Oratio lamentabilis ... Iohannes Savageti Constantiensis et Basiliensis ... super turbatione dicte ecclesie Constantiensis ... una cum tractatu per eum, edito sex dubiis iuris clauso ... Per que evidens iustitia ... Ludovici de Freiberg ... confirmati episcopi ac iniustitia Ottonis de Sunnenberg ... declaratur et ostenditur

as stated in the chapter ignorantia ignorance, Distinction 38. Whence also Jerome in his prologue to Isaiah says: if, according to the Apostle Paul, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God, he who does not know the scriptures does not know the power of God and His wisdom. For ignorance of the scriptures is ignorance of Christ: Distinction 38, chapter Si iuxta apostolum If according to the Apostle. For he who lives rebelliously and refuses to learn and read good things is shown to be a member of the devil rather than of Christ, and is shown to be an infidel rather than a faithful one, as in the chapter Nullus epus No bishop, Distinction 38. Therefore, to repel the ignorance, malice, and calumny of the rebels, and so that it may be clearly evident to all that the said provisions were and are canonical, and that the rebels themselves, like blind men and leaders of the blind, assert the true to be false and the false to be true—whom the prophet Isaiah curses, saying: "Woe to you who call good evil and evil good, setting darkness for light and light for darkness," as found in Case 11, Question 3, chapter Ve qui Woe to those who—I, Johannes Savageti, Doctor of Laws and Licentiate in Decrees, Canon and Archdeacon of the said churches of Constance and Basel, and formerly an advocate in the Roman Curia, for the praise of Almighty God and the most blessed Virgin Mary and our Most Holy Lord Pope Sixtus, and the Holy Apostolic See, not out of a desire to obtain praise but out of a charity to pursue and sow the truth, have taken care to discuss and elucidate the truth in the aforementioned matters according to the meagerness of my intellect, and on that occasion I have formulated the doubts written below.

¶ And first I ask: Whether the reservation of the Church of Constance, and the apostolic provision made for it regarding the person of the aforementioned Lord Ludovic before its actual vacancy, were valid, notwithstanding the Concordats of the German nation.

¶ Second: Whether the second provision, corroborating the first and subsequently made by our Most Holy Lord concerning the person of the said Lord Ludovic, is consonant with the Concordats and should be judged to have been made according to them.

¶ Third: Whether those appealing from such provisions and the requisitions made thereafter have incurred the censures and other penalties contained in the apostolic letters issued regarding this, notwithstanding their own appeal.

¶ Fourth: Whether the mandates of the Lord Emperor, granted in favor of Otto of Sunnenberg and to the prejudice of the aforementioned Lord Ludovic, should be obeyed.

¶ Fifth: Whether it was permissible to hear divine offices and receive the ecclesiastical sacraments from those rebel priests who are excommunicated and denounced. And whether those who knowingly participate with them have incurred the same ecclesiastical censures, and what is the law regarding those in Constance who knowingly received orders from those putative bishops of the Batutensian and Sebastian churches, who are interdicted.