Papal documents relating to Franciscan poverty

See also translations by Jonathan Robinson of texts relating to Franciscan poverty by Bonaventure, Michael de Cesena and William of St-Amour.


Return to Home Page

POPE CLEMENT V, EXIVI DE PARADISO
Translated by John Kilcullen and John Scott

Copyright (c) 1996, 1998, R.J. Kilcullen, J.R. Scott.

"I have gone out from paradise, I have said, 'I will water the garden of plantations'", says that heavenly gardener, who -- truly the fount of wisdom, the word of God, from the Father and remaining in the Father, begotten from eternity in these last days, with the Holy Spirit forming him, made flesh in the Virgin's womb -- has gone out a man to accomplish the arduous task of the redemption of the human race, giving himself as an exemplar of heavenly life, offering himself to men. But, since for the most part, burdened by the cares of mortal life, man began to turn the gaze of his mind away from the contemplation of such an exemplar, our true Solomon made among the rest a certain garden of delight in the soil [solio: substitute solo?] of the militant Church, far from the stormy waves of the world, in which more quietly and more securely one might be occupied [vocaretur: substitute vacaretur, as in Friedberg] with things to be contemplated and observed in the works of such an exemplar; he entered into this world to water it with the fruitful waters of spiritual grace and teaching. This garden indeed is the holy religion of the Brothers Minor, which, firmly closed round on all sides by the walls of regular observance, content within itself with God alone, is abundantly adorned by the new plantations of its sons. Coming to this, the beloved son of God gathers the myrrh of mortifying penitence, together with spices which, with sweetness marvellous to all, surround it with the odour of attractive holiness. Here is that form and Rule of heavenly life, which that extraordinary confessor of Christ, saint Francis, described, teaching by word, and equally by example, that it should be observed by his sons.

Because, however, the devout professors and imitators of the said holy Rule - as the alumni and true sons of so great a father too - were striving, just as also they are fervently striving, firmly to observe the foregoing Rule in its purity and to the full, taking note that certain things are contained in the text {serie} of the rule that could convey a doubtful sense, they prudently had recourse in time past to the apex of the apostolic office to have an explanation of them, so that, having been made certain by it [the pope], to whose feet also they were subjected by that Rule, they should, with all doubts driven off,be able to serve the Lord, with full charity of conscience. Many of our predecessors, the Roman pontiffs, in succession gave ear and mind (as was worthy) to their pious and just supplications, and explained those things that seemed doubtful, published some things, and granted some, as seemed expedient for the consciences of the Brothers and the pure observance of their state. However, since commonly, devout consciences, which are terrified at any wandering in [from] God's way, are wont to fear fault where there is none, the consciences of all those Brothers have not been so fully quieted by the said explanations but that some waves of doubt relating to some things concerning the Rule and their state are generated and arise in them, as is brought to our ears often and concerning very many matters in public and private consistories. Accordingly, it has been requested humbly of us by those Brothers, that {quatenus} we should take care, of the benignity of the apostolic see, to provide opportune remedies of explanation for the before mentioned doubts which have occurred, and can occur in future.

We, therefore (whose mind from a tender age has been fervent {efferbuit} with pious devotion toward such professors of the Rule, and to that whole Order) are now by the common care of the pastoral rule that we unworthily bear, so much the more ardently stirred up to foster them and more kindly and attentively to bestow on them gracious favours, the more frequently we reflect with intent mind on the plentiful fruits we see come forth continually for the whole of the universal Church from their exemplary life and salutary teaching; moved by the so pious intention of the supplicants, we have decided that our efforts should be directed to completing diligently what is asked, and we have caused those doubts to be examined diligently by many arch bishops and bishops, and masters of theology, and others who are literate, prudent and discrete.

