appearance of public scandals, a complete
breakdown. We desire, then, as far as it is permitted to us from on high, to check the evils
from becoming too strong, to restore a great many things to their earlier observance of the
sacred canons, to create with God’s help an improvement in keeping with the established
practice of the holy fathers, and to give — with the approval of the sacred Lateran council
initiated for that reason, among others, by our predecessor of happy memory, pope Julius II,
and continued by us -healthy guidance to all these matters.

In order to make a start, we take up the points which for the present seem more appropriate
and which, having often been neglected during particular generations, have brought great loss
to the christian religion and produced very great scandals in the church of God. We have
therefore decided to begin with preferment to ecclesiastical dignities. Our predecessor of
devout memory, pope Alexander III, also in a Lateran council, decreed that age, a serious
character and knowledge of letters are to be carefully examined in the preferment of
individuals to bishoprics and abbacies. Moreover, nothing impedes the church of God more
than when unworthy prelates are accepted for the government of churches. Therefore, in the
preferment of prelates, the Roman pontiffs must give much attention to the matter, especially
because they will have to give an account to God at the last judgment about those given
preferment by them to churches and monasteries. Consequently, we rule and establish that
henceforward, in accordance with the constitution of the aforesaid Alexander III, for vacant
churches and monasteries of patriarchal, metropolitan and cathedral status, the person
provided is to be of mature age, learning and serious character, as said above, and the
provision is not to be made at someone’s urging, by means of recommendation, direction or
enforcement, or in any other way, unless it has seemed right to act differently on the grounds
of advantage to the churches, prudence, nobility, uprightness, experience, lengthy contact

436
with the curia (together with adequate learning), or service to the apostolic see. We wish the
same to be observed regarding the persons elected and chosen in elections and choices that
have customarily been admitted by the apostolic see. But if the question arises of providing
for churches and monasteries of this kind with persons of less than thirty years of age, there
can be no dispensation for them to be in charge of churches before their twenty-seventh year
of age or of monasteries before their twenty-second year.

Indeed, so that suitable persons may be advanced with greater exactness and care, we rule
that the cardinal to whom the reporting on an election, appointment or provision to a church
or monastery has been entrusted, ought, before he gives an account in the sacred consistory
(as the custom is) of his carrying out of such an examination or report assigned to him, to
make his report known to one of the older cardinals of each grade, personally in the actual
consistory, or, if there was no consistory on the day appointed for him to give his account,
then by means of his secretary or some other member of his personal staff, and the three older
cardinals in question are bound to communicate the report as soon as possible to the other
cardinals of their grade. The said cardinal making the report shall personally examine the
business of the election, administration, appointment or promotion in summary and extra-
judicial fashion. If any have spoken against it, he is obliged to call, after the objectors have
been summoned, competent, responsible and trustworthy witnesses and, if it should be
necessary or appropriate, others by virtue of office. He is bound to bring with him to the
consistory, on the day the report has to be made, the stages and decisions of the report
together with the statements of the witnesses, and he shall not give his report in any form
until the person to be promoted, if he is at the curia, shall have first visited the majority of the
cardinals in order that they may be able to learn at first hand, insofar as it is relevant to his
character, what they shall soon learn from the report of their colleague. Moreover, the person
promoted is obliged, by longstanding practice and laudable custom, to visit as soon as
possible the same cardinals who are then in the curia. This practice and praiseworthy custom,
indeed, we renew and command to be kept without change.

Since it is right to maintain episcopal dignity unharmed, and for it to be protected from
indiscriminate exposure to the attacks of wicked persons and to the false charges of accusers,
we decree that no bishop or abbot may be deprived of his rank when anyone urges a charge or
presses demands (unless the opportunity for a legitimate defence is afforded to him), even if
the charges have been widely known and, after the parties have been attentively heard, the
case has been fully proved; nor may any prelate be transferred against his will, except for
other just and efficacious reasons and causes, in accordance with the terms and decree of the
council of Constance.

Also, as a result of commendams for monasteries, the monasteries themselves (as experience,
a practical mistress, has quite often taught) are seriously damaged in spiritual and temporal
matters because their buildings fall into decay, partly through the negligence of the
commendatories and partly through greed or lack of interest, divine worship is gradually
reduced, and matter for contempt is generally offered especially to secular persons, not
without a lessening of the standing of the apostolic see, from which commendams of this kind

437
originate. In order that sounder measures may be taken to secure these monasteries from
damage, we will and decree that when vacancies occur through the death of the abbot in
charge, they cannot be given in commendam to anyone by any agreement unless it seems
right to us to decide otherwise, in accordance with the actual circumstances and with the
advice of our brothers, so as to protect the authority of the apostolic see and to oppose the
evil designs of those attacking it .

But let such monasteries be provided with competent persons, in keeping with the above-
mentioned constitution, so that suitable abbots will have charge of them (as is fitting). Such
monasteries may be given in commendam, when the original commendam no longer exists on
account of the resignation or death of the commendatory, only to cardinals and to qualified
and well-deserving persons; and in such a way that the commendatories of the monasteries,
whatever their dignity, honour and high rank may be, even if they enjoy the status and dignity
of a cardinal, are obliged, if they have meals in private, apart from the common table, to
assign a quarter of their board for the renewal of the fabric, or for the purchase or repair of
furnishings, clothings and adornment, or for the maintenance or sustenance of the poor, as the
greater need demands or suggests . If, however, they share board completely, a third part of
all the resources of the said monastery committed to the commendatory must be assigned,
after all other imposts have been deducted, to the above-mentioned burdens and to the
sustenance of the monks. Moreover, letters which are drawn up regarding such commendams
to monasteries ought to contain a clause specifically stating this. If they are drawn up in some
other form, they are of no worth or value .

Since it is fitting for such churches to be provided for without any loss of revenues, in such a
way that both the honour of those in charge and the need of the churches and buildings are
considered, we decree and rule that pensions may never be reserved from the incomes of
these churches except on account of a resignation or for some other reason which has been
considered credible and honourable in our secret consistory. We also rule that henceforth
parochial churches, major and principal dignities and other ecclesiastical benefices whose
rents, revenues and produce by ordinary reckoning do not amount to an annual value of two
hundred golden ducats of the treasury, and also hospitals, leperhouses and hostels of any
importance which have been set up for the use and provisioning of the poor, shall not be
given in commendam to cardinals of the holy Roman church, or conferred on them by any
other title, unless they have become vacant by the death of a member of their household. In
the latter case they can be given in commendam to cardinals, but these are bound to dispose
of them within six months for the benefit of such persons as are suitable and in good relations
with them. We do not wish, however, to prejudge the cardinals further with respect to
benefices to which they may have a reserve claim .

We also ordain that members of churches, monasteries or military orders may not be
detached or separated from their head — which is absurd — without legitimate and
reasonable cause. Perpetual unions, apart from cases permitted by law or on some reasonable
grounds, are not permitted at all. Dispensations for more than two incompatible benefices are

438
not to be granted, except for great and pressing reasons or to qualified persons according to
the form of common law . We set a limit of two years on persons of whatever rank who
obtain more than four parish churches and their perpetual vicarages, or major and principal
dignities, even if by way of union or commendam for life. They are bound to release the rest,
only four being retained in the meantime. Such benefices, due for release, can be resigned
into the hands of the ordinaries so that they may be provided with persons nominated by
them; notwithstanding any reservations, even those of a general nature or resulting from the
quality of the persons resigning. Once the period of two years is past, all the benefices that
have not been disposed of may be reckoned as vacant and may freely be applied for as
vacant. Those who hold on to them incur the penalties of the constitution Execrabilis of our
memorable predecessor, pope John XXII. We also rule that special reservations of any
benefice are in no way to be granted at the urging of anyone .

On cardinals

Since the cardinals of the holy Roman church take precedence in honour and dignity over all
the other members of the church after the sovereign pontiff, it is proper and right that they be
distinguished beyond all others by the purity of their life and the excellence of their virtues.
On that account, we not only exhort and advise them but also decree and order that
henceforth each of the cardinals following the teaching of the Apostle, so live a sober, chaste
and godly life that he shines out before people as one who abstains not merely from evil but
from every appearance of evil . In the first place, let him honour God by his works . Let all of
them be vigilant, constant at the divine office and the celebration of masses, and maintain
their chapels in a worthy place, as they were wont to do .

Their house and establishment, table and furniture, should not attract blame by display or
splendour or superfluous equipment or in any other way, so as to avoid any fostering of sin or
excess, but, as is right, let them deserve to be called mirrors of moderation and frugality.
Therefore, let them find satisfaction in what contributes to priestly modesty; let them act with
kindness and respect both in public and in private, towards prelates and other distinguished
persons who come to the Roman curia; and let them undertake with grace and generosity the
business committed to them by ourself and our successors .

Moreover, let them not employ bishops or prelates in demeaning tasks in their houses, so that
those who have been appointed to give direction to others and who have been clad in a sacred
character, will not lower themselves to menial chores and generally bring about a lack of
respect for the pastoral office . Consequently, let them treat with honour as brothers, and as
befits their state of life, those whom they have or will have in their houses. Since the
cardinals assist the Roman pontiff, the common father of all Christians, it is very improper
for them to be patrons of or special pleaders for individuals. We have therefore decided, lest
they adopt partiality of any kind, that they are not to set up as promoters or defenders of
princes or communities or of any other persons against anyone, except to the extent that
justice and equity demands and the dignity and rank of such people requires. Rather,
separated from all private interest, let them be available and engage with all diligence in

439
calming and settling any disputes. Let them promote with due piety the maintenance of the
just business of princes and all other persons, especially the poor and religious, and let them
offer help in accordance with their resources and their official responsibility to those who are
oppressed and unjustly burdened .

They are to visit at least once a year — in person if they have been present in the curia, and
by a suitable deputy if they have been absent — the places of their titular basilica. They are,
with due care, to keep themselves informed about the clergy and people of the churches
subject to their basilica; they are to keep under review the divine worship and the properties
of the said churches; above all, let them examine with care the lives of the clergy and their
parishioners, and with a father’s affection encourage one and all to live an upright and
honourable life . For the development of divine worship and the salvation of his own soul,
each cardinal should give to his basilica during his lifetime, or bequeath at the time of his
death, a sufficient amount for the suitable sustenance there of one priest; or, if the basilica
needs repairs or some other form of aid, let him leave or donate as much as he may in
conscience decide. It is entirely unfitting to pass over persons related to them by blood or by
marriage, especially if they are deserving and need help. To come to their assistance is just
and praiseworthy. But we do not consider that it is appropriate to heap on them a great
number of benefices or church revenues, with the result that an uncontrolled generosity in
these matters may bring wrong to others and may cause scandal. Consequently we have
determined that they are not to squander thoughtlessly the goods of the churches, but are to
apply them in works of devotion and piety, for which great and rich returns have been
assigned and ordained by the holy fathers .

It is also our wish that they take care, without making any excuse, of the churches entrusted
to them in commendam, whether these be cathedrals, abbeys, priories, or any other
eeclesiastical benefices that they take measures, with all personal effect, to see that the
cathedrals are duly served by the appointment of worthy and competent vicars or suffragans,
according to what has been customary, with an appropriate and adequate salary; and that they
provide for the other churches and monasteries held by them in commendam with the right
number of clerics or chaplains, whether religious or monks, for the adequate and
praiseworthy service of God. Let them also maintain in proper condition the buildings,
properties and rights of any kind, and repair what has crumbled, in accordance with the duty
of good prelates and commendatories . We also judge that the said cardinals are to use great
discretion and careful foresight with regard to the number of their personal attendants and
horses lest by having a greater number than their resources, situation and dignity permit, they
can be accused of the vice of over-display and extravagance. Let them not be accounted
greedy and squalid on the grounds that they enjoy great and plentiful revenues and yet offer
sustenance to very few; for the house of a cardinal ought to be an open lodging, a harbour and
refuge for upright and learned persons, especially men, for nobles who are now poor and for
honourable persons. Hence let them be prudent about the manner and quantity of what has to
be kept, and carefully check the character of their personal attendants, lest they themselves
incur from the vices of others the shameful stain of dishonour and provide real opportunities
for contradictions and false accusations .

440
Since very special provision must be made that our deeds be approved not only before God,
whom we ought to please in the first place, but also before peoplel so that we can offer to
others an example to be imitated, we ordain that every cardinal show himself an excellent
ruler and overseer of his house and personal staff, with regard to both what is open for all to
see and what lies hidden within . Therefore let each of them have the priests and deacons clad
in respectable garments, and make careful provision that no one in his household who holds a
benefice of any type, or is in holy orders, wears multi-coloured clothes or a garment that has
little connection with ecclesiastical status. Those in the priesthood, therefore, ought to wear
clothes of colours which are not forbidden to clerics by law and are of at least ankle length.
Those who hold high office in cathedrals, canons of the said cathedrals those holding the
chief posts in colleges, and chaplains of cardinals when celebrating masses, are obliged to
wear a head-covering in public. Shield-bearers are permitted garments somewhat shorter than
ankle-length. Grooms, because they are generally moving about and perform a somewhat
burdensome service, can use shorter and more suitable garments, even if they happen to be
clerics, so long as they are not ordained priests; but in such a way that they do not cast aside
decency and they so conduct themselves that their behaviour is in keeping with their position
in the church . Other clerics are to do everything with due proportion and restraint. Both
clerics holding benefices and those in holy orders are not to pay special attention to their hair
and beards, nor to possess mules or horses with trappings and ornaments of velvet or silk, but
for articles of this kind let them use ordinary cloth or leather .

