Folio 225
John XXII, 1316-1334
printed p. 193 · pdf p. 225
492. (2). That under the existing law "everyone of each sex" published in the General Council [Later. IV. see n. 437] the Roman Pontiff cannot bring it about that parishioners be not bound to confess all their sins once a year to their own priest, who, it says, is the parish curate; indeed neither could God do this, because, as it says, this involves contradiction.
493. (3). That the Pope cannot give the general power of hearing confessions, indeed neither can God, without the one who has confessed to one having general power being bound to confess these same sins again to his own priest, who, it says, as we have already indicated, is the parish curate. . . .
All the above mentioned articles and each one of them we, by apostolic authority, condemn and reprove as false and erroneous and deviating from sound authority . . . , declaring that the true and Catholic doctrine is contrary to them.
Hell and Limbo(?) 1
[From the letter "Nequaquam sine dolore" to the Armenians, Nov. 21, 1321]
493a. It (The Roman Church) teaches . . . that the souls . . . of those who die in mortal sin, or with only original sin descend immediately into hell; however, to be punished with different penalties and in different places.
The Poverty of Christ 2
[From the edict "Cum inter nonnullos," Nov. 13, 1323]
494. Since among some learned men it often happens that doubt is again raised as to whether it should be branded as heretical to affirm persistently that our Redeemer and Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles did not possess anything either in particular or even in common, even though there are different and adverse opinions on that question, we, in a desire to put an end to this controversy, declare on the advice of our brethren by this perpetual edict that a persistent assertion of this kind shall henceforth be branded as erroneous and heretical, since it expressly contradicts Sacred Scripture, which in many passages asserts that they did have some possessions; and since with regard to the aforementioned it
-
Bar(Th) approximately the year 1321, n. II. Cf. Zeitschr. f. kath. Theologie 52 (1928): 79 ff. (A. Straub); Estudios ecclesiásticos 5 (1926): 438 ff. (F. Segarra). ↩
-
DuPl I, I 295b f.; CIC Extr. IOH XXII 14, 4: Frdbg II 1229 f.; Rcht II 1143 f.; Bar(Th) about 1323 n. 61 (24, 332b).—As to how this definition of John XXII does not contradict the constitution of Nicholas III, "Exiit qui seminat," see in Natalis Alexander, Hist. eccl. of the 12th and 14th centuries, diss. 11, art. 1. ↩