Folia Theologica et Canonica 6. 28/20 (2017)

IUS CANONICUM - José Miguel Viejo-Ximénez, Raymond of Penyafort decretalist

RAYMOND OF PENYAFORT DECRETALIST

137

Not to multiply examples further, it may be suffice to add one extra table on custom:

Bernard’s Summa (SB)

De consuetudine (I Comp. 1.3)

Audivimus de iure scripto. Nunc audia- mus de iure non scripto, scil. de consuetudine; unde videndum quid sit consuetudo, unde dicatur, quaes eius species, quem locum habeat in causis, quae consuetudo légi vel constitutioni praeiudicet, quae in duabus contrariis consuetudinibus debeat praevalere.

Raymond

De consuetudine (SIC 1.9)

Diximus de iure scripto; sequitur ut de iure non scripto, de consuetudine, videlicet, vi- deamus, inquirentes quid sit consuetudo, unde dicatur, quaes eius species, quem locum habeat in causis, quae consuetudo legi vel constitutioni praeiudicet, quae dua- rum consuetudinem contrariarum praeva- leat.

The threefold «divisio iuris» -naturális, gentium, civilis (SIC 1.1- 3)- is taken from Gratian, as far as the explanations on the origin of law (SIC 1.4). Regarding the «constitutio», Raymond completes the definition of D.2 c.4 by stressing the notes that distinguish this rule from divine and customary law; «Constitutio est ius humánum in scriptis redactum» (SIC 1.5.2 = SB 1.1.1). While the emperor and the praetorian prefect may issue general civil constitutions, the cities can only approve municipal laws «dum tarnen lex illa iuris naturális vei scripti contineat aequitatem» (SIC 1.5.3). In the church, the pope and the general council enacted «constitutiones generales» (SIC 1.5.3). Particular ecclesiastical constitutions are those passed by the «synodus patriarchalis, metropolitana et epis- copalis» and cannot be «contra ius» (SIC 1.5.3). The distinction constitutio generalis - constitutio particularis is founded on Augustine, for whom all the ecclesiastical matters have three different sources: the «auctoritas scripturarum», the «traditio universalis», and the «particularis instructio» (D.l 1 c.8). The dynamic divine law - human law and general law - particular law is organized around two principles: first the human power, civil or ecclesiastical, interposed between equity and law {Cod. Just. 1.14.1: «[...] nobis solis [...]»); and second the no contradiction between rules {Cod. Just. 1.26.2: «[...] minime legibus vei constitutionibus contraria [...]»). Thus, when on the same fact there are two different constitutions one must take into account their nature. If both are general, the contradiction is solved by Paulo’s rule {Dig. 1.3.26 and 28): «(...) prima tollitur per posteriorem, si directe sibi contradicant. Si autem non contradicant directe, posterior recipit interpretationem secundum priorem» (SIC 1.5.5). But when the two conflicting constitutions are particular, it is necessary to consider the authority from which they came. In the event that the authorities are of the