Denzinger EN 712
715 Dz 364 Can. 2. If anyone with the intervention of the accursed ardor of avarice has acquired through money an allowance from the state, or a priory, or a deanery, or honor, or some ecclesiastical promotion, or any ecclesiastical sacrament, namely chrism or holy oil, the consecrations of altars or of churches, let him be deprived of the honor evilly acquired. And let the buyer and the seller and the mediator be struck with the mark of disgrace. And not for food nor under the pretense of any custom before or after may anything be demanded from anyone, nor may he himself presume to give, since he is a simoniac. But freely and without any diminution let him enjoy the dignity and favor acquired for himself. *
716 Dz 365 Can. 13. Moreover the detestable and shameful and, I say, insatiable rapacity of money lenders, forbidden both by divine and human laws throughout the Scripture in the Old and in the New Testament, we condemn, and we separate them from all ecclesiastical consolation, commanding that no archbishop, no bishop, no abbot of any rank, nor anyone in an order and in the clergy presume to receive moneylenders except with the greatest caution. But during their whole life let them be considered disreputable and, unless they repent, let them be deprived of Christian burial. *
717 Dz 366 Can. 22. "Certainly because among other things there is one thing which especially disturbs the Holy Church, namely, false repentance, we warn our confreres and priests lest by false repentance the souls of the laity are allowed to be deceived and to be drawn into hell. It is clear, moreover, that repentance is false when, although many things have been disregarded, repentance is practiced concerning one thing only; or when it is practiced concerning one thing, in such a way that he is not separated from another. Therefore, it is written: "He who shall observe the whole law yet offends in one thing, has become guilty of all," (Jc 2,10), with respect to eternal life. For just as if he had been involved in all sins, so if he should remain in only one, he will not enter the gate of eternal life. Also that repentance becomes false if when repenting one does not withdraw from either court or business duty, a thing which for no reason can be done without sin, or if hatred is kept in the heart, or if satisfaction be not made to one who has been offended, or if the offended one does not forgive the one offending, or if anyone take up arms against justice."*
718 Dz 367 Can. 23. "Those, moreover, who pretending a kind of piety condemn the sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord, the baptism of children, the sacred ministry and other ecclesiastical orders, and the bond, of legitimate marriages, we drive as heretics from the Church of God, and we both condemn and we command them to be restrained by exterior powers. We bind their defenders also by the chain of this same condemnation." *
721 Dz 368 1. That the Father is complete power, the Son a certain power, the Holy Spirit no power.
722 Dz 369 2. That the Holy Spirit is not of the substance [another version:* power] of the Father or of the Son.
Dz 370 3. That the Holy Spirit is the soul of the world.
723 Dz 371 4. That Christ did not assume flesh to free us from the yoke of the devil.
724 Dz 372 5. That neither God and man, nor this Person which is Christ, is the third Person in the Trinity.
725 Dz 373 6. That free will is sufficient in itself for any good.
726 Dz 374 7. That God is only able to do or to omit those things, either in that manner only or at that time in which He does (them), and in no other.
727 Dz 375 8. That God neither ought nor is He able to prevent evil.
728 Dz 376
9. That we have not contracted sin from Adam, but only punishment.
729 Dz 377 10. That they have not sinned who being ignorant have crucified Christ,
730 and that whatever is done through ignorance must not be considered as sin.
731 Dz 378 11. That the spirit of the fear of the Lord was not in Christ.
732 Dz 379 12. That the power of binding and loosing was given to the Apostles only, not to their successors.
733 Dz 380 13. That through work man becomes neither better nor worse.
734 Dz 381 14. That to the Father, who is not from another, properly or especially belongs power, * not also wisdom and kindness.
