Decretals, PAPAL.—I. DEFINITION AND EARLY as to the character of the party and his eminent good HISTORY.—(I) In the wide sense of the term decretails (i.e. epzstola decretalis) signifies a pontifical letter containing a decretum, or pontifical decision. (2) In a narrower sense it denotes a decision on a matter of discipline. (3) In the strictest sense of the word, it means a rescript (rescriptum), i.e. an answer of the pope when he has been appealed to or his advice has been sought on a matter of discipline. Papal decretals, therefore, are not necessarily general laws of the Church. But frequently the pope ordered the recipient of his letter to communicate the papal answer to the ecclesiastical authorities of the district to which he belonged; and it was their duty then to act in conformity with that decree when analogous cases arose. It is generally stated that the most ancient decretal is the letter of Pope Saint Siricius (384-398) to Himerius, Bishop of Tarragona in Spain, dating from 385; but it would seem that the document of the fourth century known as “Canones Romanorum ad Gallos episcopos” is nothing else than an epistola decretalis of his predecessor, Pope Damasus (366-384), addressed to the bishops of Gaul (Babut, La plus ancienne decretale, Paris, 1904). The decretals ought to be carefully distinguished from the canons of the councils; from the epistolcedogmaticce, i. e. the pontifical documents touching on Catholic doctrine; from the constitutions, or pontifical documents given motu pro prio, that is, documents issued by the pope without his being asked to do so or consulted upon a subject. (4) Finally, under the name decretals are known certain collections, containing especially, but not exclusively, pontifical decretals. These are the canonical collections of a later date than the “Decretum” of Gratian (about 1150). The commentators on these collections are named decretalists, in contradistinction to the decretists, or those who commented upon the “Decretum” of Gratian. Eventually some of these collections received official recognition; they form what is now known as the “Corpus Juris Canonici“. An account will be given here of the collections of decretals, but particularly of those of Gregory IX.
II. THE “QUINQUE COMPILATIONES ANTIQUAE DECRETALIUM”.—The “Decretum” of Gratian was considered in the middle of the twelfth century as a corpus Juris canonici, i.e. a code of the ecclesiastical laws then in force. As such, however, it was incomplete; moreover, many new laws were made by succeeding popes; whence the necessit of new collections (see Corpus Juris Canonici). Jive of these collections exhibited pontifical legislation from the “Decretum” of Gratian to the pontificate of Gregory IX (1150-1227). These are known as the “Quinque compilationes antiquae”. On account of their importance they were made the text of canonical instruction at the University of Bologna, and, like the “Decretum” of Gratian, were glossed, i.e. notes bearing on the explanation and interpretation of the text were added to the manuscripts. The first collection, the “Breviarium extravagantium”, or summary of the decretals not contained in the “Decretum” of Gratian (vagantes extra Decretum), was the work of Bernard of Pavia (q.v.) and was compiled 1187-1191. It contains papal decretals to the pontificate of Clement III inclusive (1187-1191). The compilation known as the third (Compilatio tertia), written however prior to the second collection (Compilatio secunda), contains the documents of the first twelve years of the pontificate of Innocent III (January 8, 1198—January 7, 1210) which are of a later date than those of the second compilation, the latter containing especially the decretals of Clement III and Celestine III (1191-1198). The “Compilatio tertia” is the oldest official collection of the legislation of the Roman Church; for it was composed by Cardinal Petrus Collivacinus of Benevento by order of Innocent III (1198-1216), by whom it was approved in the Bull “Devotioni vestrae” of December 28, 1210.
The second compilation, also called “Decretales mediae” or “Decretales intermediae”, was the work of a private individual, the Englishman John of Wales (de Walesio, Walensis, or Galensis). About 1216 an unknown writer formed the “Compilatio quarta”, the fourth collection, containing the decretals of the pontificate of Innocent III which are of a later date than January 7, 1210, and the canons of the Fourth Lateran Council held in 1215. Finally, the fifth compilation is, like the third, an official code, compiled by order of Honorius III (1216-1227) and approved by this pope in the Bull “Novae causarum” (1226 or 1227). It must also be noted that several of these collections contain decretals anterior to the time of Gratian, but not inserted by him in the “Decretum”. Bernard of Pavia divided his collection into five books arranged in titles and chapters. The first book treats of persons possessing jurisdiction (judex), the second of the civil legal processes (judicium), the third of clerics and regulars (clerus), the fourth of marriage (connubium), the fifth of delinquencies and of criminal procedure (crimen). In the four other collections the same logical division of the subject-matter was adopted. (For the text see Friedberg, Quinque compilationes antiquae, Leipzig, 1882.)
