Nor would any cardinal announce these decrees; that office fell to a bishop , Andrew of Posen. The emperor was present at their promulgation , also members, mostly doctors , etc. These decrees it must be remembered, though adopted at Basle and often quoted by the disciples of Gallicanism and other opponents of papal supremacy, were formulated and accepted at Constance amid quite unusual circumstances, in much haste, and in quasi despair at the threatened failure of the long-desired general council; they ran counter to the immemorial praxis of the Church , and substituted for its Divine constitution the will of the multitude or at best a kind of theological parliamentarism.
He did not withdraw his resignation, but posited conditions that the council refused; he called away from Constance several cardinals and members of the Curia , who were soon, however, obliged to return; put forth a plea of lack of liberty; complained to the King of France concerning the method of voting, as well as his treatment by the council and the emperor; and finally fled from Schaffhausen to Lauenburg, giving the council reason to fear either his final escape from imperial reach or the withdrawal of the Italian representatives.
The pope soon fled again, this time to Freiburg in the Breisgau, and thence to Breisach on the Rhine, but was soon compelled to return to Freiburg , whence eventually 17 May he was brought by deputies of the council to the vicinity of Constance , and there held prisoner , while the council proceeded to his trial.
He had exhausted all means of resistance, and was morally vanquished. Unwilling to undergo the ordeal of the impending trial he renounced all right of defence and threw himself on the mercy of the council.
He was deposed in the twelfth session 29 Mar, , not for heresy but for notorious simony , abetting of schism , and scandalous life, having already been suspended by the council in the tenth session 14 May.
Two days later he ratified under oath the action of the council and was condemned to indefinite imprisonment in the custody of the emperor. He was held successively in the castles of Gottlieben, Heidelberg, and Mannheim, but was eventually released, for a heavy ransom, with the help of Martin V , and in died at Florence as Cardinal-Bishop of Tusculum. The promised resignation of Gregory XII was now in order, and was accomplished with the dignity to be expected from the pope usually considered by Catholic historians the legitimate occupant of the See of Peter, though at this time his obedience had practically vanished, being confined to Rimini and a few German dioceses.
Through his protector and plenipotentiary, Carlo Malatesta, Lord of Rimini , he posited as conditions that the council should be reconvoked by himself, and that in the session which accepted his resignation neither Baldassare Cossa nor any representative of him should preside. The council agreed to these conditions. The fourteenth session 4 July, had, therefore, for its president the Emperor Sigismund, whereby it appeared, as the supporters of Gregory wished it to appear, that hitherto the council was an assembly convoked by the civil authority.
Gregory confirmed these acts in the seventeenth session 14 July and was himself confirmed as Cardinal-Bishop of Porto, Dean of the Sacred College and perpetual Legate of Ancona , in which position he died 18 Oct. From the fourteenth session, in which he convoked the council, it is considered by many with Phillips Kirchenrecht, I, a legitimate general council.
For this purpose, and because he insisted on personal dealings with himself, Emperor Sigismund and deputies of the council went to Perpignan , then Spanish territory, to confer with him, but the stubborn old man, despite his pretended willingness to resign, was not to be moved Sept.
Soon, however, he was abandoned by the Rings of Aragon , Castile , and Navarre, hitherto his chief supporters. By the Treaty of Narbonne 13 Dec. Vincent Ferrer hitherto the main support of Benedict, and his confessor, now gave him up as a perjurer ; the council confirmed 4 Feb.
Various causes, as just said, held back the appearance of the Spanish deputies at the council. Finally they arrived at Constance for the twenty-first session 15 Oct.
He was finally deposed in the thirty-seventh session 26 July, as guilty of perjury , a schismatic , and a heretic ; his private life and priestly character, unlike those of John XXIII , were never assailed.
It had come about that, whichever of the three claimants of the papacy was the legitimate successor of Peter , there reigned throughout the Church a universal uncertainty and an intolerable confusion, so that saints and scholars and upright souls were to be found in all three obediences. On the principle that a doubtful pope is no pope , the Apostolic See appeared really vacant, and under the circumstances could not possibly be otherwise filled than by the action of a general council.
