[Casus longi super V libros decretalium] (1479) - Page 16

In similar cases, the same rule must be observed. ¶ Note that if any things are ordered under a disjunction, it is enough for one to be fulfilled. In similar cases, the judgment is similar.

Case: Behold, someone having several benefices obtained letters against the Archbishop of Ravenna regarding obtaining a benefice in the church of Ravenna. Being very amazed that the Pope was writing for someone who already had a sufficient benefice, the Archbishop wrote to the Pope about this. The Pope writes back to him, saying: "Brother, if at any time we direct our writings to you, and it seems that your spirit is irritated, you should not be troubled nor moved. Instead, you should carefully consider the nature of the business for which we write, and either reverently fulfill our mandate, or through your own letters show a reasonable cause why you cannot fulfill it, because we will patiently sustain it if you do not do what was suggested to us by depraved insinuation."

If at any time

¶ Note that a subordinate should not be moved by the harshness of the words of a superior. ¶ Also, that the mandate of a superior must be fulfilled, or a reason must be given why it is not fulfilled. And thus note that a right is conferred through monitorial letters. ¶ Also note that those things that are elicited through excessive solicitousness are not valid. ¶ Also note that an account must be rendered for everything.

Case: A Cistercian monk here

With the order, etc.

or other religious have privileges regarding tithes or other things. It is said here that if anyone has obtained letters against these religious regarding those things in which they are privileged, without mention being made of their privileges, they are not bound to answer them. ¶ Also note that a rescript obtained against regulars regarding those things which were granted to them by privilege is not valid unless

if mention is made of the privilege or the order in the rescript.

Case: A certain Jew newly converted to the faith

To you, the

church of Tournai being vacant, he obtained letters against the Dean and Chapter of the church of Tournai that they should receive him as a canon and as a brother and offer him a prebend. He presented his letters to the Dean and Chapter. They replied that the collation of prebends did not pertain to them, but to the Bishop of Tournai. Afterwards, he presented the letters to the Bishop, requesting that he fulfill what the Pope had commanded. The Bishop replied that he had received no mandate from the Lord Pope regarding this. And so, the business having failed, he returned to the Pope. The Pope writes back to the Bishop of Tournai, saying that if he had attended more diligently to the date of the letters, he would by no means have repelled him, because at the time when the letters were given, he was with the chapter as one who was the Archdeacon of that same church, and he was not yet consecrated as bishop. Whence, he could not allege that he had not received a mandate. In the end, he says that he ought not to have disdained to receive him because he was a Jew. ¶ From this decretal, note that the date of the letters must be considered. ¶ Also, that a mandate to the chapter is understood as a mandate to anyone of the chapter.

Case: A certain person through letters, having suppressed his name

To the ears

of dignities, they obtained letters regarding major benefices, calling themselves by a simple name. It is asked whether such letters are valid. The Pope replies that it is not his intention that such poor clerks, by whose names the author suppresses his dignity, should be disturbed by such letters. Whence, such letters are not valid. ¶ From this decretal, note that one must recur to the intention of the mandate. ¶ Also note that he who obtains letters regarding a benefice, if