III. THE DECRETALS OF GREGORY IX.—Gregory IX, in 1230, ordered his chaplain and confessor, St. Raymond of Penaforte (Pennafort), a Dominican, to form a new canonical collection destined to replace all former collections. It has been said that the pope by this measure wished especially to emphasize his power over the Universal Church. The papacy had, indeed, arrived at the zenith of its power. Moreover, a pope less favorably circumstanced would, perhaps, not have thought of so important a measure. Nevertheless, the utility of a new collection was so evident that it is needless to seek other motives than those which the pope himself gives in the Bull “Rex pacificus” of September 5, 1234, viz., the inconvenience of recurring to several collections containing decisions most diverse and sometimes contradictory, exhibiting in some cases gaps and in others tedious length; moreover, on several matters the legislation was uncertain.
St. Raymond executed the work in about four years, and followed in it the method of the aforesaid “Quinque compilationes antiquae”. He borrowed from them the order of the subject-matter, the division into five books, of the books into titles, and of the titles into chapters. Of the 1971 chapters which the Decretals of Gregory IX contain, 1771 are taken from the “Quinque compilationes antiquae”, 191 are due to Gregory IX himself, 7 are taken from decretals of Innocent III not inserted in the former collections, and 2 are of unknown origin. They are arranged, as a general rule, according to the order of the ancient collections, i.e. each title opens with the chapters of the first collection, followed by those of the second, and so on in regular order; then come those of Innocent III, and finally those of Gregory IX. Almost all the rubrics, or headings of the titles, have also been borrowed from these collections, but several have been modified as regards detail. This method considerably lightened St. Raymond’s task. However, he did more than simply compile the documents of former collections. He left out 383 decisions, modified several others, omitted parts when he considered it prudent to do so, filled up the gaps, and, to render his collection complete and concordant, cleared up doubtful points of the ancient ecclesiastical law by adding some new decretals. He indicated by the words et infra the passages excised by him in the former collections. They are called partes decisa:. The new compilation bore no special title, but was called “Decretales Gregorii IX” or sometimes “Compilatio sexta”, i.e. the sixth collection with reference to the a Quinque compilationes antiquw”. It was also called “Collectio seu liber extra”, i.e. the collection of the laws not contained (vagantes extra) in the “Decretum” of Gratian. Hence the custom of denoting this collection by the letter X (i. e. extra).
Quotations from this collection are made by indicating the number of the chapter, the name the work goes by (X), the number of the book, and that of the title. Usually the heading of the title and sometimes the first words of the chapter are quoted; for instance, “c. 3, X, III, 23”, or “c. Odoardus, X, De solutionibus, III, 23”, refers to the third chapter, commencing with the word Odoardus, in the Decretals of Gregory IX, book III, title 23, which is entitled “De solutionibus”. If the number of the chapter or of the title is not indicated it will easily be learned on consulting the alphabetical indexes of the rubrics and of the introductory words of the chapters, which are to be found in all editions of the “Corpus Juris Canonici“. Gregory IX sent this new collection to the Universities of Bologna and Paris, and, as already stated, declared, by the Bull “Rex pacificus” of September 5, 1234, that this compilation was the official code of the canon law. All its decisions have the force of law, whether they be authentic or not, whatever the juridical value of the texts considered in themselves, and whatsoever the original text. It is a unique (unica) collection; all its decisions were simultaneously promulgated, and are equally obligatory, even if they appear to contain, or if in fact they do contain, antinomies, i.e. contradictions. In this peculiar case it is not possible to overcome the difficulty by recourse to the principle that a law of later date abrogates that of an earlier period. Finally, it is an exclusive collection, that is to say, it abrogates all the collections, even the official ones, of a later date than the “Decretum” of Gratian. Some authors (Schulte, Laurin) maintain that Gregory IX abrogated even those laws prior to Gratian’s time which the latter had not included in his “Deere-turn”, but this opinion is contested by several others (von Scherer, Schneider, Wernz, etc.). The controversy is no longer of practical interest.
The Decretals of Gregory IX differ widely from our modern codes. Instead of containing in one concise statement a legislative decision, they generally contain, in the beginning, an account of a controversy, the allegations of the parties in dispute, and a demand for the solution of the question. This is the species facti or the pars historica and has no juridical value whatever. The enacting part of the chapter (pars dispositiva) alone has the force of law. It is this part which contains the solution of the case or the statement of the rule of conduct. The rubrics of the titles have the force of law when their sense is complete, as for instance, Ne sede vacante aliquid innovetur (Let there be no innovation while the see is vacant). This is because the headings form an integral part of the official code of the laws. However, they ought always to be interpreted according to the decisions contained in the chapters. The historical indications concerning each chapter are often far from being exact, even since they were corrected in the Roman edition of 1582. It may be regretted that St. Raymond did not have recourse to the original documents themselves, of which a large number must have been at his disposal. The summaries (summaria) which precede the chapters are the work of the canonists and may assist in the elucidation of the text. The partes decisw are sometimes of like use, but never when these parts were designedly omitted from a desire to extinguish their legal force or because they contain decisions irreconcilable with the actual text of the law.