The canonical irregularities of the council seem less blameworthy when to this practical vacancy of the papal chair we add the universal disgust and weariness at the continuance of the so-called schism , despite all imaginable efforts to restore to the Church its unity of headship, the justified fear of new complications, the imminent peril of Catholic doctrine and discipline amid the temporary wreckage of the traditional authority of the Apostolic See , and the rapid growth of false teachings equally ruinous to Church and State.
Election of Martin V Under the circumstances the usual form of papal election by the cardinals alone see CONCLAVE was impossible, if only for the strongly inimical feeling of the majority of the council, which held them responsible not only for the horrors of the schism , but also for many of the administrative abuses of the Roman Curia see below , the immediate correction of which seemed to not a few of no less importance, to say the least, than the election of a pope.
This object was not obscured by minor dissensions, e. The French, Spanish, and Italian nations desired an immediate papal election; a Church without a head was a monstrosity, said d'Ailly. Under Bishop Robert of Salisbury the English held stoutly for the reforms that seemed imperative in the administration of the papacy and the Curia ; Emperor Sigismund was foremost among the Germans for the same cause, and was ready to take violent measures in its interest.
But Robert of Salisbury died, and curiously enough, it was by another English bishop , Henry of Winchester , then on his way to Palestine, and a near relative of the King of England , that the antagonistic measures of papal election and curial reform were reconciled in favour of the priority of the former, but with satisfactory assurance, among other points, that the new pope would at once undertake a serious reform of all abuses; that those reforms would be at once proclaimed by the council on which all the nations agreed; and that the manner of the imminent papal election should be left to a special commission.
Among the five reform decrees passed at once by the council in its thirty-ninth session 9 Oct. In the fortieth session finally 30 Oct. The council decreed that for this occasion to the twenty-three cardinals should be added thirty deputies of the council six from each nation making a body of fifty-three electors. Another decree of this session provided for the immediate and serious attention of the new pope to eighteen points concerning reformatio in capite et Curia Romana.
The forty-first session 8 Nov. That afternoon the electors assembled in conclave and after three days chose for the pope the Roman Cardinal Odo Colonna, who took the name of Martin V. He was only a subdeacon , and so was successively made deacon , priest , and bishop Fromme, "Die Wahl Martins V. Quartalschrift", His coronation took place 21 November, At its forty-fifth session he solemnly closed the council 22 April, , whereupon, declining invitations to Avignon or to some German city, he returned to Italy and after a short stay in Florence , entered Rome , 28 Sept.
Reformation of ecclesiastical government and life The long absence of the popes from Rome in the fourteenth century, entailing the economical and political ruin of the ancient Patrimony of Peter ; the many grave abuses directly or indirectly connected with the administration of French popes at Avignon ; the general civil disorders of the time Hundred Years War, Condottieri, etc.
The writings of theologians and canonists and the utterances of several popular saints St. Bridget of Sweden , St. Catherine of Siena are alone enough to show how well justified was this universal demand Rocquain. In the minds of many members of the council this reformation, as already stated, was of equal importance with the closing of the schism ; and to some, especially to the Germans , it seemed to overshadow even the need of a head for the Church. It was precisely the pope and the cardinals , they argued, whose administration most needed reform, and now, when both were weakest and for the first time in their history had felt the mastery of the theologians and canonists, seemed to this party the psychological moment to write these reforms into the common ecclesiastical law, whence they could not easily be expunged.
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. 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. Christ would govern his church better by his true disciples scattered throughout the world, without these monstrous heads.
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. 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.
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 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. 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 see Hardt 4, They are printed in Hardt 2, Other minor deliberations take place.
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. 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, constitutions, 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.
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 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.
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. 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 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. 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 begins, and he is not to be obeyed by anyone in any matter under pain of the offender becoming a promoter of schism.
They are bound, moreover, to appear in person at the council, to explain their case and to await the council's judgment. 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. The disturbance caused by fear or pressure at a papal election corrodes and divides, in a lamentable way, the whole of Christianity. 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. 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. In the year of our Lord's nativity one thousand etc. This my profession and confession, written at my orders by a notary of the holy Roman church, I have signed below with my own hand.
