In both cases, the head over which the sentence is suspended lacks
guarantees, and, once pronounced, this sentence is definitive. For,
on appeal to the court of the metropolitan bishop, it is always
confirmed;[36] the bishops support each other, and, let the appellant
be right or wrong, the appeal is in itself a bad mark against him: he
did not submit at once, he stood out against reproof, he was lacking
in humility, he has set an example of insubordination, and this alone
is a grave fault. There remains the recourse to Rome; but Rome is far
off,[37] and, while maintaining her superior jurisdiction, she does
not willingly cancel an episcopal verdict; she treats prelates with
respect, she is careful of her lieutenant-generals, her collectors of
Saint Peter's pence. As to the lay tribunals, these have declared
themselves incompetent,[38] and the new canon law teaches that never,
"under the pretext of a writ of error, may a priest make an appeal to
the secular magistrate";[39] through this appeal, "he derogates from
the authority and liberty of the Church and is liable to the gravest
censures;" he betrays his order.
Pages:
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153