First of all, therefore, because we find at the beginning of the said Rule: "The rule and life of the Brothers Minor is this, namely to observe the holy Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ by living in obedience, without property and in chastity"; again, below: "And when the year of probation is complete, let them be received to obedience, promising always to observe that life and the Rule"; again, near the end of the Rule: "let us observe poverty and humility and the holy Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, which we have firmly promised" -- it has been doubted whether the Brothers of the same order are bound by the profession of their Rule to all the precepts as well as all the counsels, of the Gospel, some saying that they are obliged to all, others asserting that they are obliged only to those three counsels, namely, "to live in obedience, in chastity and without property", and to those things that are placed in the Rule under obligatory words, we ( sticking to the footsteps of our predecessors concerning this article, following it up more clearly in one respect) have decided that it should be answered to the said doubt that, since any person's determinate vow has to be considered as certain, one who vows the rule cannot be said to be bound, by the force of such a vow, to those Gospel counsels that are not placed in the Rule. And, indeed, this is proved to have been the intention of blessed Francis, the founder of the Rule, by the fact that he placed some Gospel counsels in the Rule, [praemissis: substitute praetermissis] and passed over others. For if by the words: "The Rule and Life of the Brothers Minor is this" etc., he had intended to bind them to all the Gospel counsels, it would have been superfluous and nugatory for him to have expressed some of them in the Rule and suppressed the rest. Since however the nature of a restrictive term {habeat} implies this, that it excludes from itself extraneous things in such a way that it includes the rest that pertain to it, we declare and say that the said brothers are by their profession of the Rule obliged not only to those three vows taken bare and absolute, but are also bound to fulfil all those things pertinent to those aforesaid three that the Rule itself posits. For if they were bound only to these three aforesaid, promising precisely and barely that they will observe the Rule by living in "obedience, chastity and without property", and were not bound also to all the things contained in the Rule that modify these three: they would for nothing and in vain utter the words, "I promise always to observe this Rule", since from these words no obligation would arise. However it is not to be thought that blessed Francis intended the professors of this rule to be equally obliged in respect to all the things contained in the Rule modifying the three vows, or to other things expressed in it, but rather he decreed plainly that, by the force of the words, in respect of certain of them transgression is mortal, and in respect of some others not, since to some of them he adds a word of precept, or of something equivalent to it, and in respect of others he is content with other words.

Again, because, besides the things placed in the Rule expressly by word of precept and exhortation or admonition, some are inserted with a word added of imperative mode, affirmative or negative: it has been until now doubted whether they were bound to those things as to points having the force of precept: and since (as we have understood) this doubt is not diminished, but is increased, from the fact that our predecessor of happy memory, Pope Nicholas III, is known to have declared that those Brothers are by their profession of their Rule {astricti} obliged to those Gospel counsels that are expressed in the Rule as precepts or inhibitions, or under equivalent words, and nevertheless, to the observance of all of those things that are brought before them in the same Rule under obligatory words: the aforesaid brothers have supplicated that we should deign to explain, to save their consciences, which of them should be counted as equivalent to precepts, and obligatory. We, therefore, who delight in their pure consciences, taking note that in matters relating to the salvation of the soul, the safer part should be held to avoid grave remorse of conscience, say that although the brothers are not bound to the observance of all that is put in the Rule under words of imperative mode, as to the observance of precepts or of their equivalent, it is nevertheless {expedit} advantageous for the Brothers for observing the purity and rigour of the Rule that they should know themselves to be obliged, as to the equivalent of precepts, to the things noted here below. In order that these things that can seem equivalent to precepts by the force of the words, or at least by reason of the subject matter which they deal with, or for both reasons, may be had in summary: we declare that what is put in the Rule about not having more cloaks {tunicas} than one with a hood and one without a hood; also, about not wearing sandals, about not riding except in a case of necessity; also, that the Brothers should wear cheap clothes; also, that they are bound to fast from the feast of All Saints to the Birthday of the Lord, and on Fridays; also, that clerics should say the divine office according to the {ordo} rite of the holy Roman Church; also that ministers and custodians should take particular care for the necessities of the sick and for the clothing of the Brothers; also, that if some Brother falls into infirmity the other Brothers should serve him; also, that the Brothers should not preach in the bishopric of any bishop where that has been forbidden to them by him; also, that no one should dare at all to preach to the people unless he has been for this purpose examined, approved and appointed by the General Minister, or by others to whom that belongs according to the aforesaid declaration; also, that the Brothers who know that they cannot observe the foregoing Rule specifically should and can have recourse to their Ministers; also, everything put in the Rule relating to the form of the habit both of novices and also of the professed, and also everything relating to the mode of reception and profession, unless, as the Rule says, it seems, in relation to the habit of novices, best otherwise according to God to those involved in reception: these, I say, are all to be observed by the Brothers as obligatory. Also, the Order has commonly believed, holds, and has held from antiquity, that wherever the words "are bound" are put in the Rule, they have the force of precept, and should be observed as such by the Brothers.