735 Dz 382 15. That even chaste fear is excluded from future life.
736 Dz 383 16. That the devil sends forth evil suggestion through the operation * of stones and herbs.
737 Dz 384 17. That the coming at the end of the world can be attributed to the Father.
738 Dz 385 18. That the soul of Christ did not descend to hell by itself but only by power.
739 Dz 386 19. That neither action nor will, neither concupiscence nor delight, when * it moves it [the soul] is a sin, nor ought we to wish to extinguish (it).,*
[From the letter of Innocent II "Testante Apostolo" to Henry the Bishop of Sens, July 16, 1140 * ]
And so we who though unworthily are observed to reside in the chair of St. Peter, to whom it has been said by the Lord: "And thou being once converted convert thy brethren" (Lc 22,33), after having taken counsel with our brethren the principal bishops, have condemned by the authority of the sacred canons the chapters sent to us by your discretion and all the teachings of this Peter (Abelard) with their author, and we have imposed upon him as a heretic perpetual silence. We declare also that all the followers and defenders of his error must be separated from the companionship of the faithful and must be bound by the chain of excommunication.
741 Dz 388 [From the letter "Apostolicam Sedem" to the Bishop of Cremona, of uncertain time]
To your inquiry we respond thus: We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the priest whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the faith of holy mother the Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joy of the heavenly fatherland. Read (brother) in the eighth book of Augustine's "City of God" * where among other things it is written, "Baptism is ministered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion but death excludes." Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian * where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers' and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the priest mentioned.
Dz 389 1. We believe and confess that God is the simple nature of divinity, and that it cannot be denied in any Catholic sense that God is divinity, and divinity is God. Moreover, if it is said that God is wise by wisdom, great by magnitude, eternal by eternity, one by oneness, God by divinity, and other such things, we believe that He is wise only by that wisdom which is God Himself; that He is great only by that magnitude which is God Himself; that He is eternal only by that eternity which is God Himself; that He is one only by the oneness which is God Himself; that He is God only by that divinity which He is Himself; that is, that He is wise, great, eternal, one God of Himself.
Dz 390 2. When we speak of three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we confess that they are one God, one divine substance. And contrariwise, when we speak of one God, one divine substance, we confess that the one God himself, the one divine substance are three persons.
Dz 391 3. We believe (and we confess) that only God the Father and Son and Holy Spirit are eternal, and not by any means other things, whether they be called relations or peculiarities or singularities or onenesses, and that other such things belong to God, which are from eternity, which are not God.
Dz 392 4. We believe (and confess) that divinity itself, whether you call it divine substance or nature, is incarnate only in the Son.
[Condemned in the letter "Cum Christus" to Willelmus, Archbishop of Rheims, February 18, 1177]
750 Dz 393 Since Christ perfect God is perfect man, it is strange with what temerity anyone dares to say that "Christ is not anything else but man." * Moreover lest so great an abuse of God be able to spring up in the Church . . . by our authority you should place under anathema, lest anyone dare to say this concerning the other . . . because just as He is true God, so He is true man existing from a rational soul and human flesh.
[From the letter "In civitate tua" to the Archbishop of Geneva, of uncertain time]
753 Dz 394 In your city you say that it often happens that when certain ones are purchasing pepper or cinnamon or other wares which at that time are not the value of more than five pounds, they also promise to those from whom they receive these wares that they will pay six pounds at a stated time. However, although a contract of this kind according to such a form cannot be considered under the name of usury, yet nevertheless the sellers incur sin, unless there is a doubt that the wares would be of more or less value at the time of payment. And so your citizens would look well to their own interests, if they would cease from such a contract, since the thoughts of men cannot be hidden from Almighty God.
[From the letter "Ex publico instrumento" to the Bishop of Brescia, of uncertain time]
754 Dz 395 Since the aforesaid woman, although she has been espoused by the aforesaid man, yet up to this time, as she asserts, has not been known by him, in instructing your brotherhood through Apostolic writings we order that if the aforesaid man has not known the said woman carnally and this same woman, as it is reported to us on your part, wishes to enter religion, after she has been made sufficiently mindful that she ought either to enter religion or return to her husband within two months, you at the termination of her objection and appeal absolve her from the sentence (of excommunication); that if she enters religion, each restore to the other what each is known to have received from the other, and the man himself, when she takes the habit of religion, have the liberty of passing over to other vows. Certainly what the Lord says in the Gospel: "It is not permitted to man unless on account of fornication to put away his wife" (Mt 5,32 Mt 19,9), must be understood according to the interpretation of the sacred words concerning those whose marriage has been consummated by sexual intercourse, without which marriage cannot be consummated, and so, if the aforesaid woman has not been known by her husband, it is permissible (for her) to enter religion.