If anyone of the aforesaid staff acts otherwise, or wears such forbidden garments after three
months from the announcement of the present regulations, despite being given a legitimate
warning, he incurs excommunication. If he has not corrected himself within a further three
months, he is understood to be suspended from receiving the fruits of the benefices which he
holds. And if he remains fixed in this obstinacy for another six months, after a similar legal
warning, he is to be deprived of all the benefices which he holds, and he is to be considered
as so deprived. The benefices thus made vacant may be freely sought from the apostolic see.
We wish each and every one of these arrangements to apply to the households of ourself and
any future Roman pontiffs, and likewise to all other beneficed clerics or persons in holy
orders, even those in the curia . There is one single exception: the said attendants of ourself
and future Roman pontiffs may wear red garments, in keeping with what is proper and usual
for the papal dignity .

Since the care of the most important business is the special concern of cardinals, it is for them
to use their ability to know which regions have been infected by heresies, errors and
superstitions opposed to the true orthodox faith; where the ecclesiastical discipline of the
Lord’s commandments is lacking; and which kings and princes or peoples are being troubled,
or fear to be troubled, by wars. Cardinals shall apply themselves to obtain information on
these and similar matters and make a report to us or the current Roman pontiff so that, by
earnest effort, opportune and saving remedies for such evils and afflictions can be thought
out. Since by frequent, almost daily, experience it is known that many evils quite often occur
to provinces and cities on account of the absence of their own officially appointed legates,

441
and various scandals are springing up which are not without disadvantages to the apostolic
see, we decree and ordain that cardinals who are in charge of provinces or cities, under the
title of legates, may not administer them through lieutenants or officials, but they are obliged
to be present in person for the greater part of the time, and to rule and govern them with all
vigilance. Those who now hold the title of legate, or will hold it for a time, are obliged to go
to their provinces — within three months from the date of the present proclamation if the
provinces are in Italy, and within five months if they are outside Italy — and to reside there
for the greater part of the time, unless, by a command from us or our successors, they are held
back in the Roman curia for some business of greater moment or are sent to other places as
needs demand. In the latter cases, let them have in the said provinces and cities vice-legates,
auditors, lieutenants and the other usual officials with due arrangements and salaries. Anyone
who does not observe each and all of the above regulations is to be deprived of all the
emoluments of his post as legate. These regulations were formulated and established long ago
with this object: that the ready presence of the legates would be beneficial to the peoples; not
that, being free from toils and cares, under cover of being the legate, they would fix their
attention only on profit .

Since the duty of a cardinal is primarily concerned with regular assistance to the Roman
pontiff and the business matters of the apostolic see, we have decided that all cardinals shall
reside at the Roman curia, and those who are absent are to return within six months if they
are in Italy, or within a year from the day of promulgation of this present constitution if they
are outside Italy. If they do not they are to lose the fruits of their benefices and the
emoluments of all their offices; and they lose completely, as long as they arc absent, all
privileges granted in general and in particular to cardinals. Those cardinals are excepted,
however, who happen to be absent by reason of a duty imposed by the apostolic see, or of a
command or permission from the Roman pontiff, or from reasonable fear or any other motive
which justifiably excuses, or for health reasons . Moreover, the privileges, indults and
immunities granted to the said cardinals and contained or declared in our bull under the date
of our coronation1{Bull Licat Romani pontificis,9 April 1513; see Regesta Leonis X no. 14}
remain in full force. We have also decided that the funeral expenses of cardinals, when all
costs are included, ought not to exceed the total of 1,500 florins, unless the previous
arrangement of the executors — after just grounds and reasons have been set out — has
reckoned that more should be spent. The funeral rites and formal mourning are to be on the
first and ninth days; within the octave, however, masses may be celebrated as usual .

Out of reverence towards the apostolic see, for the advantage and honour of the pontiff and
the cardinals, in order that the possibility of scandals which could come to light may be
removed and a greater freedom of votes in the holy senate may exist, and that, as is right, it
may be lawful for each cardinal to say freely and without penalty whatever he feels before
God and his own conscience, we lay down that no cardinal may reveal in writing or by word
or in any other way, under pain of being a perjurer and disobedient, the votes that were given
in the consistory, or whatever was done or said there which could result in hatred or scandal
or prejudice with regard to anyone, or whenever silence on any point beyond the foregoing
has been specially and clearly enjoined by ourself or the Roman pontiff of the time. If anyone

442
acts to the contrary he incurs, as well as the punishments stated, immediate excommunication
from which, except in immediate danger of death, he can only be absolved by ourself or the
Roman pontiff of the time, and with a declaration of the reason .

Reforms of the curia and of other things

Since every generation inclines to evil from its youth, and for it to grow accustomed from
tender years towards good is the result of work and purpose we rule and order that those in
charge of schools, and those who teach young children and youths, ought not only to instruct
them in grammar, rhetoric and similar subjects but also to teach those matters which concern
religion, such as God’s commandments, the articles of the faith, sacred hymns and psalms,
and the lives of the saints. On feast days they should limit themselves to teaching what has
reference to religion and good habits, and they are obliged to instruct, encourage and compel
their pupils in these matters insofar as they can. Thus, let them attend churches not only for
masses, but also to listen to vespers and the divine offices, and let them encourage the hearing
of instructions and sermons . Let them not teach anything to their pupils that is contrary to
good morals or may lead to a lack of reverence .

To wipe out the curse of blasphemy, which has increased beyond measure towards a supreme
contempt for the divine name and for the saints, we rule and ordain that whoever curses God
openly and publicly and, by insulting and offensive language, has expressly blasphemed our
lord Jesus Christ or the glorious virgin Mary, his mother, if he has held a public office or
jurisdiction, he is to lose three months’ emoluments of his said office for the first and second
offence, and if he has committed the fault a third time, he is automatically deprived of his
post. If he is a cleric or a priest, he is to be punished further as follows for being found guilty
of such a fault: for the first time he blasphemed, he is to lose the fruits of whatever benefices
he held for one year; for the second time he offended and was convicted, he is to be deprived
of his benefice if he held only one, and if he held several then he is to be compelled to lose
the one that his ordinary decides upon; if he is charged and convicted for a third time, he is
automatically deprived of all the benefices and dignities that he holds, he is rendered
incapable of holding them any longer, and they can be freely asked for and allotted to others.
A lay person who blasphemes, if he is a noble, is to be fined a penalty of twenty-five ducats;
for the second offence the fine is fifty ducats, which are to be applied to the fabric of the
basilica of the prince of the apostles in Rome; for other offences he is to be punished as set
out below; for a third fault, however, he is to lose his noble status. If he is of no rank and a
plebian, he is to be cast into prison. If he has been caught committing blasphemy in public
more than twice, he is to be compelled to stand for a whole day in front of the entrance of the
principal church, wearing a hood signifying his infamy; but if he has fallen several times into
the same fault, he is to be condemned to permanent imprisonment or to the galleys, at the
decision of the appointed judge. In the forum of conscience, however, nobody guilty of
blasphemy can be absolved without a heavy penance imposed by the decision of a strict
confessor . We wish those who blaspheme against the other saints to be punished somewhat
more lightly, at the decision of a judge who will take account of individuals .

443
We also decree that secular judges who have not taken action against such convicted
blasphemers and have not imposed rightful penalties on them, insofar as they are able to, are
to be subjected to the same penalties as if they had been involved in the said crime. But those
who have exercised care and severity in their examinations and punishments, will gain for
each occasion an indulgence of ten years and may keep a third of the fine imposed. Any
persons who have heard the blasphemer are obliged to rebuke him sharply in words, if it
should happen that this can be done without danger to themselves, and they are obliged to
report the same or bring it to the knowledge of an ecclesiastical or secular judge within three
days. But if several persons have at the same time heard the said blasphemer committing the
fault, each one is obliged to make an accusation against him, unless perhaps they all agree
that one will perform the task for all . We urge and counsel in the Lord all the said persons, in
virtue of holy obedience, that they command and ensure, for the reverence and honour of the
divine name, that all the foregoing are kept and very exactly carried out in their lordships and
lands. Thus they will have from God himself an abundant reward for such a good and pious
deed, and they too will obtain from the apostolic see an indulgence of ten years, and a third of
the fine by which the blasphemer is punished, as often as they have taken the trouble to have
such a crime punished . It is likewise our will that this indulgence and the remaining third of
the fine imposed be granted and assigned to the person reporting the name of the blasphemer.
Moreover, other penalties set down in the sacred canons against such blasphemers remain in
force .

In order that clerics, especially, may live in continence and chastity according to canonical
legislation, we rule that offenders be severely punished as the canons lay down. If anyone, lay
or cleric, has been found guilty of a charge on account of which the wrath of God comes
upon the sons of disobedience, let him be punished by the penalties respectively imposed by
the sacred canons or by civil law. Those involved in concubinage, whether they be lay or
cleric, are to be punished by the penalties of the same canons. Concubinage is not to be
allowed by the tolerance of superiors, or as an evil custom of a great number of sinners,
which should rather be called a corruption, or under any other excuse; but let those involved
be punished severely in accordance with the judgment of the law .

Moreover, for the good and peaceful government of cities and all places subject to the Roman
church, we renew the constitutions published some time ago by Giles, the well-remembered
bishop of Sabina, and we enjoin and command that they be kept without alteration .

So that the stain and disease of abominable simony may be driven out for ever not only from
the Roman curia but also from all christian rule, we renew the constitutions issued by our
predecessors, also in sacred councils, against simoniacs of this kind, and we prescribe that
they be observed unaltered. We wish the penalties they contain to be regarded as clearly
stated and included herein, and the offenders to be punished by our authority .

We rule and order that anyone who holds a benefice with or without the care of souls, if he
has not recited the divine office after six months from the date of his obtaining the benefice,
and any legitimate impediment has come to an end may not receive the revenues of his

444
benefices, on account of his omission and the length of time, but he is bound to spend them,
as being unjustly received, on the fabric of the benefices or on alms to the poor. If he
obstinately remains in such negligence beyond the said period, after a legitimate warning has
been given, let him be deprived of the benefice, since it is for the sake of the office that the
benefice is granted. He is to be understood as neglecting the office, so that he can be deprived
of his benefice, if he fails to recite it at least twice during fifteen days . However, in addition
to what has just been said, he will be obliged to offer to God an explanation for the said
omission. The penalty on those holding several benefices may be repeated as often as they are
proved to act contrary to these obligations .

The full disposal and administration of the revenues of cathedral and metropolitan churches,
monasteries and any other ecclesiastical benefices belong exclusively to us and the Roman
pontiff of the time, and to those who legally and canonically hold churches, monasteries and
benefices of this kind. Secular princes ought in no way to interpose themselves in the said
churches, monasteries and benefices, since all divine law also forbids it. For these reasons we
rule and command that the fruits and revenues of churches, monasteries and benefices ought
not to be sequestrated, held or detained in any way by any secular rulers, even if they be the
emperor, kings, queens, republics or other powers, or by their officials, or by judges, even
ecclesiastical ones, or by any other persons public or private, acting at the command of the
said emperor, kings, queens princes, republics or powers. Those who hold such churches,
monasteries and benefices ought not to be impeded — under the pretext of the restoration of
the fabric (unless permission is expressly given by the Roman pontiff of the time) or of alms-
giving or under any other guise or pretence — so that they cannot freely and without
restriction, as before, dispose of the fruits and revenues. If there have been sequestrations,
seizures or retentions, then restoration of the fruits and revenues must be made totally, freely,
and without exception or delay, to the prelates to whom they pertain by right and by law. If
they have been scattered and can nowhere be found, it is our will, supported by the penalty of
excommunication or ecclesiastical interdict to be automatically incurred by the lands and
domain of the ruler, that, after a just estimate has been made about them, the said prelates
receive satisfaction through those who carried out the said sequestrations, applications or
dispersals or who gave orders for them to be carried out; and further, that their goods and the
goods of those subject to them, wherever these may be found, may be seized and held if, after
being warned, they refuse to obey. Those who act in a contrary manner do so under pain of
both the penalties mentioned above and those of deprivation of the fiefs and privileges which
they have obtained for a time from us and from the Roman or other churches, and of those
issued against violators and oppressors of ecclesiastical liberties, including those in
extraordinary and other constitutions, even if they are unknown and perhaps not now in
actual use. We renew all these penalties as stated and included herein, we decree and declare
that they have perpetual force- and we will and order that sentence, judgment and
interpretation are to be given according to them by all judges, even cardinals of the holy
Roman church, with all power of judging and declaring otherwise being removed and taken
away from them .

