The title canon Episcopi is conventionally given to a certain passage found in medieval canon law. The text originates in an early 10th-century penitential, recorded by Regino of Prüm, it is an important source on folk belief and surviving pagan customs in Francia on the eve of the formation of the Holy Roman Empire. The folk beliefs described in the text reflect the residue of pre-Christian beliefs at about one century after the Carolingian Empire had been Christianized, its condemnation of the belief in witchcraft was an important argument used by the opponents of the witch trials during the 16th century, such as Johann Weyer. The conventional title "canon Episcopi" is based on the text's incipit, was current from at least the 17th century, it is first attested in the Libri de synodalibus causis et disciplinis ecclesiasticis composed by Regino of Prüm around 906. It was included in Burchard of an early attempt at collecting all of Canon law; the text was adopted in the Decretum of Ivo of Chartres and in Gratian's authoritative Corpus juris canonici of c.
1140. Because it was included in Gratian's compilation the text was treated as canon law for the remaining part of the High Middle Ages, until Roman Catholic views on European witchcraft began to change in the late medieval period; the text of Gratian is not the same as the one used by Burchard, the distinctive features of the Corrector text were thus not transmitted to times. The text of Regino of Prüm was edited in Patrologia Latina, volume 132; the text of Burchard's Corrector has been separately edited by Wasserschleben, again by Schmitz. The incipit of Gratian's text, which gave rise to the title of "canon Episcopi" reads: Episcopi, eorumque ministri omnibus modis elaborare studeant, ut perniciosam et a diabolo inventam sortilegam et magicam artem ex parochiis suis penitus eradicent, et si aliquem virum aut mulierem hujuscemodi sceleris sectatorem invenerint, turpiter dehonestatum de parochiis suis ejiciant. "The bishops and their ministers should by all means make great effort so that they may eradicate the pernicious art of divination and magic, invented by the devil, from their parishes, if they find any man or woman adhering to such a crime, they should eject them, turpidly dishonoured, from their parishes."This condemnation the "pernicious art of divination and magic" is justified by a reference to Titus 3:10-11 on heresy.
Follows a description of the errors of "certain wicked women", who deceived by Satan believe themselves to join the train of the pagan goddess Diana during the hours of the night, to cover great distances within a multitude of women riding on beasts, during certain nights to be called to the service of their mistress. Those holding such beliefs are condemned by the text in no uncertain terms, deploring the great number of people who "relapse into pagan error" by holding such beliefs; because of this, the text instructs that all priests should teach at every possible instant that such beliefs are phantasms inspired by an evil spirit. The following paragraph presents an account of the means by which Satan takes possession of the minds of these women by appearing to them in numerous forms, how once he holds captive their minds, deludes them by means of dreams; the text emphasizes that the heretic belief is to hold that these transformations occur in the body, while they are in reality dream visions inspired in the mind.
The text proposes that it is normal to have nightly visions in which one sees things that are never seen while awake, but that it is a great stupidity to believe that the events experienced in the dream vision have taken place in the body. Examples are adduced, of Ezechiel having his prophetic visions in spirit, not in body, of the Apocalypse of John, seen in spirit, not in body, of Paul of Tarsus, who describes the events at Damascus as a vision, not as a bodily encounter; the text concludes by repeating that it should be publicly preached that all those holding such beliefs have lost their faith, believing not in God but in the devil, whosoever believes that it is possible to transform themselves into a different kind of creature, is far more wavering than an infidel. The Canon Episcopi has received a great deal of attention from historians of the witch craze period as early documentation of the Catholic church's theological position on the question of witchcraft; the position taken by the author is that these "rides of Diana" did not exist, that they are deceptions, dreams or phantasms.