Moreover, because the aforesaid confessor of Christ, presenting to the Ministers and the brothers the manner of acting and of serving concerning those to be received into the order, said in the Rule that the Brothers and their Ministers should take care not to be solicitous of their [those to be received] temporal things, so that they [those to be recieved?] should freely do with them whatever has been inspired in them by the Lord, that nevertheless, those Ministers should have permission to send them [those newly received?] to some who fear God, if advice is needed, by whose advice they should distribute their goods to the poor: many brothers have doubted, and do doubt, whether it is permitted to them to accept anything of the goods of entrants, if it be given, and whether they can without fault lead them to give to persons and to convents, also whether the Ministers themselves or the Brothers should give advice for the management of the distribution of such things, when it is possible to find others than from among themselves suitable for giving advice to whom those about to enter could be sent. We, however, considering attentively that by those words saint Francis intended that professors of his Rule, whom he had established in the greatest poverty, be especially and totally removed from the love of the temporal things of those entrants, so that, so far as it concerns the Brothers themselves, reception to the order should be clearly holy and most pure, and so that in no way should they seem to have in view their temporal goods, but only their submission to divine service: we say that for the future both Ministers and the other Brothers should abstain from the said inducements to giving to themselves, and from persuasions, and also from the giving of advice concerning distribution, since {per hoc} through this, they should be sent to some of a different status who fear God, not to Brothers, so that they should truly appear to all to be devoted supporters, zealous and perfect, of so wholesome a paternal regulation. Since, however, the Rule itself wishes entrants to be free to do with their things what the Lord will inspire, it does not seem that it is not licit for them to accept, their needs and the requirements of the declaration just mentioned having been considered, if the entrant wishes freely to give something from his goods, as to the other poor, by way of alms. However it is fitting for the Brothers to take care in accepting such offerings lest by the noteworthy quantity of things accepted an improper purpose {sinister oculus} can be presumed against them

Furthermore, since it is said in the Rule that those who have already promised obedience should have one tunic with a hood, and another without a hood, if they want to have them; also, that all the brothers should wear cheap clothes,and we have declared the above mentioned words to be equivalent to precepts: wishing these things to be determined more fully, we say, concerning the number of tunics, that it is not licit to use more, except in necessity; this can be inferred from the Rule, according to the way our above mentioned predecessor explained this passage {passum} more fully. We say that cheapness of clothes, both of habits and of under garments, should be understood to be that which should rightly be regarded as cheap according to the custom or condition of the country, in respect of colour of cloth and price. For in such matters one determinate mode cannot be assigned in respect of all regions. We have thought that judgment of such cheapness should be entrusted to Ministers and custodians or guardians, burdening their consciences upon this -- provided, however, that they preserve cheapnessin clothing. In the same way we leave to the judgment of these ministers, custodians and guardians, for what necessity these Brothers can wear sandals.