I sincerely offer it on this altar N. Made etc. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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. Even before the council convened, Sigismund had become convinced that the only way to resolve the issue was to remove all three popes and select a single pope to rule from Rome. He quickly won many council members to his point of view. He was the only one of the three popes to make the journey in person, on the slim hope that his presence might earn him good will and allow him to stay in power.
But once in Constance, he had a falling out with Sigismund. Finally, detractors began spreading rumors about his immoral behavior as pope, opening the possibility of the Council excommunicating him and removing him from power.
John stalled for time, promising to resign in a statement in early March Then, on March 20, he disguised himself as a workman and slipped out of the city for the refuge of a supporter in Austria.
He was arrested in late April and returned to Constance. He was formally deposed as pope on May 29, and died in captivity on Dec.
Pope Gregory, who many believed had the strongest claim to the papacy, decided not to fight the Council. He resigned on July 4, , and soon retreated to peaceful obscurity. The Council finally lost patience, excommunicating him in July of that year and ending over a century of Avignon papacy. Benedict took refuge in the Kingdom of Aragon, which recognized him as pope until his death in With all three popes removed, the Council formed a conclave and selected Oddone Colonna, who had traveled to Constance with John XXIII and later took part in his removal, as the new and singular pope in November In honor of his election on St.
The next session took place three days later and the cardinal Francesco Zabarella was in charge of reading a text that had been written with the scope of justifying the conciliar authority. However, when the cardinal Zabarella proceeded to do it, he omitted an important fragment affirming the power of the Council to enact without papal support the reform in capite et membris 2.
After some new negotiations, the sentence was finally included in the decree approved at the 5 th session affirming that the Council held its power immediately from Christ 3. From this moment onwards the text of the decree has been a major object of controversy 4 For the text of the Haec sancta see Appendix. The affirmation of papal infallibility and primacy proclaimed by the Vatican Council I turned the Council of Constance and in particular the text of the Haec sancta into a highly conflictive issue that should be forgotten instead of studied 5.
During this period the historiography credited the old and polemical idea of Juan of Torquemada according to which the origin of conciliar thought should be searched in the heretical teaching of William of Ockham and Marsilius of Padua 6. Thus, the text of the Haec sancta was bluntly brushed aside from the catholic tradition. Even such a perceptive and skilled historian as J. Hefele who had been working on his monumental Conciliengeschicte, fell victim of this intellectual climate and affirmed that the question of the decree should be solved on canonical terms 7.
Nevertheless, in the work of some of the most important scholars of medieval political thought, as for example, O. Gierke, F. Bliemetzrieder, H. Ullmann we feel a great unrest about the supposedly heretical origins of conciliar thought. In fact, most of them started to suggest that its real source might be searched in the corpus of canonical texts regulating the life of ecclesiastical corporations during the xii and xiii centuries.
However, none of them made a systematical study about this corpus 8. Mansi and H. Van der Hardt. Few years after the Vatican Council I, H. Finke started the publication of the Acta Concilii Constantiensis 9. Oakley has studied how these theological criteria distorted the historical vision of the conciliar tradition since most of the instrumenta, theological Dictionaries and Catholic Encyclopedias tended to create a vacuum memoriae between the Council of Vienne and the Council of Florence In the same sense, the publication of the Codex Iuris Canonicis affirmed without restrictions on its canon the principle of the Prima Sedes a nemine iudicatur Even as late as , Angelo Mercati, the Prefect of the Vatican Library published a list of popes in which against all historical criteria the popes of the Pisan line were considered as anti-popes while the Roman ones were considered legitimate In his study, B.
Tierney proved what had been suggested previously: the real source of conciliar thought should be searched inside the catholic tradition. The sources of these ideas were on the one hand, the body of canonical texts interpretating the structure of the Universal Church in terms of ecclesiastical corporations and on the other hand, those glosses of the Decretum commenting the case of an heretical pope De Vooght suggested from an historical point of view the potential contradictions between the Pastor aeternus of the Vatican Council I and the Haec sancta approved by the Council of Constance Despite P.
Gill, the Director of the Pontifical Oriental Institute who restated the old polemical arguments which considered the Haec sancta an heretical intent to subvert the Church constitution desired by God Even if he thought he could justify his position from an historical point of view, once again the theological and canonical criteria conditioned the interpretation.