[From fragments of a letter to the Archbishop of Salerno, of uncertain time]
755 Dz 396 After legitimate consent in the present case it is permitted to the one, even with the other objecting, to choose a monastery, as some saints have been called from marriage, as long as sexual intercourse has not taken place between them. And to the one remaining, if, after being advised, he is unwilling to observe continency, he is permitted to pass over to second vows; because, since they have not been made one flesh, it is quite possible for the one to pass over to God, and the other to remain in the world. *
756 Dz 397 If between the man and the woman legitimate consent . . . occurs in the present, so indeed that one expressly receives another by mutual consent with the accustomed words. . . . whether an oath is introduced or not, it is not permissible for the woman to marry another. And if she should marry, even if carnal intercourse has taken place, she should be separated from him, and forced by ecclesiastical order to return to the first, although some think otherwise and also judgment has been rendered in another way by certain of our predecessors.
[From fragments of the letter to (Pontius, the Bishop of Clermont?), of uncertain time]
757 Dz 398 Certainly if anyone immerses a child in water three times in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen, and he does not say: "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, Amen," the child is not baptized.
758 Dz 399 Let those concerning whom there is a doubt, whether or not they have been baptized, be baptized after these words have first been uttered: "If you are baptized I do not baptize you; if you are not yet baptized, I baptize you, etc."
751 Dz 400 Chap. 10. Let monks not be received in the monastery at a price. . . If anyone, however, on being solicited gives anything for his reception, let him not advance to sacred orders. Let him, however, who accepts (a price) be punished by the taking away of his office.*
Heresies that Must be Avoided *
Chap. 27. As Blessed Leo * says: "Although ecclesiastical discipline, content with sacerdotal judgment, does not employ bloody punishments, it is nevertheless helped by the constitutions of Catholic rulers, so that men often seek a salutary remedy, when they fear that corporal punishment is coming upon them." For this reason, since in Gascony, in Albegesium, and in parts of Tolosa and in other places, the cursed perversity of the heretics whom some call Cathari, others Patareni, others Publicani, others by different names, has so increased that now they exercise their wickedness not as some in secret, but manifest their error publicly and win over the simple and weak to their opinion, we resolve to cast them, their defenders and receivers under anathema, and we forbid under anathema that anyone presume to hold or to help these in their homes or on their land or to do business with them. *
[From the decree "Ad abolendum" against the heretics]
761 Dz 402 All who, regarding the sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, or regarding baptism or the confession of sins, matrimony or the other ecclesiastical sacraments, do not fear to think or to teach otherwise than the most holy Roman Church teaches and observes; and in general, whomsoever the same Roman Church or individual bishops through their dioceses with the advice of the clergy or the clergy themselves, if the episcopal see is vacant, with the advice if it is necessary of neighboring bishops, shall judge as heretics, we bind with a like bond of perpetual anathema.
[From the epistle "Consuluit nos" to a certain priest of Brescia]
764 Dz 403 Your loyalty asks us whether or not in the judgment of souls he ought to be judged as a usurer who, not otherwise ready to deliver by loan, loans his money on this proposition that without any agreement he nevertheless receive more by lot; and whether he is involved in that same state of guilt who, as it is commonly said, does not otherwise grant a similar oath, until, although without payment, he receives some gain from him; whether or not that negotiator ought to be condemned with a like punishment, who offers his wares at a price far greater, if an extension of the already extended time be asked for making the payment, than if the price should be paid to him at once. But since what one must hold in these cases is clearly learned from the Gospel of Luke in which is said: "Give mutually, hoping nothing thereby" (cf. Luke Lc 6,35), men of this kind must be judged to act wrongly on account of the intention of gain which they have, since every usury and superabundance are prohibited by law, and they must be effectively induced in the judgment of souls to restore those things which have been thus received.