It is the belief in the reality of such deceptions, considered a heresy worthy of excommunication. The position here is that the devil is real, creating delusions in the mind, but that the delusions do not have bodily reality; this s
Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, is one of the constitutions of the Second Vatican Council. It was approved by the assembled bishops by a vote of 2,147 to 4 and promulgated by Pope Paul VI on 4 December 1963; the main aim was to achieve greater lay participation in the Catholic Church's liturgy. The title is taken from the opening lines of the document and means "this Sacred Council"; the numbers given correspond to section numbers within the text. Introduction General Principles for the Restoration and Promotion of the Sacred Liturgy The Nature of the Sacred Liturgy and Its Importance in the Church's Life The Promotion of Liturgical Instruction and Active Participation The Reform of the Sacred Liturgy General Norms Norms Drawn from the Hierarchic and Communal Nature of the Liturgy Norms Based Upon the Didactic and Pastoral Nature of the Liturgy Norms for Adapting the Liturgy to the Culture and Traditions of Peoples Promotion of Liturgical Life in Diocese and Parish The Promotion of Pastoral-Liturgical Action The Most Sacred Mystery of the Eucharist The Other Sacraments and the Sacramentals The Divine Office The Liturgical Year Sacred Music Sacred Art and Sacred Furnishings Appendix: A Declaration of the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican on Revision of the Calendar As is customary with Catholic documents, the name of this constitution, "Sacred Council" in Latin, is taken from the first line of the document: 1.
This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful. The Council therefore sees cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy. One of the first issues considered by the council, the matter that had the most immediate effect on the lives of individual Catholics, was the renewal of the liturgy; the central idea was. Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that conscious and active participation in liturgical celebrations, demanded by the nature of the liturgy; such participation by the Christian people as a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a redeemed people, is their right and duty by reason of their baptism. Popes Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII asked that the people be taught how to chant the responses at Mass and that they learn the prayers of the Mass in order to participate intelligently. Now the bishops decreed that: "To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, psalmody and songs."
Composers should "produce compositions which... for the active participation of the entire assembly of the faithful."After centuries when, with the Mass in Latin, Catholic piety centred around popular devotions, the bishops decreed that "Popular devotions... should be so drawn up that they harmonize with the liturgical seasons, accord with the sacred liturgy, are in some fashion derived from it, lead the people to it, since, in fact, the liturgy by its nature far surpasses any of them."On 24 August 2017 Pope Francis emphasized that "the reform of the liturgy is irreversible" and called for continued efforts to implement the reforms, repeating what Pope Paul VI had said one year before he died: "The time has come, now, to leave aside the disruptive ferments pernicious in one sense or the other, to implement according to its right inspiring criteria, the reform approved by us in application of the decisions of the council." The council fathers established guidelines to govern the renewal of the liturgy, which included and encouraged greater use of the vernacular in addition to Latin for the biblical readings and other prayers.
Implementation of the council's directives on the liturgy was to be carried out under the authority of Pope Paul VI by a special papal commission incorporated in the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, and, in the areas entrusted to them, by national conferences of bishops, which, if they had a shared language, were expected to collaborate in producing a common translation. Magnum principium Mass of Paul VI Musicam sacram
Benedictus Deus (Pius IV)
Benedictus Deus is a papal bull written by Pius IV in 1564 which ratified all decrees and definitions of the Council of Trent. It maintains that the decrees of the Council of Trent can be interpreted by the Papal office itself; this was seen by Church contemporaries of Pius IV as an attempt to strengthen the influence of the Papacy against the rise of Conciliarism exemplified by the Council of Trent itself. There is a more minor bull of the same title written by Benedict XII in 1336. Bulla S. D. N. D. Pii Divina Providentia papae generalis concilii Tridentini. Mexicopoli: Ocharte, 1565 Text at archive.org The full text of Benedictus Deus at Wikisource
1917 Code of Canon Law
The 1917 Code of Canon Law referred to as the Pio-Benedictine Code, was the first official comprehensive codification of Latin canon law. It was promulgated on 27 May 1917 and took legal effect on 19 May 1918, it was in force until the 1983 Code of Canon Law took legal effect and abrogated it on 27 November 1983. It has been described as "the greatest revolution in canon law since the time of Gratian". Papal attempts at codification of the scattered mass of canon law spanned the eight centuries since Gratian produced his Decretum c. 1150. In the 13th century canon law became the object of scientific study, different compilations were made by the Roman Pontiffs; the most important of these were the five books of the Decretales Gregorii IX and the Liber Sextus of Boniface VIII. The legislation grew with time; some of it became obsolete, contradictions crept in so that it became difficult in recent times to discover what was of obligation and where to find the law on a particular question. Since the close of the ‘’Corpus Juris’’ numerous new laws and decrees had been issued by popes and Roman Congregations.