445
Since no power over ecclesiastical persons is granted to lay people by either divine or human
law, we renew the constitution of pope Boniface VIII, our predecessor of happy memory,
which begins Felicis, and that of pope Clement V which begins Si quis suadente, and also any
other apostolic ordinance, however issued, in favour of ecclesiastical freedom and against its
violators . Moreover, the penalties against those who dare to do such things, contained in the
bull In coena Domini3, are to remain in force. It has similarly been forbidden in the Lateran
and general councils, under penalty of excommunication, for kings, princes, dukes, counts,
barons, republics and any other authorities exercising control over kingdoms, provinces,
cities and territories, to impose and exact money contributions, tithes and other similar
imposts on or from clerics, prelates and any other persons of the church, or even to receive
them from those who freely offer them and give their consent. Those who openly or covertly
provide help, favour or advice in the aforesaid matters automatically incur the penalty of
immediate excommunication; and states, communities and universities which are at fault in
any way on this point are by this very fact to be subject to ecclesiastical interdict. Prelates
also, who have given consent to the foregoing without the clear permission of the Roman
pontiff, automatically incur the penalty of excommunication and removal from office. For
these reasons we decree and ordain that henceforth those who attempt such things, even if (as
mentioned) they are qualified, in addition to the aforesaid penalties which we renew and wish
them to incur by the very fact of their contravention, are to be regarded as incapable of all
legal acts and as intestable .

Sorcery, by means of enchantments, divinations, superstitions and the invoking of demons, is

prohibited by both civil laws and the sanctions of the sacred canons. We rule, decree and
ordain that clerics who are found guilty of these things are to be branded with disgrace at the
judgment of superiors. If they do not desist, they are to be demoted, forced into a monastery
for a period of time that is to be fixed by the will of the superior, and deprived of their
benefices and ecclesiastical offices. Lay men and women, however, are to be subject to
excommunication and the other penalties of both civil and canon law. All false Christians and
those with evil sentiments towards the faith, of whatever race or nation they may be, as well
as heretics and those stained with some taint of heresy, or Judaizers, are to be totally excluded
from the company of Christ’s faithful and expelled from any position, especially from the
Roman curia, and punished with an appropriate penalty. For these reasons we rule that
proceedings are to be taken against them, with careful enquiry everywhere and particularly in
the said curia, by means of judges appointed by us, and that those accused and rightly
convicted of these offences are to be punished with fitting penalties; and we wish that those
who have relapsed are to be dealt with without any hope of pardon or forgiveness .

Since these constitutions and ordinances which we are now establishing concern life, morals
and ecclesiastical discipline, it is fitting that our own and other officials, both those in the
Roman curia and those everywhere else, should be models of and bound to them, and it is our
will and decision that they be held to their observance by an inviolable bond. Lest these
constitutions seem at any point to detract from other censures and penalties imposed by
ancient laws and constitutions against those acting otherwise, even though they have been
thought out and issued as a development, we further declare that nothing whatever has been

446
taken away from common law or from other decrees of Roman pontiffs by these regulations
and ordinances. Indeed, if any parts of them have lost their force through the evil corruption
of times, places and people, or through abuse, or for any other unapprovable reason, we here
and now renew and confirm them and order them to be observed without alteration . We
decree and declare that these our well-pondered constitutions are to be of binding force from
two months after publication, and we strictly forbid anyone to presume to make glosses or
commentaries or interpretations on them without special permission from us or the apostolic
see. Anyone who rashly dares to oppose this, incurs the penalty of immediate
excommunication by this very act . Let nobody therefore … If anyone however.. .

SESSION 10

4 May 1515

[On the reform of credit organisations (Montes pietatis)]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. We ought to give first place in our pastoral office, among our many
anxious cares, to ensuring that what is healthy, praiseworthy, in keeping with the christian
faith, and in harmony with good customs may be not only clarified in our time but also made
known to future generations, and that what could offer matter for scandal be totally cut down,
wholly uprooted and nowhere permitted to spread, while at the same time permitting those
seeds to be planted in the Lord’s field and in the vineyard of the Lord of hosts which can
spiritually feed the minds of the faithful, once the cockle has been uprooted and the wild
olive cut down. Indeed, we have learnt that among some of our dear sons who were masters
in theology and doctors of civil and canon law, there has recently broken out again a
particular controversy, not without scandal and disquiet for ordinary people, with regard to
the relief of the poor by means of loans made to them by public authorities. They are
popularly called credit organisations and have been set up in many cities of Italy by the
magistrates of the cities and by other Christians, to assist by this kind of loan the lack of
resources among the poor lest they be swallowed up by the greed of usurers They have been
praised and encouraged by holy men, preachers of God’s word, and approved and confirmed
also by a number of our predecessors as popes, to the effect that the said credit organisations
are not out of harmony with christian dogma, even though there is controversy and different
opinions regarding the question .

Some of these masters and doctors say that the credit organisations are unlawful. After a
fixed period of time has passed, they say, those attached to these organisations demand from
the poor to whom they make a loan so much per pound in addition to the capital sum. For this
reason they cannot avoid the crime of usury or injustice, that is to say a clearly defined evil,
since our Lord, according to Luke the evangelist, has bound us by a clear command that we
ought not to expect any addition to the capital sum when we grant a loan. For, that is the real
meaning of usury: when, from its use, a thing which produces nothing is applied to the
acquiring of gain and profit without any work, any expense or any risk. The same masters and

447
doctors add that in these credit organisations neither commutative nor distributive justice is
observed, even though contracts of this kind, if they are to be duly approved, ought not to go
beyond the bounds of justice. They endeavour to prove this on the grounds that the expenses
of the maintenance of these organisations, which ought to be paid by many persons (as they
say), are extracted only from the poor to whom a loan is made; and at the same time certain
other persons are given more than their necessary and moderate expenses (as they seem to
imply), not without an appearance of evil and an encouragement to wrongdoing .

But many other masters and doctors say the opposite and, both in writing and in speech, unite
in speaking in many of the schools in Italy in defence of so great a benefit and one so
necessary to the state, on the grounds that nothing is being sought nor hoped for from the loan
as such. Nevertheless, they argue, for the compensation of the organisations — that is, to
defray the expenses of those employed and of all the things necessarily pertaining to the
upkeep of the said organisations — they may lawfully ask and receive, in addition to the
capital, a moderate and necessary sum from those deriving benefit from the loan, provided
that no profit is made therefrom. This is in virtue of the rule of law that the person who
experiences benefit ought also to meet the charge, especially when there is added the support
of the apostolic authority. They point out that this opinion was approved by our predecessors
of happy memory, the Roman pontiffs Paul II, Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII, Alexander VI and
Julius II, as well as by saints and persons devoted to God and held in high esteem for their
holiness, and has been preached in sermons about the gospel truth .

We wish to make suitable arrangements on this question (in accord with what we have
received from on high). We commend the zeal for justice displayed by the former group,
which desires to prevent the opening up of the chasm of usury, as well as the love of piety
and truth shown by the latter group, which wishes to aid the poor, and indeed the earnestness
of both sides. Since, therefore, this whole question appears to concern the peace and
tranquility of the whole christian state, we declare and define, with the approval of the sacred
council, that the above-mentioned credit organisations, established by states and hitherto
approved and confirmed by the authority of the apostolic see, do not introduce any kind of
evil or provide any incentive to sin if they receive, in addition to the capital, a moderate sum
for their expenses and by way of compensation, provided it is intended exclusively to defray
the expenses of those employed and of other things pertaining (as mentioned) to the upkeep
of the organisations, and provided that no profit is made therefrom. They ought not, indeed,
to be condemned in any way. Rather, such a type of lending is meritorious and should be
praised and approved. It certainly should not be considered as usurious; it is lawful to preach
the piety and mercy of such organisations to the people, including the indulgences granted for
this purpose by the holy apostolic see; and in the future, with the approval of the apostolic
see, other similar credit organisations can be established. It would, however, be much more
perfect and more holy if such credit organisations were completely gratuitous: that is, if those
establishing them provided definite sums with which would be paid, if not the total expenses,
then at least half the wages of those employed by the organisations, with the result that the
debt of the poor would be lightened thereby. We therefore decree that Christ’s faithful ought

448
to be prompted, by a grant of substantial indulgences, to give aid to the poor by providing the
sums of which we have spoken, m order to meet the costs of the organisations .

It is our will that all religious as well as ecclesiastical and secular persons who henceforth
dare to preach or argue otherwise by word or in writing, contrary to the sense of the present
declaration and sanction, incur the punishment of immediate excommunication,
notwithstanding any kind of privilege, things said above, constitutions and orders of the
apostolic see, and anything else to the contrary .

[Bull against exempt persons, in which are included some points regarding ecclesiastical
liberty and episcopal dignity]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Presiding over the government of the universal church (the Lord so
disposing), we readily aim to secure the advantages of subjects, in conformity with the
obligation of our pastoral office. In order to preserve the church’s freedom, to remove
scandals, to establish harmony, and to foster peace between prelates of churches and those
subject to them, we apply the effort of apostolic care in proportion as experience shows that
disagreement between such groups will be harmful. Thus we are glad to regulate the indults
and privileges granted to the same subjects by both our predecessors and the apostolic see, at
the expense of the prelates concerned, in such a way scandals do not arise from them, or
material be provided to anyone for fostering ill-will, or ecclesiastical persons be somehow
drawn away from the benefit of obedience as well as from perseverance in the divine service .

Recently, indeed, a trustworthy report has reached our ears that canons of patriarchal,
metropolitan, cathedral and collegiate churches and other secular clerics are making too many
claims, on account of which they give rise to considerable ill-report concerning themselves,
have an injurious effect on others from their claims of exemption and freedom obtained from
the apostolic see, evade the corrections and regulations of the ordinaries, and shun their
courts and judgments. Some of them, in the hope of gaining freedom from punishment for
their deviations by the privilege of exemption, do not fear to commit offences which they
would certainly have never committed if they did not believe that they were protected by
their exemption. The result is that, on account of the brashness of those trusting that they will
obtain freedom from punishment for their offences, because of the privilege of exemption,
they commit outrages on many occasions as a result of which the church is very much
maligned and serious scandals arise, especially when those responsible for correcting and
punishing them fail to do so. In our wish to provide the necessary remedy lest, on the above
pretext, their faults remain unpunished, we rule, with the approval of the sacred council, that
henceforth those to whom the correction and punishment of exempt persons has been
committed by the apostolic see, are to attend carefully to these duties and diligently to carry
out the obligations of the office entrusted to them. As soon as it is legally clear to them that
exempt persons have been at fault, they are to punish them in such a way that they are
restrained from their acts of arrogance by fear of a penalty and so that others, frightened by
their example, will rightly shrink from committing similar faults .

449
If they are neglectful in this matter, the diocesan and other local ordinaries are to warn such
persons, who have the responsibility for correcting those who are exempt, that they should
punish such exempt persons who have committed faults and are guilty and should censure
them within a suitable time, which is to be determined by the judgment of those giving the
warning. The warning is to be given in person (if the resources and standing of the person
giving it make this possible), or otherwise, if there should be no clearly recognised judge in
the region of the exempt persons, they are to warn those whom they consider to be
responsible for the above by means of a public edict, which is to be fixed to the doors of the
cathedrals or other churches where such judges of exempt persons may happen to reside, or if
there are no judges of the exempt persons there, then where the exempt persons have
committed the faults. If those who have received the warning are negligent in this matter, and
do not trouble or have refused to carry it out, then, so that they may be penalised for their
fault, they are to be deprived of hearing the inquiry for that time and are henceforth not to be
involved in any way in such inquiries. Then the diocesan and other local ordinaries can
proceed, on our authority, either to an inquiry or by means of an accusation, excluding the
use of torture, against such offending and criminous persons and may personally examine the
witnesses. They shall see that the process itself — regarding which, by reason of the
solemnity of the law, we forbid anything to be alleged or said except on account of an
omitted citation (provided the offence has been correctly proved elsewhere) — is held, closed
and sealed by them and quickly despatched to the apostolic see, either by themselves or by
another messenger, so as to be carefully examined by the apostolic see, either by the Roman
pontiff or by someone else to whom he shall commit the matter; at the expense of the
offending exempt persons, including the expenses incurred in the process itself, which
expenses the ordinaries can compel the persons who have been investigated and charged to
pay. And those found worthy of blame, either to the extent of being condemned or on account
of there being sufficient evidence to justify recourse to torture so that the truth might be
extracted, are to be returned to the diocesans or ordinaries so that these may lawfully proceed
further, on our authority, in the inquiry or the accusation and may terminate the case
according to what is just .