During this early period immediately after the call of the Vatican Concil II, the main topic of the debate was centered on the dogmatic validity of the Haec Sancta.
Far from claming a radical conciliar supremacy, he proposed a much more active role of the Council, but only in the cases of papal heresy or schism According to F. The Constitutional decree Lumen gentium approved by the Vatican Council II did not pronounce the last word about the issue. Even if this decree recognized the collegial and Episcopal magisterium of the Church, at the same time left the door open for curial centralism From this moment onwards the center of the debate has been the legal validity of the decree as a positive constitutional law Some Church historians as H.
Jedin, W. Franzen without refusing the validity of the Haec sancta, have been trying to establish its limits. According to their theory later called Notstandigtheorie , the decree was only an emergency measure with the scope of solving merely the particular situation caused by the Schism In fact, a similar interpretation had already been suggested by J.
Hollensteiner some years before However, the first problem of the Notstandigtheorie was the following: if the Haec sancta was only an emergency measure, how would they explain the meaning of the sentence cuiscumque alterius concilii generalis legitime congregati? Therefore, they had used the term alterius instead of alii.
Nevertheless, as it has been suggested by F. Oakley, W. Therefore, the popes had been ipso facto by their own heretical act deposed without a public process If the council fathers had followed the ipso facto theory, at the same time they would have cast doubts on the legitimacy of a Council convoked by an heretical head We have to remember that the sentence will be read later 29 th may.
This might be the reason why the council fathers decided to include this phrase We think that one of the fundamental premises of this theory relies on the effort to harmonize the canonical principle of Prima Sedes a nemine iudicatur with the historical facts.
This effort of course makes their supporters pay an important hermeneutical price since they are forced to adapt historical data to canonical principles. This tradition had its origins in the Summa De Iure Canonico Tractaturus xii century 29 and it had been later developed between others by the canonist Alanus Anglicus xiii century whose Apparatus Ius Naturale 30 became a classical reference about this issue.
In opposition to W. It should be remembered that during this period J. Gerson had corrected his De auferibilitate papae in which he defended the need of a public process of deposition However, we think that the fact of affirming the need of deposition process should be understood as a conservative strategy whose aim was to emphasize and strengthen the position of the Council as the most important hierarchical instance in charge of setting the limits of orthodoxy in a context of extreme institutional weakness.
Wyclif and J. Hus and the condemnation of the thesis of J. The council fathers were aware of the potential risks that would follow, if the theory of the ipso facto deposition was projected to the rest of the ecclesiastical hierarchy and to the secular politeia.
In their view this risk appeared with certain evidence in the teaching of J. Hus who with differences between them affirmed that a priest in mortal sin ipso facto would have lost his authority to administrate valid sacraments On the one hand, these ideas weakened the entire hierarchical and sacramental structure of the Church while on the other hand, they left the door open for secular intervention of the princes when the priests did not fulfill their evangelical duties.
The ipso facto deposition theory implied the recovery of another canonical principle affirming that the Pope could be deposed without a process because his own heretical act had turned him minor quolibet catholico. This principle which had been of great importance for William of Ockham in his fight against the papacy in the xiv th century, became during the Council of Constance a principle that due to its anarchical implications, should be expressly rejected and avoided In a similar fashion, the teaching of J.
Petit about tyrannicide stating that a tyrannical prince could be deposed or killed without a due public process was a potential risk that would follow from the ipso facto theory.
To counteract this risk once again J. Gerson in his De auferibilitate Papae felt compelled to state clearly that it was not possible for a subject to act against his ruler without a proper declaratione iudiciaria The council fathers in Constance had to face the difficult situation of deposing an heretical pope and at the same time reconstructing the bonds of obedience from below.
Therefore, the inquisitorial processes appeared as well fitted instance to do this. If the study of the symbolical and liturgical practices has shed great results, the study of the judicial practices has not yet fully exploited all its potentialities since the inquisitorial processes have been studied exclusively from a theological point of view If we study the judicial practices with one eye on the ecclesiological debates, this would give us a twofold advantage.
0コメント