No complete collection of them had been published and they remained scattered through the ponderous volumes of the ‘’Bullaria’’ the ‘’Acta Sanctae Sedis’’, other such compilations, which were accessible to only a few and for professional canonists themselves and formed an unwieldy mass of legal material. Moreover, not a few ordinances, whether included in the ‘’Corpus Juris’’ or of more recent date, appeared to be contradictory. Great confusion was thus engendered and correct knowledge of the law rendered difficult for those who had to enforce it. In the Council of Trent the wish had been expressed in the name of the King of Portugal that a commission of learned theologians be appointed to make a thorough study of the canonical constitutions binding under pain of mortal sin, define their exact meaning, see whether their obligation should not be restricted in certain cases, determine how far they were to be maintained and observed; when the Vatican Council met in 1869 a number of bishops of different countries petitioned for a new compilation of church law that would be clear and studied.
The council never finished no attempt was made to bring the legislation up to date. By the 19th Century, this body of legislation included some 10,000 norms. Many of these were difficult to reconcile with one another due to changes in circumstances and practice; this situation impelled Pope St. Pius X to order the creation of the first Code of Canon Law, a single volume of stated laws. In response to the request of the bishops at the First Vatican Council, on 14 May 1904, with the motu proprio Arduum sane munus, Pope Pius X set up a commission to begin reducing these diverse documents into a single code, presenting the normative portion in the form of systematic short canons shorn of the preliminary considerations and omitting those parts, superseded by developments. Under the aegis of Cardinal Pietro Gasparri, the Commission for the Codification of Canon Law was completed under Benedict XV who promulgated the Code, effective in 1918; the work having been begun by Pius X and promulgated by Benedict XV, it is sometimes called the "Pio-Benedictine Code," but more the 1917 Code.
In its preparation centuries of material were examined, scrutinized for authenticity by leading experts, harmonized as much as possible with opposing canons and other codes, from the Codex of Justinian to the Napoleonic Code. Pope Pius X in a letter on 19 March 1904 announced his intention of revising the unwieldy mass of past legislation and appointed a commission of cardinals and learned consultors to undertake this difficult work; the Catholic universities of the world and the bishops of all countries were asked to cooperate. The scholars began a copy of the first draft was sent to the bishops for suggestions. In addition to the canon law experts brought to Rome to serve on the codification commission, all the Latin Church's bishops and superiors general of religious orders were periodically consulted via letter; every Latin bishop had the right to permanently keep a representative in Rome to give him voice at the meetings of the codification commission. By the winter of 1912, the "whole span of the code" had been completed, so that a provisional text was printed.
The 1912 text was sent out to all Latin bishops and superiors general for their comment, their notations which they sent back to the codification commission were subsequently printed and distributed to all members of the commission, in order that the members might consider the suggestions. The new code was completed in 1916; the code was promulgated on 27 May 1917, Pentecost Sunday, as the Code of Canon Law by Pius' successor, Pope Benedict XV, who set 19 May 1918 as the date on which it came into force. For the most part, it applied only to the Latin Church except when "it treats of things that, by their nature, apply to the Oriental", such as the effects of baptism, it contained 2,414 canons. On 15 September 1917, by the motu proprio Cum Iuris Canonici, Pope Benedict XV made provision for a Pontifical Commission charged with interpreting the code and making any necessary modifications as legislation was issued. New laws would be appended to existing canons in new paragraphs or inserted between canons, repeating the number of the previous canon and adding bis, etc. so as not to subvert the
Collectio canonum Wigorniensis
The Collectio canonum Wigorniensis is a medieval canon law collection originating in southern England around the year 1005. It exists in multiple recensions, the earliest of which — "Recension A" — consists of just over 100 canons drawn from a variety of sources, most predominantly the ninth-century Frankish collection of penitential and canon law known as the Collectio canonum quadripartita; the author of Recension A is unknown. Other recensions exist later in date than the first; these recensions are extensions and augmentations of Recension A, are known collectively as "Recension B". These recensions all bear the unmistakable mark of having been created by Wulfstan, bishop of Worcester and archbishop of York sometime around the year 1008, though some of them may have been compiled as late as 1023, the year of Wulfstan's death; the collection treats a range of ecclesiastical and lay subjects, such as clerical discipline, church administration and clerical penance and private penance, as well as a variety of spiritual and catechistic matters.