Notaries of the apostolic see, whose office is known to have been instituted by pope Clement
I of happy memory at the beginnings of the primitive church, for the purpose of investigating
and recording the acts of saints, and who have been elevated to the office of protonotary and
wear an official garment and a rochet, together with other officials who are attached to us and
to the said see, when they are actually engaged in their duties, are exempt from all
jurisdiction of ordinaries in both civil and criminal matters. Other notaries, however, not
wearing the dress of the protonotariate, unless they have adopted it within three months after
the publication of this present document, both themselves and others due to be elevated to the
office in the future who do not regularly wear the official dress and a rochet, as well as other
officials, our own and those of the said see, when not actually engaged in their duties, are to
be subject to the jurisdiction of the said diocesans and ordinaries in both criminal and civil
cases which involve sums not exceeding twenty-five golden ducats of the treasury. But in
civil cases involving sums exceeding such an amount, they are to enjoy full exemption and to

450
be totally excluded from the jurisdiction of the said diocesans and ordinaries. We also judge it
worthy and appropriate that among the personal staff of cardinals of the holy Roman church,
only those shall enjoy the privilege of exemption who belong to the household staff and are
regular sharers of its board, or have been sent by the same cardinals to carry out their
personal business, or perhaps are absent for a time from the Roman curia to refresh
themselves. But for others, even when they are registered as belonging to the personal staff,
the privilege of staff membership in no way entitles them to be outside the control of their
diocesans and ordinaries .

By the constitution published at the council of Vienne which begins Attendentes, there was
given to the aforesaid diocesans full faculties to visit once a year the convents of nuns, in
their dioceses, that are immediately subject to the apostolic see. We renew this constitution
and we prescribe and command that it be strictly kept, notwithstanding any exemptions and
privileges. By the foregoing, moreover, the same diocesans and ordinaries are not to be
prejudiced by cases in which jurisdiction over exempt persons has been granted by law.
Rather, we define that henceforth exemptions granted for a time without reasonable cause,
and without any citation of those involved, are of no force or value .

Since order in the church is confused if the jurisdiction of each person is not preserved, we
rule and ordain, in an effort to support the jurisdiction of ordinaries (so far as we can with
God’s favour), to impose more quickly an end to lawsuits, and to restrict the immoderate
expenses of litigants, that individual cases, spiritual, civil and mixed, involving in any way an
ecclesiastical forum and concerned with benefices — provided that the actual benefices have
not been under a general reservation and the incomes, rents and produce of the individual
benefices do not surpass in value, by common reckoning, twenty-four golden ducats of the
treasury — shall in the first instance be examined and settled outside the Roman curia and
before the local ordinaries. Thus, nobody may appeal prior to a definitive sentence, nor may
an appeal (if made) be in any way admitted, except from an interlocutory judgment which
may have the force of a definitive sentence, or by way of a complaint which in no way
concerns the main business. For, redress cannot be obtained from a definitive sentence by
means of an appeal, unless one of the litigants does not dare to go to law before the ordinary
because of a genuine fear of his adversary’s power, or for some other acceptable and
honourable reason which must be at least partially proved otherwise than by his personal
oath. In these exceptional cases, the appeal can be begun, investigated and concluded in the
Roman curia, even in the first instance . In other cases, the appeals and the commissions of
these and other such suits, and whatever follows from them, shall henceforth be of no force or
value. The judges and conservators appointed by the apostolic see, if they are not graduates in
either civil or canon law, are obliged, on being asked by the parties concerned or by one of
them, to take an assessor who is not under suspicion with the parties and to judge the case
according to his report .

We have learnt, by many and frequent reports, that very many churches and the bishops
presiding over them, on both sides of the Alps, are being troubled and disturbed in their
jurisdictions, rights and lordships by esquires, princes and nobles. These, under colour of a

451
right of patronage which they pretend to hold in ecclesiastical benefices, without the support
of any apostolic privileges, or of collations or letters from the ordinaries, or even of any
pretence of a title, presume to confer benefices not only on clerics but also on layfolk; to
punish at their own whim priests and clerics who are at fault; to remove, purloin and usurp in
an arbitrary way, either directly or by ordering others, the tithes of everything on which they
are obliged by law to pay, as well as tithes belonging to cathedrals, and other things which
pertain to diocesan law and jurisdiction and are the exclusive concern of bishops; to forbid
such tithes and any fruits to be taken out of their cities, lands and territories; to seize and
unjustly hold fiefs, possessions and lands; to induce and compel, by threats, terror and other
indirect means, the granting to them of fiefs and goods of churches and the conferring of
ecclesiastical benefices on persons nominated by them; and not only to permit but even
expressly to command very many other losses, damages and injuries to be inflicted on the
aforesaid clerics and churches and their prelates .

We take thought, then, that no power has been granted to lay people over clerics and
ecclesiastics, or over property belonging to the church, and that it is right and just that laws
should be made against those who refuse to observe this . We also consider how much such
actions detract, with disastrous results which must be condemned, not only from the honour
of ourself and the apostolic see but also from the peaceful and prosperous condition of
churchmen. We desire too, to restrain from thoughtless acts of rashness, not so much by new
penalties as by a renewed fear of existing ones that should be applied, those whom the
rewards of virtues do not induce to observe laws. We therefore renew each and all of the
constitutions hitherto issued regarding the payment of tithes; against violators and seizers of
churches; against fire-raisers and pillagers of fields; against those seizing and holding
cardinals of the holy Roman church, our venerable brother bishops and other persons of the
church, both secular and regular, and unlawfully taking over in any way their jurisdiction and
rights, or disturbing or molesting them in the exercise of their jurisdiction, or presumptuously
forcing them to confer ecclesiastical benefices on persons named by them, or to dispose of
them in some other way at their arbitrary choice, or to grant or otherwise sell fiefs and goods
of the church in perpetual tenure, against making regulations in conflict with ecclesiastical
liberty; against providing help, advice and support for the above practices. Since these acts
are not merely opposed to law but are also in the highest degree insulting and contrary to
ecclesiastical liberty, we therefore, in order that we may be able to give an honest account to
God of the office entrusted to us, earnestly urge in the Lord, by fatherly sentiments and
counsels, the emperor, kings, princes, dukes, marquises, counts, barons, and others of
whatever other nobility, pre-eminence, sovereignty, power, excellence or dignity they may
be, and we command them by virtue of holy obedience, to observe the foregoing constitutions
and to make them inviolably observed by their subjects, notwithstanding any customs
whatever to the contrary, if they wish to avoid the divine displeasure and the fitting reaction
of the apostolic see. We decree that appointments made in the above-mentioned way to the
said benefices are null and void, and those making use of them are rendered incapable of
obtaining other ecclesiastical benefices until they have been dispensed in the matter by the
apostolic see .

452
We have also been carefully reflecting that, after Christ’s ascension into heaven, the apostles
assigned bishops to each city and diocese, and the holy Roman church became established
throughout the world by inviting these same bishops to a role of responsibility, and by
gradually sharing the burdens by means of patriarchs, primates, archbishops and bishops; and
that it has also been laid down by the sacred canons that provincial councils and episcopal
synods ought to be established by such persons for the correction of morals, the settlement
and limiting of controversies, and the observance of God’s commandments, in order that
corruptions may be corrected and those neglecting to do these things may be subjected to
canonical penalties. In our desire that these canons be faithfully observed, since it is right for
us to be interested in what concerns the christian state, we place a strict obligation on the said
patriarchs, primates, archbishops and bishops, in order that they may be able to render to God
a worthy account of the office entrusted to them, that they order the canons, councils and
synods to be observed inviolably, notwithstanding any privilege whatsoever. Besides, we
order that henceforth a provincial council is to be held every three years, and we decree that
even exempt persons are to attend them, notwithstanding any privelege or custom to the
contrary. Those who are negligent in these matters are to know that they will incur penalties
contained in the same canons .

In order that respect for the papal dignity might be preserved, it was determined by the
constitution issued at the council of Vienne, which begins In plerisque that no persons,
especially no religious, may be provided to cathedral churches which are deprived of
temporal goods, without which spiritual things cannot exist for long, and which lack both
clergy and christian people. We renew this constitution, and we will and command that it
must be observed inviolably unless we shall judge otherwise for some just reason to be
approved in our secret consistory .

We decree that anything attempted against the foregoing, or any part thereof, is null and void,
notwithstanding any constitution or privilege to the contrary . Let nobody therefore … If
anyone however.. .

[On printing books]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Among the anxieties resting on our shoulders we come back with constant
thought to how we can bring back to the path of truth those going astray, and gain them for
God (by his grace working in us) . This is what we truly seek after with eagerness; to this we
unremittingly direct our mind’s desires; and over this we watch with anxious earnestness .

It is certainly possible to obtain without difficulty some learning by reading books. The skill
of book-printing has been invented, or rather improved and perfected, with God’s assistance,
particularly in our time. Without doubt it has brought many benefits to men and women
since, at small expense, it is possible to possess a great number of books. These permit minds
to devote themselves very readily to scholarly studies. Thus there can easily result,
particularly among Catholics, men competent in all kinds of languages; and we desire to see

453
in the Roman church, in good supply, men of this type who are capable of instructing even
unbelievers in the holy commandments, and of gathering them for their salvation into the
body of the faithful by the teaching of the christian faith . Complaints from many persons,
however, have reached our ears and those of the apostolic see. In fact, some printers have the
boldness to print and sell to the public, in different parts of the world, books — some
translated into Latin from Greek, Hebrew, Arabic and Chaldean as well as some issued
directly in Latin or a vernacular language — containing errors opposed to the faith as well as
pernicious views contrary to the christian religion and to the reputation of prominent persons
of rank. The readers are not edified. Indeed, they lapse into very great errors not only in the
realm of faith but also in that of life and morals . This has often given rise to various
scandals, as experience has taught, and there is daily the fear that even greater scandals are
developing .

That is why, to prevent what has been a healthy discovery for the glory of God, the advance
of the faith, and the propagation of good skills, from being misused for the opposite purposes
and becoming an obstacle to the salvation of Christians, we have judged that our care must be
exercised over the printing of books, precisely so that thorns do not grow up with the good
seed or poisons become mixed with medicines. It is our desire to provide a suitable remedy
for this danger, with the approval of this sacred council, so that the business of book-printing
may go ahead with greater satisfaction the more that there is employed in the future, with
greater zeal and prudence, a more attentive supervision. We therefore establish and ordain
that henceforth, for all future time, no one may dare to print or have printed any book or other
writing of whatever kind in Rome or in any other cities and dioceses, without the book or
writings having first been closely examined, at Rome by our vicar and the master of the
sacred palace, in other cities and dioceses by the bishop or some other person who knows
about the printing of books and writings of this kind and who has been delegated to this
office by the bishop in question, and also by the inquisitor of heresy for the city or diocese
where the said printing is to take place, and unless the books or writings have been approved
by a warrant signed in their own hand, which must be given, under pain of excommunication,
freely and without delay .

In addition to the printed books being seized and publicly burnt, payment of a hundred ducats
to the fabric of the basilica of the prince of the apostles in Rome, without hope of relief, and
suspension for a whole year from the possibility of engaging in printing, there is to be
imposed upon anyone presuming to act otherwise the sentence of excommunication. Finally,
if the offender’s contumacy increases, he is to be punished with all the sanctions of the law,
by his bishop or by our vicar, in such a way that others will have no incentive to try to follow
his example. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however.. .

[On setting a date for those acknowledging the Pragmatic Sanction]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Among other matters to be carried through in this sacred council, we
especially desire to make known and proclaim what must be decided and announced

454
concerning the sanction called the Pragmatic, which was issued by a number of leaders of the
French nation, both clerics and laymen as well as nobles and others supporting them. This is
in accordance with the wishes of our predecessor pope Julius II, of happy memory, who
summoned this council. The prelates and other clergy and the aforesaid laity have been
summoned on several occasions to appear before both our said predecessor, Julius, and
ourself; and their obstinacy has quite often been alleged or been the subject of accusations in
the said council. It was subsequently alleged on behalf of the prelates, clerics and laymen,
including nobles, and their said supporters, who were legitimately summoned (as just stated)
for this purpose, that there was no route which would allow them to travel in safety to the
said council. In order that they may not be able to make this excuse, we have taken measures
for a comprehensive safe-conduct to be granted and conveyed to them by the Genoans,
through whose territory they can travel in safety to the Roman curia, so that they may be able
to bring forward the views which they may wish to present in defence of this Pragmatic
Sanction .

To prevent them being able to bring up some further point against what has been set out and
to claim a legitimate ignorance, and in order that their obstinacy may be overcome, we once
again, with the approval of the sacred council, give notice and warning, regarding a final and
definitive dead-line, to the clergy and laity, including nobles, prelates and their supporters,
and to colleges of clerics and of seculars, that they must lawfully assemble (putting aside
every excuse and delaying action) before I October next. We are extending the dead-line, for
the aforesaid reasons and in order to remove all excuses, to the said I October, by way of a
final postponement; and we grant and assign this anew. Once the dead-line has passed,
however, proceedings will go forward at the next session to other matters and to the
conclusion of the said business, even by means of a definitive sentence, notwithstanding their
obstinacy and refusal to appear. This next eleventh session we summon for these and many
other useful matters. with the approval of the sacred council, for 14 December after the next
feast day of St Lucy. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however .. .