[From the letter, "Cum apud sedem" to Humbert, Archbishop of Arles, July 15, 1198]
766 Dz 404
You have asked us whether the dumb and the deaf can be united to each other in marriage. To this question we respond to your brotherhood thus: Since the edict of prohibition concerning the contracting of marriage is that whoever is not prohibited, is consequently permitted, and only the consent of those concerning whose marriages we are speaking is sufficient for marriage, it seems that, if such a one wishes to contract (a marriage), it cannot and it ought not to be denied him, since what he cannot declare by words he can declare by signs.
[From the letter to the Bishop of Mutina, in the year 1200] *
776 Besides in the contracting of marriages we wish you to observe this: when, as in the present case legitimate agreement exists between legitimate persons, which is sufficient in such cases according to canonical sanctions, and if this alone is lacking, other things are made void, even if sexual intercourse itself has taken place, if persons legitimately married afterwards actually contract (marriage) with others, what before had been done according to law cannot be annulled.
[From the letter "Quanto te magis" to Hugo, Bishop of Ferrara, May 1, 1199]
768 Dz 405 Your brotherhood has announced that with one of the spouses passing over to heresy the one who is left desires to rush into second vows and to procreate children, and you have thought that we ought to be consulted through your letter as to whether this can be done under the law. We, therefore, responding to your inquiry regarding the common advice of our brothers make a distinction, although indeed our predecessor seems to have thought otherwise, whether of two unbelievers one is converted to the Catholic Faith, or of two believers one lapses into heresy or falls into the error of paganism. For if one of the unbelieving spouses is converted to the Catholic faith, while the other either is by no means willing to live with him or at least not without blaspheming the divine name or so as to drag him into mortal sin, the one who is left, if he wishes, will pass over to second vows. And in this case we understand what the Apostle says: "If the unbeliever depart, let him depart: for the brother or sister is not subject to servitude in (cases) of this kind" (1Co 7,15). And likewise (we understand) the canon in which it is said that "insult to the Creator dissolves the law of marriage for him who is left." *
769 Dz 406 But if one of the believing spouses either slip into heresy or lapse into the error of paganism, we do not believe that in this case he who is left, as long as the other is living, can enter into a second marriage; although in this case a greater insult to the Creator is evident. Although indeed true matrimony exists between unbelievers, yet it is not ratified; between believers, however, a true and ratified marriage exists, because the sacrament of faith, which once was admitted, is never lost, but makes the sacrament of marriage ratified so that it itself lasts between married persons as long as the sacrament of faith endures.
[From the letter "Gaudemus in Domino" to the Bishop of Tiberias, in the beginning of 1201]
777 Dz 407 You have asked to be shown through Apostolic writings whether pagans receiving wives in the second, third, or further degree ought, thus united, to remain after their conversion with the wives united to them or ought to be separated from them. Regarding this we reply to your brotherhood thus, that, since the sacrament of marriage exists between believing and unbelieving spouses as the Apostle points out when he says: "If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she consents to live with him, let him not put her away" (1Co 7,12), and since in the aforesaid degree matrimony is lawfully contracted with respect to them by pagans who are not restricted by canonical constitutions, ("For what is it to me?" according to the same Apostle, "to judge concerning those which are outside?" (1Co 5,12); in favor especially of the Christian religion and faith, from receiving which many fearing to be deserted by their wives can easily be restrained, such believers, having been joined in marriage, can freely and licitly remain united, since through the sacrament of baptism marriages are not dissolved but sins are forgiven.