Several "canons" in the collection verge on the character of sermons or expository texts rather than church canons in the traditional sense. Cross and Hamer's edition, Wulfstan's canon law collection Thorpe's edition in vol. 2 of his Ancient laws and institutes Johnson's English translation in his A collection of all the ecclesiastical laws Spelman's editio princeps in his Concilia, leges, constitutiones Discussion on the Anglo-Saxon canon law Web site A comprehensive edition of the canonical material in Cambridge, Corpus 265 A comprehensive edition of the canonical material in the Oxford manuscript A comprehensive edition of the canonical material in the London manuscript A comprehensive edition of the canonical material in Cambridge, Corpus 190 P. Wormald, The making of English law: King Alfred to the twelfth century. Vol. I: legislation and its limits. Wulfstan’s canon law collection, eds J. E. Cross and A. Hamer, Anglo-Saxon texts 1. A Wulfstan manuscript, containing institutes and homilies, ed. H.
R. Loyn, Early English manuscripts in facsimile 17
Donation of Constantine
The Donation of Constantine is a forged Roman imperial decree by which the 4th-century emperor Constantine the Great transferred authority over Rome and the western part of the Roman Empire to the Pope. Composed in the 8th century, it was used in the 13th century, in support of claims of political authority by the papacy. Lorenzo Valla, an Italian Catholic priest and Renaissance humanist, is credited with first exposing the forgery with solid philological arguments in 1439–1440, although the document's authenticity had been contested since 1001. In many of the existing manuscripts, including the oldest one, the document bears the title Constitutum domini Constantini imperatoris; the Donation of Constantine was included in the 9th-century Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals collection. The text, purportedly a decree of Roman Emperor Constantine I dated 30 March, in a year mistakenly said to be both that of his fourth consulate and that of the consulate of Gallicanus, contains a detailed profession of Christian faith and a recounting of how the emperor, seeking a cure for his leprosy, was converted and baptized by Pope Sylvester I.
In gratitude, he determined to bestow on the seat of Peter "power, dignity of glory, vigour, honour imperial", "supremacy as well over the four principal sees, Antioch and Constantinople, as over all the churches of God in the whole earth". For the upkeep of the church of Saint Peter and that of Saint Paul, he gave landed estates "in Judea, Asia, Africa and the various islands". To Sylvester and his successors he granted imperial insignia, the tiara, "the city of Rome, all the provinces and cities of Italy and the western regions". What may be the earliest known allusion to the Donation is in a letter of 778, in which Pope Hadrian I exhorts Charlemagne, whose father, Pepin the Younger, had made the Donation of Pepin granting the Popes sovereignty over the Papal States, to follow Constantine's example and endow the Roman Catholic church; the first pope to directly invoke the decree was Pope Leo IX, in a letter sent in 1054 to Michael I Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople. He cited a large portion of the document, believing it genuine, furthering the debate that would lead to the East–West Schism.
In the 11th and 12th centuries, the Donation was cited in the investiture conflicts between the papacy and the secular powers in the West. In his Divine Comedy, written in the early 14th century, the poet Dante Alighieri wrote: "Ahi, Costantin, di quanto mal fu matre, / non la tua conversion, ma quella dote / che da te prese il primo ricco patre!". During the Middle Ages, the Donation was accepted as authentic, although the Emperor Otto III did raise suspicions of the document "in letters of gold" as a forgery, in making a gift to the See of Rome, it was not until the mid-15th century, with the revival of Classical scholarship and textual criticism, that humanists, the papal bureaucracy, began to realize that the document could not be genuine. Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa spoke of it as an apocryphal work; the Catholic priest Lorenzo Valla argued in his philological study of the text that the language used in manuscript could not be dated to the 4th century. The language of the text suggests that the manuscript can most be dated to the 8th century.
Valla believed the forgery to be so obvious that he leaned toward believing that the Church had knowledge that the document was inauthentic. Valla further argued that papal usurpation of temporal power had corrupted the church, caused the wars of Italy, reinforced the "overbearing, tyrannical priestly domination."This was the first instance of modern, scientific diplomatics. Independently of both Cusa and Valla, Reginald Pecocke, Bishop of Chichester, reached a similar conclusion. Among the indications that the Donation must be a fake are its language and the fact that, while certain imperial-era formulas are used in the text, some of the Latin in the document could not have been written in the 4th century; the purported date of the document is inconsistent with the content of the document itself, as it refers both to the fourth consulate of Constantine as well as the consulate of Gallicanus. Pope Pius II wrote a tract in 1453, five years before becoming Pope, to show that, though the Donation was a forgery, the papacy owed its lands to Charlemagne and its powers of the keys to Peter.