As in the case of the former canonical collections, the Decretals of Gregory IX were soon glossed. It was customary to add to the manuscript copies textual explanations written between the lines (glossa inlerlinearis) and on the margin of the page (glossa marginalis). Explanations of the subject-matter were also added. The most ancient glossarist of the Decretals of Gregory IX is Vincent of Spain; then follow Godefridus de Trano (d. 1245), Bonaguida Aretinus (thirteenth century), and Bernard of Botone or Parmensis (d. 1263), the author of the “Glossa ordinaria”, i.e. of that gloss to which authoritative credence was generally given. At a later date some extracts were added to the “Glossa ordinaria” from the “Novella sive commentarius in decretales epistolas Gregorii IX” by Giovanni d’Andrea (Johannes Andreae). After the invention of printing, the Decretals of Gregory IX were first published at Strasburg from the press of Heinrich Eggesteyn. Among the numerous editions which followed special mention must be made of that published in 1582, in csdibus populi romani, by order of Gregory XIII. The text of this edition, revised by the Correctores Romani, a pontifical commission established for the revision of the text of the “Corpus Juris”, has the force of law, even when it differs from that of St. Raymond. It is forbidden to introduce any change into that text (Brief “Cum pro munere”, July 1, 1580). Among the other editions, mention may be made of that by Le Conte (Antwerp, 1570), of prior date to the Roman edition and containing the partes decisce; that of the brothers Pithou (Paris, 1687); that of Bohmer (Halle, 1747), which did not reproduce the text of the Roman edition and was in its textual criticism more audacious than happy; the edition of Richter (Leipzig, 1839); and that of Friedberg (Leipzig, 1879-1881). All these authors added critical notes and the partes decisce.
To indicate the principal commentators on the Decretals would necessitate the writing of a history of canon law in the Middle Ages. Mere mention will be made of Innocent IV (d. 1254), Enrico de Segusio or Hostiensis (d. 1271), the “Abbas antiquus” (thirteenth century), Johannes Andre, already mentioned, Baldus de Ubaldis (d. 1400), Petrus de Ancharano (d. 1416), Franciscus de Zabarellis (d. 1417), Dominicus a Sancto Geminiano (fifteenth century), Joannes de Imola (d. 1436), Nicolo Tudesco, also called the “Abbas Siculus”, or “Modernus”, or “Panormitanus” (d. 1453). Among the modern commentators, Manuel Gonzalez Tellez and Fagnanus may be consulted advantageously for the interpretation of the text of the Decretals. The Decretals of Gregory IX still form the basis of canon law so far as it has not been modified by subsequent collections and by the general laws of the Church (see Corpus Juris Canonici).
IV. LATER COLLECTIONS OF DECRETALS.—The decretals of the successors of Gregory IX were also arranged in collections, of which several were official, notably those of Innocent IV, Gregory X, and Nicholas III, who ordered their decretals to be inserted among those of Gregory IX. In addition to these, several unofficial collections were drawn up. The inconveniences which Gregory IX had wished to remedy presented themselves again. For this reason Boniface VIII made a new collection of decretals which he promulgated by the Bull “Sacrosanct” of March 3, 1298. This is the “Sextus Liber Deeretalium”; it has a value similar to that of the Deeretals of Gregory IX. Boniface VIII abrogated all the decretals of the popes subsequent to the appearance of the Decretals of Gregory IX which were not included or maintained in force by the new collection; but as this collection is of later date than that of Gregory IX, it modifies those decisions of the latter collection which are irreconcilable with its own. Clement V, also, undertook to make an official collection, but death prevented him from perfecting this work. His collection was published by John XXII on October 25, 1317, under the title of “Liber septimus Decretalium”, but it is better known under the name of “Constitutiones Clementis V” or “Clementinx”. This is the last official collection of decretals. The two following collections, the last in the “Corpus Juris Canonici“, are the work of private individuals. They are called “Extravagantes“, because they are not included in the official collections. The first contains twenty Constitutions of John XXII, and is named “Extravagantes Joannis XXII”; the second is called “Extravagantes communes” and contains the decretals of different popes commonly met with in the manuscripts and editions. They were brought to their present form by Jean Chappuis in 1500 and 1503.
A. VAN HOVE