SESSION 11

19 December 1516

[On how to preach]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Under the protection of the supreme majesty by whose ineffable
providence things in heaven and on earth are guided, as we carry out the office of watchman
over the Lord’s flock committed to us, insofar as this is granted to our weakness, we reflect
within ourselves in great depth that, among many other important matters, the office of
preaching is also our concern. Preaching is of the first importance, very necessary and of
great effect and utility in the church, so long as it is being exercised rightly, from genuine
charity towards God and our neighbour, and according to the precepts and examples of the
holy fathers, who contributed a great deal to the church by publicly professing such things at

455
the time of the establishment and propagation of the faith . For, our redeemer first did and
taught, and by his command and example, the college of twelve apostles — the heavens alike
proclaiming the glory of the true God through all the earth — led back from darkness the
whole human race, which was held by the old bondage under the yoke of sin, and guided it to
the light of eternal salvation. The apostles and then their successors propagated far and wide
and rooted deeply the word itself through all the earth and unto the ends of the world.
Therefore those who are now carrying this burden ought to remember and frequently reflect
that they in turn, with respect to this office of preaching, are entering into and maintaining
that succession of the author and founder of this office, Jesus Christ our most holy redeemer,
of Peter and Paul, and of the other apostles and disciples of the Lord .

We have learnt from trustworthy sources that some preachers in our times (we record this
with sorrow) do not attend to the fact that they are carrying out the office of those we have
named, of the holy doctors of the church and of others professing sacred theology, who, ever
standing by Christians and confronting false prophets striving to overturn the faith, have
shown that the church militant remains unimpaired by her very nature; and that they ought to
adopt only what the people who flock to their sermons will find useful, by means of
reflection and practical application, for rooting out vices, praising virtues and saving the souls
of the faithful. Reliable report has it, rather, that they are preaching many and various things
contrary to the teachings and examples which we have mentioned, sometimes with scandal to
the people. This fact influences our attitude very deeply when we reflect within ourself that
these preachers, unmindful of their duty, are striving in their sermons not for the benefit of
the hearers but rather for their own self-display. They flatter the idle ears of some people who
seem to have already reached a state that would make true the words of the Apostle writing to
Timothy: For, a time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching but, having
itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will
turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths . These preachers make no
attempt whatever to lead back the deceived and empty minds of such people to the path of
right and truth. Indeed, they involve them in even greater errors. Without any reverence for
the testimony of canon law, indeed contrary to canonical censures, twisting the sense of
scripture in many places, often giving it rash and false interpretations, they preach what is
false; they threaten, describe and assert to be present, totally unsupported by legitimate proofs
and merely following their own private interpretation, various terrors, menaces and many
other evils, which they say are about to arrive and are already growing; they very often
introduce to their congregations certain futile and worthless ideas and other matters of this
nature; and, what is more appalling, they dare to claim that they possess this information
from the light of eternity and by the guidance and grace of the holy Spirit .

When these preachers spread this medley of fraud and error, backed by the false testimony of
alleged miracles, the congregations whom they ought to be carefully instructing in the gospel
message, and retaining and preserving in the true faith, are withdrawn by their sermons from
the teaching and commands of the universal church. When they turn aside from the official
sacred teachings, which they ought particularly to follow, they separate and move far from
salvation those who listen to them. For, as a result of these and similar activities, the less

456
educated people, as being more exposed to deceit, are very easily led into manifold errors, as
they wander from the path of salvation and from obedience to the Roman church. Gregory,
therefore, who was outstanding in this task, moved by the warmth of his charity, gave a
strong exhortation and warning to preachers that, when about to speak, they approach the
people with prudence and caution lest, caught up in the enthusiasm of their oratory, they
entangle the hearts of their hearers with verbal errors as if with nooses, and while perhaps
they wish to appear wise, in their delusion they foolishly tear asunder the sinews of the
hoped-for virtue. For, the meaning of words is often lost when the hearts of the audience are
bruised by too urgent and careless forms of speech .

Indeed, in no other way do these preachers cause greater harm and scandal to the less
educated than when they preach on what should be left unspoken or when they introduce
error by teaching what is false and useless. Since such things are known to be totally opposed
to this holy and divinely instituted religion, as being novelties and foreign to it, it is surely
just for them to be examined seriously and carefully, lest they cause scandal for the christian
people and ruin for the souls of their authors and of others. We therefore desire, in accord
with the word of the prophet, Who makes harmony dwell in the house, to restore that
uniformity which has lost esteem, and to preserve such as remains, insofar as we can with
God’s help, in the holy church of God, which by divine providence we preside over and
which is indeed one, preaches and worships one God and firmly and sincerely professes one
faith. We wish that those who preach the word of God to the people be such that God’s
church suffers no scandal from their preaching. If they are amenable to correction, let them
abstain in future from these matters into which they have recently ventured. For it is clear
that, in addition to the points which we have mentioned, a number of them are no longer
preaching the way of the Lord in virtue and are not expounding the gospel, as is their duty,
but rather invented miracles, new and false prophecies and other frivolities hardly
distinguishable from old wives’ tales. Such things give rise to great scandal since no account
is taken of devotion and authority and of its condemnations and rejections. There are those
who make attempts to impress and win support by bawling everywhere, not sparing even
those who are honoured with pontifical rank and other prelates of the church, to whom they
should rather be showing honour and reverence. They attack their persons and their state of
life, boldly and without discrimination, and commit other acts of this kind. Our aim is that so
dangerous and contagious an evil and so mortal a disease may be thoroughly wiped out and
that its consequences may be so completely swept away that not even its memory remains .

We decree and ordain, with the approval of the sacred council, that nobody -whether a
secular cleric or a member of any of the mendicant orders or someone with the right to preach
by law or custom or privilege or otherwise — may be admitted to carry out this office unless
he has first been examined with due care by his superior, which is a responsibility that we lay
on the superior’s conscience, and unless he is found to be fit and suitable for the task by his
upright behaviour, age, doctrine, honesty, prudence and exemplary life. Wherever he goes to
preach, he must provide a guarantee to the bishop and other local ordinaries concerning his
examination and competence, by means of the original or other letters from the person who
examined and approved him. We command all who undertake this task of preaching, or will

457
later undertake it, to preach and expound the gospel truth and holy scripture in accordance
with the exposition, interpretation and commentaries that the church or long use has approved
and has accepted for teaching until now, and will accept in the future, without any addition
contrary to its true meaning or in conflict with it. They are always to insist on the meanings
which are in harmony with the words of sacred scripture and with the interpretations,
properly and wisely understood, of the doctors mentioned above. They are in no way to
presume to preach or declare a fixed time for future evils, the coming of antichrist or the
precise day of judgment; for Truth says, it is not for us to know times or seasons which the
Father has fixed by his own authority. Let it be known that those who have hitherto dared to
declare such things are liars, and that because of them not a little authority has been taken
away from those who preach the truth .

We are placing a restriction on each and all of the said clerics, secular and regular and others,
of whatever status, rank or order, who undertake this task. In their public sermons they are
not to keep on predicting some future events as based on the sacred writings, nor presume to
declare that they know them from the holy Spirit or from divine revelation, nor that strange
and empty predictions are matters which must be firmly asserted or held in some other way.
Rather, at the command of the divine word, let them expound and proclaim the gospel to
every creature, rejecting vices and commending virtues. Fostering everywhere the peace and
mutual love so much commended by our Redeemer, let them not rend the seamless garment
of Christ and let them refrain from any scandalous detraction of bishops, prelates and other
superiors and of their state of life. Yet these they rebuke and hurt before people generally,
including the laity, not only heedlessly and extravagantly but also by open and plain reproof,
with the names of the evildoers sometimes being stated by them .

Finally, we decree that the constitution of pope Clement of happy memory beginning
Religiosi, which we renew and approve by this present decree, must be observed by preachers
without alteration, so that, preaching in these terms for the people’s advantage and winning
them for the Lord, they may deserve to gain interest on the talent received from him and to
win his grace and glory. But if the Lord reveals to certain of them, by some inspiration, some
future events in the church of God, as he promises by the prophet Amos and as the apostle
Paul, the chief of preachers, says, Do not quench the Spirit, do not despise prophesying, we
have no wish for them to be counted with the other group of story-tellers and liars or to be
otherwise hindered. For, as Ambrose bears witness, the grace of the Spirit himself is being
extinguished if fervour in those beginning to speak is quietened by contradiction. In that case,
a wrong is certainly done to the holy Spirit. The matter is important inasmuch as credence
must not be easily given to every spirit and, as the Apostle states, the spirits have to be tested
to see whether they come from God. It is therefore our will that as from now, by common
law, alleged inspirations of this kind, before they are published, or preached to the people, are
to be understood as reserved for examination by the apostolic see. If it is impossible to do this
without danger of delay, or some pressing need suggests other action, then, keeping the same
arrangement, notice is to be given to the local ordinary so that, after he has summoned three
or four knowledgeable and serious men and carefully examined the matter with them, they

458
may grant permission if this seems to them to be appropriate. We lay the responsibility for
this decision on their consciences .

If any persons dare to carry through anything contrary to any of the above, it is our will that,
in addition to the punishments set down against such persons by law, they incur the penalty
of excommunication from which, except at the imminent approach of death, they can be
absolved only by the Roman pontiff . In order that others may not be urged on by their
example to try similar acts, we decree that the office of preaching is forbidden to such
persons for ever; notwithstanding constitutions, ordinances, privileges, indults and apostolic
letters for religious orders and the aforesaid persons, including those mentioned in Mare
magnum, even if perchance they have been approved, renewed or even granted anew by us,
none of which in this matter do we wish to support at any point in their favour. Let nobody
therefore … If anyone however.. .

[Bull containing agreements between the pope and the most christian king of France, on the
Pragmatic]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. In accord with the dispensation of the divine mercy by which kings reign
and princes rule, established as we are despite our lack of merit in the lofty watch-tower of
the apostolate and set over nations and kingdoms, we ponder how permanent force and effect
may be given to the things which have been granted, carried out, established, ordained,
decreed and done by our praiseworthy and prudent arrangement, in union with our venerable
brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church, for the wholesome and peaceful
government of kingdoms and for the peace and justice of peoples, especially with regard to
rulers who are well-deserving of the catholic faith, the christian state and the apostolic see.
Nevertheless, we sometimes add the force of our renewed approval to such things, with the
approval of the sacred council, so that these things may persist with greater steadiness in an
undamaged state the more often they are strengthened by our authority as well as by the
protection of a general council. We readily supply effective care for the preservation of such
things in order that the kings and peoples of the kingdoms in question, full of gladness in the
Lord because of such concessions, privileges, statutes and regulations, may rest together in
the sweetness of peace, quiet and delight and may persevere more fervently in their
accustomed devotion to the same see .

Recently, in order that the church, our spouse, might be kept in a holy union and use might be
made by Christ’s faithful of the sacred canons issued by Roman pontiffs and general
councils, we ordained and decreed, with the unanimous advice and consent of our said
brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church certain constitutions that had been treated
with our dearly beloved son in Christ, Francis, the most christian king of France, while we
were at Bologna with our curia, and which were to take the place of the Pragmatic Sanction
and the things contained in it for the sake of peace and harmony in the kingdom of France
and for the general and public advantage of the kingdom. These constitutions were carefully
examined by our said brothers, agreed upon with the said king on their advice, and accepted

459
by a legitimate procurator of the king. Their contents are contained rather fully in our letter
which follows, Primitiva illa ecclesia . . . {Msi 32, 948-963, Raccolta di concordati su
materie ecclesiastiche tra la Santa Sede e le autorita civili, edited by A. Mercati. I Rome.
1954. 233-25}

The letter has been published chiefly in order that continuing charity and unbroken peace
may abide in the mystical body, the church, and that any dissenting members may be re-
grafted into the body in a convenient way. The letter will be better observed according as it is
more clearly established that it has been approved and renewed by us, after mature and
healthy consideration, with the approval of the said Lateran council. Although there is no
need of another approval for the validity and reality of the same letter, however, to provide an
ampler surety so that observance may be firmer and abolition more difficult, greater strength
will be given to it by the approval of so many fathers. Therefore, with the approval of the
sacred Lateran council, by apostolic authority and fullness of power, we approve and renew,
and order to be observed and maintained in their totality and without change, the said letter
together with each and every statute, ordinance, decree, explanation, agreement, compact,
promise, wish, penalty, restraint and clause contained in it; especially the clause by which it
was our will that if the said king of France does not approve and ratify the aforesaid letter,
and each and every thing contained in it, within six months from the date of this present
letter, and does not arrange for the contents to be read, published, sworn to and registered,
like all other royal constitutions in his kingdom and in all other places and lordships of the
said kingdom, for all future time without limit, by all the prelates and other ecclesiastical
persons and courts of parlements, and if he does not convey to us, within the said six months,
letters patent or authentic written documents concerning each and all of the aforesaid matters
about the acceptance, reading, publication, oath and registration referred to, or does not
deliver them to our nuncio attached to the king, in order to be passed on by him to us, and
does not subsequently arrange for the letter to be read each year and effectively observed
without alteration exactly as other binding constitutions and ordinances of the king of France
have to be observed, then the letter itself and whatever follows from it are null and void and
of no force or value .