Next, since with the two times in the Rule in which they are bound to fast, namely from the feast of All Saints to the Birthday of the Lord, noted it is inserted in the same Rule: "But at other times they are not bound, except to fast on the sixth day of the week", and from this some have wanted to say that the Brothers of the said Order are not bound, except out of fittingness, to any other feasts but those: we declare that it should be understood that they are not bound to fast at other times, except in fasts appointed by the Church. For it is not likely that either the founder of the Rule, or even its confirmer, intended to absolve them from keeping those other fasts to which all other Christians are obliged by the common law of the Church.

Besides, since the said saint, wishing his Brothers above all to be totally strangers to coins or money, firmly gave precept to all the Brothers that they should in no way accept coins or money, themselves or through an intermediary person, and that same predecessor of ours, explaining that article, laid down cases and modes so that, if they are observed by the Brothers, they cannot or should not be described as receivers of money themselves or through others contrary to the Rule or to the purity of their Order: we say that the Brothers are bound to take care above all that they do not, for other reasons and under other modes than the declaration of our said predecessor posits, have recourse to givers of money or deputed messengers, lest -- if it is attempted by them otherwise -- they can deservedly be called transgressors of the precept and of the Rule. For where something is prohibited to someone in general terms what is expressly not conceded is understood to be denied. Wherefore all the management {quaestus} of money and the reception of offerings of money, in the church or elsewhere, pillars or posts {cippi vel trunci} arranged for money of offerings or donations to be placed in them, and also whatever other recourse to money, or to those who have money, not conceded by the declaration aforesaid: these all, I say, are simply forbidden them. Since, also, recourse to spiritual [speciales: substitute spirituales; why not speciales: particular?] friends is expressly granted in only two cases according to the Rule, namely, for the needs of the sick and for clothing the Brothers, and that piously and reasonably, our oft-mentioned predecessor, having reflected on the necessity of life, decided that it should be extended to other needs of the Brothers that occur at the time when alms cease, or also when necessities attack {ingruentes} them: let the aforesaid Brothers {attendant} take note that it is not permitted to them for any other reasons besides the aforesaid or the like, on the road or elsewhere, to have recourse to such friends, whether they are the givers of money or deputed by them, whether messengers or depositaries, or whether they are called by any other name whatever, even if the modes concerning money conceded by the same declaration are observed completely. Finally, since the same confessor most of all desired the professors of his Rule to be totally withdrawn from the affection for and desire of earthly things, and especially to be totally unacquainted with money and its use, as is proved by the prohibition often repeated in the Rule against receiving money, it is necessary for the Brothers to take watchful care that, when they must have recourse for the above reasons and the modes to those who have the money set aside for their necessities, they should in all respects conduct themselves toward those holding the money whoever they are, principals or messengers, in such a way that they show to everyone that they have absolutely nothing to do with the said money (as they do not have). Whereupon to command that money should be spent and how, to demand an account of expenses, to seek it back {repetere} in any way or to deposit it, or cause it to be deposited, to carry a box of money, or its key -- let the Brothers know that these acts, and the like, are illicit to them. For to do the aforesaid belongs only to the lords who gave, and to those whom they deputed to do it.