Contemporary opponents of papal powers in Italy emphasized the primacy of civil law and civil jurisdiction, now embodied once again in the Justinian Corpus Juris Civilis. The Florentine chronicler Giovanni Cavalcanti reported that, in the year of Valla's treatise, Filippo Maria Visconti, Duke of Milan, made diplomatic overtures toward Cosimo de' Medici in Florence, proposing an alliance against the Pope. In reference to the Donation, Visconti wrote: "It so happens that if Constantine consigned to Sylvester so many and such rich gifts –, doubtful, because such a privilege can nowhere be found – he could only have granted them for his lifetime: the Empire takes precedence over any lordship." Scholars further demonstrated that other elements, such as Sylvester's curing of Constantine, are legends which originated at a time. Wolfram Setz, a recent editor of Valla's work, has affirmed that at the time of Valla's refutation, Constantine's alleged "
Collectio canonum quadripartita
The Collectio canonum quadripartita is an early medieval canon law collection, written around the year 850 in the ecclesiastical province of Reims. It consists of four books; the Quadripartita is an episcopal manual of penitential law. It was a popular source for knowledge of penitential and canon law in France and Italy in the ninth and tenth centuries, notably influencing Regino's enormously important Libri duo de synodalibus causis. Well into the thirteenth century the Quadripartita was being copied by scribes and quoted by canonists who were compiling their own collections of canon law; this work should not be confused with the early twelfth-century Latin translation of Old English law known as the Quadripartitus. The complementary acts of confession and penance highly ritualized acts undertaken only once in a lifetime and in public fora, developed in the early Middle Ages into a disciplinary system known as private penance, in which the faithful were encouraged to confess their sins and in secret to a priest or confessor, who enjoined an appropriate period of punishment.
Through the Middle Ages the private penitential system became an elaborate and ritualized institution. In its earliest form, however―that is, as it was practiced from around the sixth to eighth centuries―this system was dependent upon the transmission of basic lists of sins and their corresponding punishments; these short lists of sins made up a genre of texts known as the'penitential handbook'. Penitentials were first employed as disciplinary tools by Irish and British monks living in cloistered ascetical religious communities, but soon spread to England and France, where they developed into varied and grander forms. By the eighth century, penitentials had adopted a focus on lay sins, their popularity was rivalled only by their variety. This gave rise during the early ninth century to a backlash against the diversity of penitentials and the diversity of disciplinary and theological'errors' which they propagated. A number of Frankish councils demanded that the laws of the older penitentials be brought into line with the accepted canonical norms of the church, as reflected in the more conservative collectiones canonum being compiled at the time.
As a result of such efforts towards standardization, the older penitentials fell out of use and were replaced by the large collections of penitential and canon law which dominated in France and Italy in the tenth and eleventh centuries. During the Carolingian period there evolved two different yet overlapping contexts in which the penitentials were used; the first of these was the pastoral context of confession between parishioner. The second was an administrative and/or academic context, in which books of penitential law served bishops in their roles as administrators of local dioceses, adjudicators at judicial synods and students of moral philosophy and canon law; the penitential required by a bishop was much different than that required by the confessor-priest, it is within this episcopal context that the penitentials evolved from mere manuals into vast collections of penitential and administrative law. By the ninth century, chapters from penitential manuals had entered many of the influential canon law collections being copied and compiled on the Continent.
Since at least the fifth and sixth centuries, canon law collections could boast of being repositories of the ancient and authoritative conciliar and papal judgements of the Christian church. As such, these collections had at first stood in stark contrast to the early penitentials, whose lists of sins and corresponding penances was neither ancient nor authoritative. In time, the genres of collectio and penitential blended together; as canon law collections succumbed to revision and abandoned their claims to antique authority by including newer and less authoritative laws, it became more common for them to include penitential canons. The collections began to look more like penitentials as penitentials everywhere were beginning to take on characteristics of the more'formal' collectiones. Problems of textual stability and genre were further exacerbated by the fact that no one code or collection of canon law claimed status as the recognized standard, it was in this context of fluctuating generic and textual boundaries in France that the Quadripartita developed.
The first book treats the life, preaching and duty of priests. Books 3 and 4 are longer than books 1 and 2. Scholars have divided the Quadripartita into a number of component parts, including a dedicatory letter, a brief list of authorities used, a list or register of titles for each book, a general preface, prefaces for books 2–4, the text or canons of the four books and an Epilogue