We decree and declare that the enduring effect only continues in the event of the said
ratification and approval, and not otherwise or in any other way, and that all who are included
in the said letter, regarding the observance of the actual letter and of each and every thing set
down in it, are bound and obliged by the censures and penalties and other things contained in
it, in accordance with the meaning and form of the same letter. This is notwithstanding
apostolic constitutions and ordinances, all those things which we did not wish to oppose in
the and any other things of any kind to the contrary. Let nobody If anyone however.. .

[On the abrogation of the Pragmatic Sanction]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. The eternal Father, who will never abandon his flock up to the close of the
age, so loved obedience, as the Apostle testifies, that to make expiation for the sin of

460
disobedience of the first parent, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death.
Moreover, when he was about to depart from the world to the Father, he established Peter and
his successors as his own representatives on the firmness of a rock. It is necessary to obey
them as the book of the Kings testifies, so that whoever does not obey, incurs death . As we
read in another place, the person who abandons the teaching of the Roman pontiff cannot be
within the church; for, on the authority of Augustine and Gregory, obedience alone is the
mother and protector of all virtues, it alone possessing the reward of faith. Therefore, on the
teaching of the same Peter, we ought to be careful that what has been introduced in due
season and for sound reasons by our predecessors the Roman pontiffs, especially in sacred
councils, for the defence of obedience of this kind, of ecclesiastical authority and freedom,
and of the apostolic see, should be duly discharged by our effort, devotion and diligence and
be brought to the desired conclusion. The souls of the simple, of whom we shall have to
render an account to God, are to be freed from the deceits and snares of the prince of
darkness. Indeed, our predecessor of happy memory, pope Julius II, summoned the sacred
Lateran council for lawful reasons which were then made clear, on the advice and with the
consent of his venerable brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church, among whom we
were then numbered. Together with the same sacred Lateran council, he pondered on the fact
that the corruption of the kingdom of France at Bourges, which they call the Pragmatic
Sanction, had been strong in the past and was still vigorous, resulting in very great danger
and scandal to souls, and a loss and cheapening of respect for the apostolic see. He therefore
entrusted discussion of the Pragmatic Sanction to specifically named cardinals and to the
prelates of a certain congregation .

Although the aforesaid sanction should clearly be subject to nullity on many counts, and was
supporting and preserving open schism, and therefore it could have been declared to be
essentially of no effect, null and invalid, without the need for any preceding formal citation,
yet, from a great sense of caution, our same predecessor Julius, by a public edict — which
was to be fixed to the church doors of Milan, Asti and Pavia, since there was then no safe
access to France -gave warning and summoned the prelates of France, the chapters of
churches and monasteries, the parlements and the layfolk supporting them and making use of
the said sanction, and each and all of the rest who were thinking that there was some
advantage for them in the foregoing individually or collectively, to appear before him and the
said council within a fixed period, which was then clearly stated, and to declare the reasons
why the aforesaid sanction, and its corruptive and abusive effect in matters touching on the
authority of the Roman church and the sacred canons, and on the violation of ecclesiastical
liberty should not be declared null and invalid. During the lifetime of the said Julius our
predecessor, various obstacles made it impossible to implement the summons or to discuss
fully the business of the abrogation, as had been his intention . After his death, however, the
summons, in full lawful form, was again brought forward by the promoter of the sacred
council, the procurator fiscal. Those summoned and not presenting themselves were accused
of obstinacy and the request was made for matters to be taken further. At the time we, who
have been brought to the highest peak of the apostolate by the favour of the divine mercy
after duly considering the whole situation, gave no response to the request, for definite
reasons. Later, when a variety of impediments were being alleged by the said persons who

461
had been warned and summoned, as to why they had been unable to present themselves at the
appointed time (as stated above), we postponed, several times at several sessions, with the
approval of the sacred council the date fixed by the said summons and warning to later dates,
which have now long gone past, so that all occasion for just excuse and complaint might be
taken away from them .

Although all obstacles have been removed and all dead-lines have passed nevertheless the
aforesaid persons, despite being warned and summoned, have not appeared before us and the
said council, nor taken any steps to appear, in order to bring forward a reason why the said
sanction should not be declared null. There is therefore no longer room for any excuse. They
can justly be regarded as obstinate; as indeed, by the demands of justice, we reckoned them to
be. We are therefore thinking seriously about this Pragmatic Sanction, or rather corruption, as
has been stated, which was issued at the time of the schism by those who did not have the
necessary power, and which is not at all in accord with the rest of the christian state or with
God’s holy church. It was revoked, made void and abolished by the most christian king of
France, Louis XI, of distinguished memory. It damages and lessens the authority, liberty and
dignity of the apostolic see. It completely removes the power of the Roman pontiff to provide
both cardinals of the holy Roman church, who work earnestly on behalf of the universal
church, and learned men, with churches, monasteries and other benefices, in accordance with
the demands of their status, even though such persons are numerous in the curia and it is by
their counsel that the authority and power of the apostolic see, the Roman pontiff and the
whole church is kept safe and its affairs guided and promoted into a prosperous state. Thus it
offers excuses to church prelates of the aforesaid faction for breaking and violating the sacred
nerve of obedience to ecclesiastical discipline and for setting up opposition against us and the
apostolic see, their mother, and it opens the way for them to attempt such things. Clearly it is
subject to nullity and is to be supported by no prop except of a temporary nature, or rather, of
a kind of tolerance. Our predecessors as Roman pontiffs, for all their high hopes expressed in
their own days, may have seemed to have tolerated this corruption and abuse, not being able
to confront it completely either because of the evil nature of the times or because they were
providing for it in some other way. We remember, however, that almost seventy years have
passed since the publication of this sanction of Bourges, and that no council has been
lawfully held within this time except the present Lateran council. Since we have been placed
in this council by the Lord’s disposition, we therefore judge and resolve, with Augustine as
our witness, that we cannot refrain or desist from the eradication and total annulment of the
same vile sanction if we are to avoid disgrace to ourself and to the many fathers assembled in
the present council as well as to avoid danger to our own soul and those of the above-
mentioned persons using it .

Just as pope Leo I, our predecessor of holy memory, whose footsteps we readily follow
insofar as we can, gave orders and brought to pass that the measures which had been rashly
carried out at the second synod of Ephesus, contrary to justice and the catholic faith, were
later revoked at the council of Chalcedon, for the sake of the constancy of the same faith, so
we too judge that we cannot, or ought not to, withdraw from or abandon the revocation of so
evil a sanction and its contents if we are to preserve our own honour, and that of the church,

462
with a safe conscience. The fact that the sanction and its contents were published at the
council of Basel and, at the instance of the same council, were received and recognised by the
meeting at Bourges, ought not to influence us since all those happenings after the transfer of
the same council of Basel took place — the transfer being made by pope Eugenius IV, our
predecessor of happy memory — have remained the deeds of the quasi-council, or rather the
conventicle, of Basel. For, especially after that transfer, it did not deserve to be called a
council any more and therefore its acts could not have any force. For it is clearly established
that only the contemporary Roman pontiff, as holding authority over all councils, has the full
right and power to summon, transfer and dissolve councils. This we know not only from the
witness of holy scripture, the statements of holy fathers and our predecessors as Roman
pontiffs, and the decisions of the sacred canons, but also from the declarations of the same
councils. Some of this evidence we have decided to repeat, and some to pass over in silence
as being sufficiently well known .

Thus we read that the synod of Alexandria, at which Athanasius was present, wrote to Felix,
bishop of Rome, that the council of Nicaea had decided that councils ought not to be
celebrated without the authority of the Roman pontiff . Pope Leo I transferred the second
council of Ephesus to Chalcedon. Pope Martin V authorised his presidents at the council of
Siena to transfer the council with no mention being made of the council’s consent. The
greatest respect was shown to our predecessors as Roman pontiffs: to Celestine by the first
synod of Ephesus; to the said Leo by the synod of Chalcedon; to Agatho by the sixth synod;
to Hadrian by the seventh synod; and to Nicholas and Hadrian by the eighth synod, of
Constantinople. These councils submitted with reverence and humility to the instructions and
commands of the same pontiffs which had been composed and issued by them in the sacred
councils. Moreover, pope Damasus and the other bishops assembled at Rome, writing to the
bishops at Illyricum about the council at Rimini, pointed out that the number of bishops
assembled at Rimini counted for nothing since it was known that the Roman pontiff, whose
decrees were to be preferred before all others, had not given his consent to their meeting. It
appears that pope Leo I said the same when writing to all the bishops of Sicily. It was
customary for the fathers of the ancient councils humbly to ask for and obtain a warrant and
approbation from the Roman pontiff in order to corroborate the matters dealt with in their
councils . This is clear from the synods and their acts held at Nicaea, Ephesus, Chalcedon, the
sixth synod at Constantinople, the seventh at Nicaea, the Roman synod under Symmachus
and the synods in Haimar’s book. We would certainly be without these recent troubles if the
fathers at Bourges and Basel had followed this laudable custom, which it is known that the
fathers at Constance also finally adopted .

We desire this matter to be brought to its proper conclusion. We are proceeding on the
strength of the many citations issued by us and our said predecessor Julius, and of the other
things mentioned above which are so notorious that they cannot be hidden by any excuses or
evasions, as well as in virtue of our pastoral office. We are supplying for each and every
defect, both of law and of fact, if perchance any happen to exist in the above. We judge and
declare, from our certain knowledge and from the fullness of apostolic power, with the
approval of the same sacred council, by the contents of the present document, that the

463
aforesaid Pragmatic Sanction or corruption, and its approbations however issued, and each
and every decree, chapter, statute, constitution or ordinance that is included, or even inserted,
in any way in the same and has been published by others, as well as the customs, expressions
and uses, or rather abuses, in any way resulting from it and observed until the present, have
been and are of no force or value. In addition, for a more extensive safeguard, we revoke,
make void, abrogate, quash, annul and condemn that same sanction or corruption of Bourges
and its approval, whether expressed or tacit, as said above, as well as each and every thing of
whatever nature included or even inserted in it, and we judge, declare and will them to be
considered as of no effect, revoked, made void, abrogated, quashed, annulled and
condemned. Moreover, since subjection to the Roman pontiff is necessary for salvation for all
Christ’s faithful, as we are taught by the testimony of both sacred scripture and the holy
fathers, and as is declared by the constitution of pope Boniface VIII of happy memory, also
our predecessor, which begins Unam sanctam, we therefore, with the approval of the present
sacred council, for the salvation of the souls of the same faithful, for the supreme authority of
the Roman pontiff and of this holy see, and for the unity and power of the church, his spouse,
renew and give our approval to that constitution, but without prejudice to the declaration of
pope Clement V of holy memory, which begins Meruit .

In virtue of holy obedience and under the penalties and censures to be declared below, we
forbid each and all of Christ’s faithful, both laity and secular clergy, and regulars of whatever
order including mendicants, and other persons without restriction, of no matter what status,
rank or condition they may be, including cardinals of the holy Roman church, patriarchs,
primates, archbishops, bishops, and any others distinguished by ecclesiastical or worldly or
any other honour, and each and all other prelates, clerics, chapters, secular convents, regulars
of the aforesaid orders, including abbots and priors of monasteries, dukes, counts, princes,
barons, parlements, royal officials, judges, advocates, notaries and scribes, both ecclesiastical
and secular, and any other regular or secular ecclesiastics in any high office, as said above,
who are now or shall be living in the said kingdom of France and the Dauphine and wherever
the said Pragmatic has been in force directly or indirectly, silently or openly, to presume to
make use of the aforesaid Pragmatic Sanction, or rather corruption, in any way or for any
reason, by keeping silence or by clear speech, directly or indirectly, or by any other excuse or
clever evasion, in any judicial or extrajudicial acts, or even to appeal to it or make judgments
on its terms, or to quash, by themselves or through another or others, any judicial or extra-
judicial acts on the grounds of the general meaning of the said sanction or of parts of it, and
they may not permit or order these things to be done by means of others. They are not to keep
the aforesaid Pragmatic Sanction, or sections or decrees contained in it, in their own houses
or in other public or private places. Indeed, they are to destroy it, or have it destroyed, in
archives, including royal and capitular ones, and in the above-mentioned places within six
months from the date of this present letter .

The penalties to be incurred, automatically and without the need for any further declaration,
for each and all of the aforesaid persons, if they act to the contrary (though may they not!),
are immediate major excommunication, the incapacity for all and singular legal acts of any
kind, being branded as infamous, and the penalties expressed in the law of treason; in

464
addition for the aforesaid ecclesiastical and religious persons, the loss of all patriarchal,
metropolitan and other cathedral churches, of all monasteries, priories and convents, and of
all secular dignities and ecclesiastical benefices, as well as the inability to hold them in the
future; and in addition for secular persons, the loss of any fiefs held for any reason from the
Roman or some other church, and the inability to hold them in the future. They cannot be
absolved from these penalties by any faculty or by clauses contained in privileges regarding
the hearing of confessions, no matter by what persons or verbal formulae they may have been
granted. Except when at the point of death, they can only be absolved by the Roman pontiff
acting canonically or by someone else having a faculty from him specifically for that purpose
.