778 Dz 408 But since pagans divide their conjugal affection among many women at the same time, it is rightly doubted whether after conversion all or which one of all they can retain. But this (practice) seems to be in disagreement with and inimical to the Christian Faith, since in the beginning one rib was changed into one woman, and Divine Scripture testifies that "on account of this, man shall leave father and mother and shall cling to his wife and they shall be two in one flesh" (Ep 5,31 Gn 2,24 cf. Mt 19,5); it does not say "three or more" but two; nor did it say "he will cling to wives" but to a wife. Never is it permitted to anyone to have several wives at one time except to whom it was granted by divine revelation. This custom existed at one time, sometimes was even regarded as lawful, by which, as Jacob from a lie, the Israelites from theft, and Samson from homicide, so also the Patriarchs and other just men, who we read had many wives at the same time, were ex-used from adultery. Certainly this opinion is proved true also by the witness of Truth, which testifies in the Gospel: "Whosoever puts away his wife (except) on account of fornication, and marries another commits adultery," (Mt 19,9 cf. Mc 10,11). If, therefore, when the wife has been dismissed, another cannot be married according to law, all the more she herself cannot be retained; through this it clearly appears that regarding marriage plurality in either sex-since they are not judged unequally must be condemned.
779 Moreover, he who according to his rite puts away a lawful wife, since Truth in the Gospel has condemned such a repudiation, never while she lives, even after being converted to the faith of Christ, can he have another wife, unless after his conversion she refuses to live with him, or even if she should consent, yet not without insult to the Creator, or so as to lead him into mortal sin. In this case to the one seeking restitution, although it be established regarding unjust spoliation, restitution would be denied, because according to the Apostle: "A brother or sister is not subject to servitude in (cases) of this kind" (1Co 7,12). But if her conversion should follow his conversion to faith, before, on account of the above mentioned causes, he would marry a legitimate wife, he would be compelled to take her back again. Although, too, according to the Evangelical truth, "he who marries one put aside is guilty of adultery" (Mt 19,9), yet the one doing the dismissing will not be able to upbraid the one dismissed with fornication because he married her after the repudiation, unless she shall otherwise have committed fornication.
[From the letter "Ex parte tua" to Andrew, the Archbishop of Lyons, Jan. 12, 1206]
786 Dz 409 Unwilling to depart suddenly on this point from the footsteps of our predecessors who, on being consulted, responded that before marriage has been consummated by sexual intercourse, it is permitted for one of the parties, even without consulting the remaining one, to pass over to religion, so that the one left can henceforth legitimately marry another; we advise you that this must be observed.
Dz 410 (For) they assert that baptism is conferred uselessly on children. . . . We respond that baptism has taken the place of circumcision. . . . Therefore as "the soul of the circumcised did not perish from the people" (Gn 17,4), so "he who has been reborn from water and the Holy Spirit will obtain entrance to the kingdom of heaven" (Jn 3,5). . . .Although original sin was remitted by the mystery of circumcision, and the danger of damnation was avoided, nevertheless there was no arriving at the kingdom of heaven, which up to the death of Christ was barred to all. But through the sacrament of baptism the guilt of one made red by the blood of Christ is remitted, and to the kingdom of heaven one also arrives, whose gate the blood of Christ has mercifully opened for His faithful. For God forbid that all children of whom daily so great a multitude die, would perish, but that also for these the merciful God who wishes no one to perish has procured some remedy unto salvation. . . . As to what opponents say, (namely), that faith or love or other virtues are not infused in children, inasmuch as they do not consent, is absolutely not granted by most. . . . some asserting that by the power of baptism guilt indeed is remitted to little ones but grace is not conferred; and some indeed saying both that sin is forgiven and that virtues are infused in them as they hold virtues as a possession not as a function, until they arrive at adult age. . . . We say that a distinction must be made, that sin is twofold: namely, original and actual: original, which is contracted without consent; and actual which is committed with consent. Original, therefore, which is committed without consent, is remitted without consent through the power of the sacrament; but actual, which is contracted with consent, is not mitigated in the slightest without consent. . . . The punishment of original sin is deprivation of the vision of God, but the punishment of actual sin is the torments of everlasting hell. . . .
