[Liber sextus Decretalium]

k Common. Otherwise the statute is [rendered] void, because some... but [one] can [obtain] through this letter others...
l Process held. Unless the process is [done] before different judges and nothing [was] excepted, will the sentence or process be valid? It seems so, because this benefit is personal, through which also [it] does not prejudice another. On rules, "To application." But it is truer according to B: the process is not valid through this letter; otherwise, nothing would seem to be added, [and] he would have harassed him in legitimate expenses [and he] would be condemned; and this same [thing] Innocent holds. Defendant also, during the same trial, holds the plaintiff [as] one who has deemed him [the defendant] liable to himself. m Expenses. And in the benefit of reconvention [there are] damages. Below, same title, chapter last, or of convention if he preferred to procure letters against him, [and] he ought to finish [the cause] before the same judges. And this is general, lest you harass the adversary in expenses; he will be able to refuse those who are suspected, [or be] punished with a similar penalty if he does [so]... Boniface VIII, "Furthermore, when..."
n Legitimate. Concerning this, say as in "On the office of the delegate," [chapter] "On him who..."
o During. Because reconvention ought to have its place. Not, below, "On loans," petition, chapter 1...
p Liable. Even by a real action. Digest...
q Or of convention. Perhaps it poses two words, because if the plaintiff reconvenes, the cause ought to be terminated by one and the same sentence. If they convene, then the first can be terminated, and [then] the second. This is proved here, below, "On loans," petition, chapter 1. Below, "On the office of the delegate," [chapter] "When the beloved," or perhaps in either case it is to be terminated by one sentence. And this [must be done] while the trial is pending before the same judge. Once finished, before another, for then the defendant cannot act before the first delegate, since the jurisdiction regarding the investigation has been finished. Below, "On the office of the delegate," [chapter] "To the plaintiff." But whether he can reconvene the same [person] before the ordinary during the same trial is doubted. And it seems for the affirmative, since this letter says: he preferred to procure letters, whence it seems to speak only of the delegate. But because the same reason is in both, the same law seems to be, according to B, or perhaps it is not the same reason, because ordinary jurisdiction is favorable, and extraordinary is hateful, and therefore something else could be said regarding the ordinary. To this makes what Innocent holds, below, chapter last.

r Letters. Perhaps it is such a cause that does not fall into the investigation of the delegate without special mandate of the pope. 6th [book], question 3, [chapter] "If the bishop." But "On the office of the delegate," [chapter] "Use of the duty," [chapter] 1, and 2, below, [chapter] "On restoration to the original state," [chapter] "Penultimate." Otherwise, why would he load himself in procuring letters, [he] who can expedite his business through the plaintiff's letters? In reconvention, the defendant becomes the plaintiff...
s Expire. [He] acting, because [he is]... below, "On the cause of possession," [chapter] "Pastoral." Elsewhere it is posited for [to] defend. "On judgment," [chapter] 1.
t Refuse. From the beginning, before he has consented to them, according to B, as [mentioned] above in [the section] "On the cause," "On the office of the delegate," [chapter] "By insinuating." And while the investigation of the suspicion is pending, the judge will not proceed in the cause of reconvention procured by the defendant, because if the contrary were said, it would be easy to delude this constitution, according to Innocent.
v Similar penalty. Expressed above in the plaintiff: that he lacks letters, the process is not valid, and he is condemned in expenses. But by whom such condemnation is made, [note] below, same title, chapter last.

A woodcut depicts the Pope receiving letters of faculty, granting canonical reception.

When someone [is] receiving someone as a canon...

There was a discussion concerning an Extravagant of Alexander, which began, "It happens," and B says that the one received by letters of faculty, if the reception belonged to the receivers and not the Pope's authority, he is understood to be received, unless something else is held in the letters.

Si [reception was] expressed. But if the reception did not belong to them, then he is received by apostolic authority. But before all things, I ask for what purpose it expedites to know what [is] here decided? It expedites for the sake of that which [is] here, below, "On prebends," [chapter] "Those who by authority," and "On the office of the ordinary," [chapter] last, [and] "To him," or "Them." It emanated, however, for a declaration because of that which [is] here, below, "On letters of faculty," [chapter] "Relating," and "Appointed," below, same [section], chapter, or beyond two sheets.

Si, notwithstanding the provisions, customs, or statutes of the same church, strengthened by oath, apostolic confirmation, or any other infirmity, we grant by our letters the power of receiving canons [to someone], the reception of another in the same church does not belong to those to whom such letters are directed. But by the force of those [letters], he who receives [them] receives the power; [and] he who is received is known to be received by apostolic authority.

[If] to someone...

Si, by the Roman Pontiff, it is granted to you that you can retain the benefits which you obtain at the time of your promotion until the pleasure of his will, this grace expires immediately upon his death, by whom the pleasure of his will is entirely extinguished.