By the knowledge, power and statements mentioned above we expressly and specifically
repeal anything to the contrary. This is notwithstanding anything mentioned above as well as
constitutions, ordinances, decrees and statutes, however they may have been published and
granted, and frequently renewed, repeated, confirmed and approved, as enduring in their
force, by apostolic or any other authority, even conciliar authority and even by our certain
knowledge and fullness of apostolic power, the tenor of all of which we regard as sufficiently
expressed and included, for the purposes of the above, as if they had been inserted herein
word for word; notwithstanding if the apostolic see has granted to any communities and
universities, and any individual persons mentioned above, even if they are the aforesaid
cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, marquises and dukes, or any others, whether
individually or communally, that they cannot be interdicted, suspended, excommunicated,
deprived or incapacitated by apostolic letters which do not make full and express mention,
word for word, of the indult in question; and notwithstanding any other general or special
privileges, indulgences and apostolic letters, of whatever tenor they may be, by means of
which, because they are not expressed or included in whole in the present letter, the effect of
the above might be impeded or deferred in any way, since special mention of their contents is
to be regarded as included, word for word, in this our letter. Let nobody therefore .. . If
anyone however .. .

[On religious and their privileges]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. We consider and diligently ponder the hardworking and anxious zeal, and
the unending labours for the glory of the divine name, for the triumph of the catholic faith
and the preservation of the church’s unity, and for the training and salvation of the souls of
the faithful, which are carried on by bishops and their superiors, who have been placed by the
apostolic see at the head of their churches in different parts of the world, as well as by the
friars of the different orders, especially the mendicant orders, who are engaged without
respite or rest. So great is the satisfaction that has reached our heart, as a result of their
fruitful labours in the Lord’s vineyard and their opportune and praiseworthy actions, that we
are devoting every effort to encourage the things which we know to contribute to the
preservation of peace and quiet among them. We are conscious that the bishops have become
partners in our anxiety . Ambrose bears witness that their distinction and greatness have no

465
possible equal. We also know that religious have done much in the field of the Lord for the
defence and advance of the christian religion and that they have produced and are daily
producing abundant fruit. Consequently all of the faithful are aware that the good works of
these bishops and religious have enabled the true faith to make progress and to spread
everywhere throughout the world .

These men have likewise not hesitated on innumerable occasions, with much dedication and
competence, to destroy the schisms in God’s church, to bring unity to that church and to
undergo innumerable pains so that the same church might gain the quiet of peace. Therefore
it is just that we direct our efforts so to unite them to one another by the bond of peace and by
a fraternal unity and charity that, linked in unity of doctrine and actions, they may foster more
abundant fruits in God’s church. The exercise of spiritual rights, which concern the glory of
God and the salvation of the souls of Christ’s faithful, has been entrusted to bishops and their
superiors in their respective dioceses, since they have been chosen to be sharers of our
burden, as we have already said, and since dioceses with defined boundaries have been
assigned to each of the bishops. We truly desire, then, that these spiritual rights be exercised
by the bishops, and that the right of freely exercising them be truly, as far as possible, kept
intact for them. If our predecessors as Roman pontiffs and the apostolic see have granted any
such spiritual rights to the said mendicant friars to the harm of the bishops we consider that
such concessions made to religious ought in future to be limited, so that the friars themselves
will be supported in all charity by the said bishops rather than be troubled and disturbed. For,
regulars and seculars, prelates and subjects, exempt and non-exempt, belong to the one
universal church, outside of which no one at all is saved, and they all have one Lord and one
faith. That is why it is fitting that, belonging to the one same body, they also have the one
same will; and just as the brethren are united by the bond of mutual charity, so it is not fitting
that they arouse among themselves injustice and hurt, since the Saviour says, My
commandment is that you love one another as I have loved you .

We wish to preserve charity and mutual goodwill among bishops, their superiors, prelates and
friars, as well as to promote divine worship and the peace and tranquillity of the universal
church. We know this can be done only if each preserves as far as possible his own
jurisdiction. We have therefore decided and decreed, with the approval of the sacred council,
that the said bishops, their superiors and other prelates may visit the parish churches which
legitimately belong to the same friars by reason of their residences, with regard to what
concerns the care of the parishioners and the preservation and administration of the
sacraments, without however the exceptional trouble and expense of official visitors. They
may punish those responsible for the churches and failing in this matter: if they are religious,
then in accordance with the rules of their order within the precincts of the religious house, if
they are secular priests or friars who hold benefices of this kind, then they may freely punish
them as being subject to their jurisdiction. Both prelates and secular priests who are not
excommunicated may celebrate masses out of devotion in the churches of the said religious
houses, if they wish to do so, and the friars themselves ought to welcome them. Friars who
are invited by the same prelates to take part in solemn processions ought to agree, provided
the suburban friary in question is not more than a mile away from the city .

466
The friars’ superiors are bound to specify and present in person to the same prelates the friars
whom they have chosen to hear for a time the confessions of the prelate’s subjects, if the
prelates ask for them to be specified and presented to them; if not, then to their vicars; with
the condition that they are not bound to go to prelates who are more than two days’ journey
away. The friars in question may be examined by the same bishops and prelates, at least
regarding the sufficiency of their learning and their other skills relative to this sacrament. If
they are accepted, or if the refusal is unjust, then, in accordance with the constitution Omnis
utriusque sexus, let them be considered as accepted at least as regards confession, and they
can even hear the confessions of strangers. They have no power, however, to absolve layfolk
and secular clergy from manimposed penalties. They may not administer the eucharist and
extreme unction and the church’s other sacraments to those whose confessions they have
heard, including the sick and the dying, who say that their own priest has refused to give the
sacraments to them, unless the refusal was made without a just reason and this is proved by
the testimony of neighbours or by an investigation carried out before a pubic notary. They
have no authority to administer these sacraments to persons requesting their ministrations
except during a period of actual service to them. Temporary agreements and contracts
between friars and prelates or curates are valid unless they are rejected by the next general or
provincial chapter and the rejection is duly communicated by the chapter. Friars may not
enter parishes bearing a cross in order to carry out the funerals of those who have chosen to
be buried at the churches of their houses or institutions, unless the parish priest, having
received due notice and a request, does not refuse, and in that case without prejudice to
himself and the ordinary; or unless there is an ancient custom on this point with the friars,
which is currently in force and is mutually agreed upon. Those who wish to be buried in the
habit of the said friars, but who live in their own houses and not in enclosure, are free to
choose a burial place for themselves in their last wills .

Friars due to be promoted to orders are to be examined by the ordinaries on grammar and
their competence. Provided they answer adequately, they ought to be readily admitted by the
ordinaries. They may not, however, be ordained in their churches or houses or other places by
anyone except the diocesan bishop or his deputy (the latter is to be asked with due reverence),
unless the bishop refuses on insufficient grounds or is absent from his diocese. They should
not ask for the consecration of a church or an altar, or the blessing of a cemetery, from
another bishop; and they may not arrange for the first stone of a church being built for them
to be laid by a strange bishop, unless the ordinary refuses without any just reason after he has
been asked two or three times with due reverence and urgency. Friars may not bless a bride
and bridegroom without the consent of those in charge of the parish. In order to render to the
mother church the honour due to her, friars and secular clerics may not ring the bells of their
churches on Holy Saturday before those of the cathedral or mother church have been rung,
even if they are supported on this point by a privilege of the apostolic see. Those acting
otherwise incur a penalty of one hundred ducats. They are to publish and observe in the
churches of their own houses the censures which are imposed promulgated and solemnly
published by the ordinaries in the mother churches of cities as well as in the collegiate and
parish churches of castles and towns, when they are asked to do this by the same ordinaries.

467
To provide more fruitfully for the salvation of the souls of Christ’s faithful of both sexes,
they are obliged to advise and encourage those whose confessions they have heard for a time,
no matter of what standing or status they may be, that they are bound in conscience to pay
tithes, or a portion of their goods or produce, in those places where such tithes or dues are
customarily paid; and they are obliged to refuse absolution to those who will not pay them.
They are bound, moreover, to include this in their public preaching and exhortations to the
people when they are asked to do so .

The conservators assigned for a time to the same friars by the apostolic see ought to be
outstanding in learning and good reputation and of established ecclesiastical rank. They
cannot oblige to appear before them anyone living more than two days’ journey away,
notwithstanding any privileges granted to the conservators at other times. Excommunicated
persons wishing to enter a mendicant order cannot be absolved when the interests of a third
party are involved, unless satisfaction has previously been made. Procurators, business agents
and workers in the service of the said friars are subject to sentences of excommunication
which have been promulgated, if they have given cause for them or have offered help, favour
or advice to the guilty. Brothers and sisters of the third order, and those known as the cloaked
ones, the girdled ones and the devotees, and others no matter how named, living in their own
homes, can choose whatever place of burial they wish. They are bound, however, to receive
the eucharist at Easter as well as extreme unction and the other sacraments of the church,
with the exception of the sacrament of penance, from their own priest . They are obliged to
undertake the tasks incumbent upon the laity, and they can be brought before lay judges in a
secular court. To avoid the cheapening of ecclesiastical censures, and sentences of interdict
being regarded as of little importance, members of the said third orders are in no way to be
admitted to hear divine services in the churches of their orders during a period of interdict, if
they have given grounds for the interdict or encouraged or supported those grounds, or if they
have in any way offered help, counsel or favour to the guilty . But those living in an official
group, or dwelling with the enclosed, and women who are leading a life of virginity, celibacy
or chaste widowhood under an expressed vow and with a habit, ought to enjoy the privileges
of the order of which they are tertiaries .

We wish and decree that each and all of the above norms are to be extended to and observed
by, all other religious of other orders. In matters not mentioned above, the rights of the said
bishops and friars and other religious are to be maintained. We do not wish to prejudice these
rights in any way by the above statements, or to introduce anything new. This is
notwithstanding apostolic constitutions and ordinances; statutes and customs of the said
orders which have been strengthened by oath, apostolic confirmation or any other form of
reinforcement; and privileges, indults and apostolic letters which have been granted to the
same orders and are contrary to what has been set down above or to any part of it, even what
was included in Mare magnum. If there is required a mention or other statement that is
special, specific, clear, distinctive, word for word, and not by general clauses, regarding these
things and their meaning, or if some other carefully chosen form should be used, in order that
they might be abrogated, then we consider their meaning to be sufficiently expressed and
included in this present letter, we expressly and specially abrogate anything to the contrary,

468
and we decree as null and void anything that is knowingly or unknowingly attempted to the
contrary in these matters by any person acting on any authority .

We warn the friars, in virtue of holy obedience, to revere bishops with fitting honour and due
respect, out of the reverence owed to us and the apostolic see, since they act as deputies in
place of the holy apostles. As for bishops, we urge and appeal by the tender mercy of our God
that, while attending to the friars with well-disposed affection, treating them with kindness
and encouraging them, they present themselves to them as in no sense difficult or hard or
peevish, but rather as easy, mild, well-disposed and liberal in loving generosity, and that in
all the above-mentioned matters they welcome them with ready kindness as co-workers in the
Lord’s vineyard and as sharers in their labours, and that they guard and defend their rights
with all charity, so that both bishops and friars, whose works as burning lamps set on a hilltop
ought to provide light to all Christ’s faithful, may move forward from strength to strength for
the glory of God, the triumph of the catholic faith and the salvation of peoples, and in
consequence deserve to obtain from the Lord, the most generous recompenser of all good
deeds, the reward of eternal life. Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone however . . .

SESSION 12

16 March 1517

[Against those attacking the houses of cardinals]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an
everlasting record. Certain audacious persons disdain to show the appropriate deference to
the cardinals of the holy Roman church, who are the chief pillars of the catholic church. They
do not fear to lay violent hands, with impious boldness, on their possessions and properties.
Their uncontrolled desire warns and induces us to strengthen, increase and extend — in
accordance with the character of the times and with what we perceive in the Lord to be
soundly in keeping with so distinguished an office in God’s church — those measures which,
by wise planning, were established by our predecessors for the safe-guarding of the high
office of the said cardinals, in order that the boldness of these people may be restrained
before it extends even further. Indeed, there has recently grown up in Rome a damnable
abuse and lack of restraint in wrongdoing. Thus, while there is a vacancy in the apostolic see,
and the election of a future Roman pontiff is actually being discussed by the cardinals in
conclave, if some rumour leaks out, even if false, that one of the cardinals has been elected as
pontiff, the mob attacks his house with arms and contends by force with his servant-guards,
while he is still in the conclave, over the despoiling of his house . If an entry is forced by
breaking down the doors or digging under the wall, the mob rushes in to plunder all the goods
that are there, unless a defence is made by armed guards. Sometimes there are some who are
so audacious and headstrong that they do not fear even on other occasions to attack the
houses of cardinals in a hostile fashion and with arms, under the guise of general brawling,
and to strike and wound while they are there, as a result of which there is considerable loss to
the honour of the cardinalate, by which the most holy church militant is fully adorned as by a

469
purple garment, contempt for the cardinals is aroused, and occasion is given for murders and
other scandals .