781 Dz 411 This is contrary to the Christian religion, that anyone always unwilling and interiorly objecting be compelled to receive and to observe Christianity. On this account some absurdly do not distinguish between unwilling and unwilling, and forced and forced, because he who is violently forced by terrors and punishments, and, lest he incur harm, receives the sacrament of baptism, such a one also as he who under pretense approaches baptism, receives the impressed sign of Christianity, and he himself, just as he willed conditionally although not absolutely, must be forced to the observance of Christian Faith. . . . But he who never consents, but inwardly contradicts, receives neither the matter nor the sign of the sacrament, because to contradict expressly is more than not to agree. . . . The sleeping, moreover, and the weak-minded, if before they incurred weak-mindedness, or before they went to sleep persisted in contradiction, because in these the idea of contradiction is understood to endure, although they have been so immersed, they do not receive the sign of the sacrament; not so, however, if they had first lived as catechumens and had the intention of being baptized; therefore, the Church has been accustomed to baptize such in a time of necessity. Thus, then the sacramental operation impresses the sign, when it does not meet the resisting obstacle of a contrary will.
[From the letter "Non ut apponeres" to Thorias Archbishop of Nidaros] *
787 Dz 412 You have asked whether children ought to be regarded as Christians whom, when in danger of death, on account of the scarcity of water and the absence of a priest, the simplicity of some has anointed on the head and the breast, and between the shoulders with a sprinkling of saliva for baptism. We answer that since in baptism two things always, that is, "the word and the element,"* are required by necessity, according to which Truth says concerning the word: "Going into the world etc." (Lc 16,15 cf. Mt 28,19), and the same concerning the element says: "Unless anyone etc." (Jn 3,5) you ought not to doubt that those do not have true baptism in which not only both of the above mentioned (requirements) but one of them is missing.
[From the letter "Debitum pastoralis officii" to Berthold, the Bishop of Metz, August 28, 1206]
788 Dz 413 You have, to be sure, intimated that a certain Jew, when at the point of death, since he lived only among Jews, immersed himself in water while saying: "I baptize myself in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen."
We respond that, since there should be a distinction between the one baptizing and the one baptized, as is clearly gathered from the words of the Lord, when he says to the Apostles: "Go baptize all nations in the name etc." (cf. Mt 28,19), the Jew mentioned must be baptized again by another, that it may be shown that he who is baptized is one person, and he who baptizes another. . . . If, however, such a one had died immediately, he would have rushed to his heavenly home without delay because of the faith of the sacrament, although not because of the sacrament of faith.
[From the letter "Cum Marthae circa" to a certain John, Archbishop of Lyons, Nov. 29, 1202]
782 Dz 414 You have asked (indeed) who has added to the form of the words which Christ Himself expressed when He changed the bread and wine into the body and blood, that in the Canon of the Mass which the general Church uses, which none of the Evangelists is read to have expressed. . . . In the Canon of the Mass that expression, "mysterium fidei," is found interposed among His words. . . . Surely we find many such things omitted from the words as well as from the deeds of the Lord by the Evangelists, which the Apostles are read to have supplied by word or to have expressed by deed. . . . From the expression, moreover, concerning which your brotherhood raised the question, namely "mysterium fidei," certain people have thought to draw a protection against error, saying that in the sacrament of the altar the truth of the body and blood of Christ does not exist, but only the image and species and figure, inasmuch as Scripture sometimes mentions that what is received at the altar is sacrament and mystery and example. But such run into a snare of error, by reason of the fact that they neither properly understand the authority of Scripture, nor do they reverently receive the sacraments of God, equally "ignorant of the Scriptures and the power of God" (Mt 22,29). . . . Yet "mysterium fidei" is mentioned, since something is believed there other than what is perceived; and something is perceived other than is believed. For the species of bread and wine is perceived there, and the truth of the body and blood of Christ is believed and the power of unity and of love. . . .
783 Dz 415 We must, however, distinguish accurately between three things which are different in this sacrament, namely, the visible form, the truth of the body, and the spiritual power. The form is of the bread and wine; the truth, of the flesh and blood; the power, of unity and of charity. The first is the "sacrament and not reality." The second is "the sacrament and reality." The third is "the reality and not the sacrament." But the first is the sacrament of a twofold reality. The second, however, is a sacrament of one and the reality (is) of the other. But the third is the reality of a twofold sacrament. Therefore, we believe that the form of words, as is found in, the Canon, the Apostles received from Christ, and their successors from them. . . .
Denzinger EN 712