We wish to suppress audacious tendencies of this kind by fitting punishments . We therefore

renew by this letter, with the approval of the sacred council and by our apostolic authority,
the published constitutions of our predecessors as Roman pontiffs, Honorius III and Boniface
VIII of happy memory, against those pursuing any cardinal of the said church in a hostile
manner, those assisting such persons by their presence, counsel or support, or knowingly
harbouring or defending them, and those attacking their houses or dwellings, as said above,
and their descendants and property. We decree that these constitutions must be observed
everywhere without alteration for all future times. We also extend these same constitutions,
with each and every censure and penalty contained in them, to each and every living person
of whatever status, condition and distinction, who attacks with an armed band the home of
any of the said cardinals, both at the time of the said conclave, even if the cardinal in question
has been elected pope, and at other times and for any reasons, and who seizes anything in the
house with violence like an enemy or wounds anyone of those dwelling there, and also their
associates and those who have given orders for it to be done, or have given personal approval
to the deed or have provided counsel and support to the attackers in the above matters and
have defended them. This is notwithstanding apostolic constitutions and ordinances and other
measures of whatever kind to the contrary. Let nobody therefore . . . If anyone however . . .

[Constitution imposing taxes and closing the council]

Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the council, for an
everlasting record. We have been set over nations and kingdoms, as the prophet declared,
although our merits are unequal to this. We are suitably carrying out the duty of our office
when we renew again that reform of the whole church and its affairs which we have
accomplished with profit; when we plan to apply suitable remedies for the unchallenged
observance of the reform and to make provision for cathedrals and metropolitan churches so
that they may no longer be without their pastors; and when we supervise these remedies with
ever-present attention and untiring efforts, by means of which we may be able to render the
Lord’s flock, which has been entrusted to our care, acceptable and submissive in the sight of
the divine majesty. Our aim is also to crush the Turks and other infidels standing firm in the
eastern and southern regions. They treat the way of true light and salvation with complete
contempt and totally unyielding blindness; they attack the life-giving cross on which our
Saviour willed to accept death so that by dying he might destroy death, and by the ineffable
mystery of his most holy life he might restore life; and they make themselves hateful enemies
of God and most bitter persecutors of the christian religion. Strengthened by defences not
only spiritual but also temporal, we may be able, under God’s guidance and favour, to oppose
the bitter and frequent sallies by which, in wild rage, they move savagely amidst christian
blood .

Indeed, pope Julius II, our predecessor of happy memory, acting in union with the holy Spirit,
in a laudable and legitimate manner, for sound reasons, with the advice and consent of his

470
venerable brothers, the cardinals of the holy Roman church, of whom we were then one,
summoned the sacred Lateran council. He held five sessions and summoned a sixth. He then
passed from the human scene. We were then raised to the summit of the highest apostolate by
the favour of the divine mercy. We had always had a heartfelt desire, even at lesser meetings,
to see a general council being celebrated as a very important development in the Lord’s field.
We realised that an obligation had been added to our honourable and useful desire as a result
of the duty of pastoral care now laid upon us. We therefore undertook this matter with a more
burning commitment and a total readiness of mind. We gave approval in the said sixth
session, with the advice and consent of our said brother cardinals and with the approval of the
same sacred Lateran council, to the postponement of the council to a fixed date, which was
then clearly stated, for reasons made clear from the situation and for others affecting our own
and the minds of our said brother cardinals. The council was to continue towards the
completion of the objectives for which it had been summoned; and especially that, once the
terrible conflicts between christian princes and rulers were settled and weapons of war set
aside, a universal and lasting peace could be established. Leaving nothing untried, we
intended to use all our efforts to bring about this peace and to conclude it, as if it were a good
of supreme advantage. We also declared that it is and shall be part of our unchangeable
thought and intention that, once the matters concerning the praise of God and the exaltation
of the aforesaid church have been completed, the holy and most necessary expedition against
the enemies of the catholic faith shall take place and a successful triumph over them be
accomplished with the aid of the most High. In order that those under an obligation to attend
this most useful council might not be held back in any way from coming to it, and so that
they might be unable to proffer any excuse, we provided and granted, with the approval of the
said Lateran council, to each and all of those summoned to the celebration of the council by
our predecessor Julius, and to their attendants, a safe-conduct while they were travelling to
and staying in Rome for the purposes of the said Lateran council. We urged kings and
princes, out of reverence for the apostolic see, not to molest those coming here but to permit
them to travel in safety .

We summoned the seventh session. We wanted nothing more than that those useful and
necessary matters on account of which the said Lateran council had been summoned might be
brought to their conclusion. We therefore set up three special committees of cardinals and
other prelates to listen to and discuss matters of this kind and other conciliar business, and we
ordered them to report to the council on what they had heard and discussed. One of the
committees had the special task of establishing a universal peace between christian kings and
princes, which was one of the chief reasons for the said council coming together, and of
rooting out the schism; the second had the special task of general reform, including the
reform of the curia; and the third had the special task of examining and abrogating the
Pragmatic Sanction and of dealing with matters concerning the true faith. Each committee
carefully examined many useful and necessary topics and accurately reported to us about
them. The subjects discussed and investigated by them were completed and concluded by us,
with God’s favour and the approval of the sacred council, in the remaining five sessions of
the council which we held. We then knew beyond all doubt that God himself, the giver of
gifts, had favoured our devout desires and those tending to the common good, out of his

471
exceeding goodness and mercy, and that he had granted to us what we had planned in our
own mind and for which we had greatly laboured namely that once the matters on account of
which the council had been summoned had been concluded in conformity with the council’s
aims, the council itself could be closed and discharged .

The emperor-elect Maximilian, our dear son in Christ, in the time of our said predecessor
Julius, and king Louis of France, of happy memory, in our own time, as well as other kings
and princes adhered to the Lateran council, lawfully assembled in the holy Spirit, to the
greatest satisfaction of everyone. The quasi-council at Pisa, which had been summoned by
certain persons without the necessary authority and had been condemned by the same Julius
who preceded us, was treated by them as condemned in accordance with the decision of the
said Julius. The schism which had begun to grow from this was ended (although it is c ear
that so long as the situation continued, it brought very many injures to prelates and others of
Christ’s faithful at various times, as well as to other general councils held until this time).
There was peace for the whole church and a resulting union. The moral habits of churchmen
as well as of secular and other persons were reformed, insofar as this seemed appropriate, and
several matters concerning the true faith were defined. Several other matters, after being
carefully examined and debated in the three committees of cardinals and prelates mentioned
above, were considered with care and skill in the said council and a final decision was
reached. Finally, it was reported to us on several occasions, through the cardinals and prelates
of the three committees, that no topics remained for debate and discussion by them, and that
over several months nothing at all new had been brought before them by anyone. The bishops
who had been invited to share with us the responsibility for the support and care of the Lord’s
flock, as well as other prelates, had remained in Rome rather a long time beyond the normal
usage of sacred councils, with inconvenience and loss to themselves and to their churches .

Therefore there seemed to remain, of all the above things which we and the said committees
so much desired to be completed in the council, only peace between kings and princes and a
harmony of minds. Our attitude in favour of this, and our striving with every effort for its
accomplishment, can be made abundantly clear to all who read our letters. God himself, who
is the supreme light and truth of all things, knows how we never ceased to beg and implore of
him, by many prayers and constant appeals, that he would deign of his mercy to influence the
christian flock — which he has entrusted to our care, despite our lack of merits — to enter
upon a stable and enduring peace, now that this same flock has been roused by the warmth of
mutual charity. We have earnestly urged this in the Lord, whose cause is principally in
question, upon kings and princes, by means of persuasive reasons, through the nuncios whom
we keep at the court of the emperor-elect Maximilian and with the aforesaid kings and
princes, and through letters; especially if they wish to provide and take measures, as is right,
on behalf of the christian religion and the catholic faith, which have been brought into serious
danger and risk by the recently extended power of the ruler of the Turks. We have learnt from
the letters of the same nuncios, kings and princes that our appeals have been of such great
power and efficacy with the said kings and princes, and have influenced their hearts and
minds to such an extent, that the peace so long desired by us for the good of the whole
christian state has been almost concluded in intention, and the hope is that if anything

472
remains it will soon be resolved (by God’s favour). Our heart exults in our Lord Jesus Christ
as we ponder over this in our mind and spirit. We give thanks for this to him, the giver of all
graces, because he has guided these persons to the harmony we had longed for. We think that
all Christ’s faithful should offer to God thanks and those signs of joy which are customary on
such occasions, and that God be asked that the peace achieved may endure .

It only remains, therefore, for the holy and very necessary campaign to be undertaken against
the fury of the infidels thirsting for christian blood, and for all the measures decided upon as
powerful safeguards in the eleven sessions, held partly by us and partly by our predecessor
Julius, to be approved and renewed and ordered to be observed unchallenged. Accordingly,
after mature deliberation on these matters with our brothers and other prelates, we approve
and renew by apostolic authority, with the approval of the sacred council, all and each of the
acts and decisions of the said eleven sessions, and the letters published above together with
all the clauses contained in them — apart from certain excepted matters which we judge
should be conceded to specified persons for the sake of the peace and unity of the universal
church — as well as the business carried out by the committees. We decree and order that
they are to be observed without alteration for ever, and that those carrying them out are to see
that they and their contents are observed, namely: in the Roman curia, the current governor of
our mother city and our vicar as well as the auditor general of the apostolic camera, who have
the power to oblige and compel persons subject to them; and outside the Roman curia, we
depute for this purpose each and all local ordinaries. We forbid each and all of Christ’s
faithful, under penalty of immediate excommunication, to presume to interpret or gloss what
has been produced and carried out in the present council without our permission and that of
the apostolic see .

We decree, with the approval of the sacred council, that the said campaign against the infidels
is to be undertaken and carried through. Zeal for the faith prompts us to this. It has been so
often proposed and promised by us and our predecessor Julius in the sessions referred to,
when the business of the council was being explained. On several occasions it was
communicated to, and discussed with, spokesmen at our court representing kings and princes.
Pope Nicholas V, our predecessor of pious memory, summoned a general expedition against
the infidels after the disastrous fall of Constantinople in order to crush their fury and to
avenge the wounds of Christ. Callistus III and Pius II, of happy memory our predecessors as
Roman pontiffs, urged on by zeal for the faith, followed in the same path with skill and
energy. During a subsequent period of three years, we imitated them by means of an
authorisation from ourselves and our said brothers for imposing and exacting a tithe on the
revenues of churches, monasteries and other benefices throughout the world and for doing
each and every other thing that is necessary and customary in a campaign of this kind. We
continually pour forth holy, humble and earnest prayers to almighty God that the campaign
may have a happy outcome. We order the same to be done by all Christ’s faithful of either
sex. We exhort Maximilian, the emperor-elect, and kings, princes and christian rulers, whose
courage God bids us to rouse, beseeching them by the tender mercy of our God, Jesus Christ,
and appealing to them by his fearful judgment to remember that they shall have to render an
account of their defence and preservation — even by giving their lives — of the church itself,

473
which has been redeemed by Christ’s blood, and to rise up in strength and power for the
defence of the christian faith, as is incumbent on them as a personal and necessary duty, with
all mutual hatred being set aside and quarrels and conflicts among themselves being
committed to everlasting oblivion. At this time of such great need, let them offer with
eagerness their ready assistance in keeping with their resources. We urge with paternal
affection and ask them that, at least during the campaign, out of reverence for almighty God
and for the apostolic see, they assure the unbroken observance of the peace into which they
have entered, so that such an important good, which we hope and desire will be obtained with
the help of the Lord’s right hand, may not be impeded by some interruption from discord and
dissension .

In order that prelates and others at the present council, which has lasted for nearly five years,
may not be further wearied by their labours and expenses and so that they may be able to visit
and bring encouragement to their churches, and for other reasonable and just causes, we bring
the present council to a close and we discharge it with the Lord’s blessing. With the approval
of the same sacred council, we grant permission to each and all who are present at the council
to return to their own countries. In order that they may be able to go back with ever
increasing joy and strengthened with spiritual gifts, we impart to them and to all their
attendants a plenary remission and indulgence for all their sins, once in their lifetime and
again at the hour of death. Let nobody therefore … If anyone however …

474
475
Filename: ecumenical councils
Directory: C:\Users\Jeremy Stevenson\Documents
Template: C:\Users\Jeremy
Stevenson\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Templates\Normal.dotm
Title:
Subject:
Author: Jeremy Stevenson
Keywords:
Comments:
Creation Date: 25/01/2022 5:23:00 PM
Change Number: 2
Last Saved On: 25/01/2022 6:31:00 PM
Last Saved By: Jeremy Stevenson
Total Editing Time: 63 Minutes
Last Printed On: 25/01/2022 6:31:00 PM
As of Last Complete Printing
Number of Pages: 475
Number of Words: 231,240 (approx.)
Number of Characters: 1,318,070 (approx.)