{XR32.246-56, 123.461}Therefore, since the holy man, expressing in the Rule the manner of the poverty aforesaid said in the same: "Let the Brothers appropriate nothing to themselves, neither house {domum} nor place {locum} nor any thing, but like pilgrims and strangers in this world serving the Lord in poverty and humility, let them go confidently for alms", and thus it was declared by some of our predecessors as Roman pontiffs that this deprivation of property {expropriationem} should be understood both individually and also in common, for which reason also they have accepted for themselves and the Roman Church the property and lordship of all things granted, offered and donated to the Brothers (which, and the use of which -- namely, of fact -, it is licit for the Order or the Brothers themselves to have), only simple use of fact in those things being left to the Brothers themselves: the things which were being said to be done in the Order and seemed to conflict with the aforesaid vow and with the purity of the order were referred to our examination, namely, so that we might follow up those among them that we believe need a remedy: that they do not merely tolerate, but seek, that they be made heirs; also, that they sometimes receive annual revenues in such notable quantity that the Convents having them live wholly from them; also, that when their cases even concerning temporal things are being pursued {agitantur} in the courts, they are present with the advocates and procurators and personally represent themselves there to instigate the same; also, that they accept and carry out the execution of last wills, and sometimes intervene concerning arrangements or restitutions to be made of usury or things wrongly taken; also, that in some places they have not only excessive gardens, but also great vineyards, from which they gather for sale much of both olives and of wine; also, that at times of harvest or vintage, so copiously are grain and wine collected by the Brothers, by begging or buying from elsewhere, and stored in cellars and granaries, that they can spend their lives for the rest of the year without begging for them; also, that they make or take care to have made churches or other buildings notably excessive in quantity, curiosity of shape and form and in sumptuousness, so that they seem to be the habitations not of paupers but of magnates. Also in many places they have so many and such remarkably precious church furnishings {paramenta} that they exceed in these respects the great cathedral churches. Moreover, they accept indiscriminately horses and arms offered to them at funerals. However, the community of the Brothers, and especially the rulers of the same Order, asserted that the aforesaid, or many of them, did not happen in the Order, also that, if some are found guilty in such matters they are strictly punished, and that from antiquity very strict statutes have often been made in the Order against such things, so that they may not happen. Desiring, therefore, to provide for the conscience of these Brothers, and to remove from their hearts (as much as possible) all doubts, we answer the aforesaid in the way that follows. For since it pertains to the truth of life that what is done outwardly represents the interior disposition and habit of the mind: the Brothers, who by so great a renunciation of property have withdrawn themselves from temporal things, must necessarily abstain from everything that would be or could seem contrary to the said renunciation of property. Because, therefore, in successions there passes in its time to the heirs not only the use of the thing but also lordship - but the aforementioned Brothers cannot acquire anything for themselves individually, or for their Order even in common - we say in explanation that considering the purity of their vow, they are not at all capable of such successions, which even of their nature extend indifferently to money, and also to other things, movable and immovable. And it is not licit to them to cause the value of such inheritances, or of so great a part of them that it could be presumed that this was done in fraud, to be left to them under the mode or form of a legacy, or to accept things thus left: rather we simply forbid those things to be done thus by them. And since annual revenues are by the law counted as immovables, and to obtain such revenue is inconsistent with poverty and mendicancy: there is no doubt that it is not licit for the aforesaid Brothers, considering their condition, to receive or have any revenues whatever, just as [it is not licit for them to have] possessions or even their use (since they are not found to have been granted to them). Further, since perfect men must particularly avoid not only what is known to be evil, but also everything that has the appearance of evil - from such presences in court, however, and instigations when the action concerns things to be converted to their advantage, the Brothers present are believed with likelihood, from what appears outwardly (from which men outside have to judge) to seek something as their own in these things - in no way should professors of such a vow and Rule associate with such courts and litigious acts, so that they both have testimony from those who are outside, and satisfy the purity of their vow, and thereby scandal of neighbours is avoided. Also, indeed, since the Brothers of the said Order are {penitus alieni} complete strangers not only to the reception, ownership and lordship or use of money itself, but also to any handling of it whatever, and to it, just as our oft mentioned predecessor plainly said in explanation of such a Rule; and since the professors of the said order cannot contend in court for any temporal thing: it is not licit or suitable for the aforesaid Brothers - nay rather, considering the purity of their status they should know that it is forbidden to them - to expose themselves to such executions and managements, since most often these things cannot be expedited without litigation and handling or administration of money. Nevertheless to be given [dari: substitute dare; why not dari? Isn't it the pope giving them advice?] advice in the carrying out of these things does not conflict with their status, since no jurisdiction, action in court, or management concerning temporal goods is thereby attributed to them.

But although it is not only licit, but also very suitable to reason, that the brothers who are sedulously occupied in spiritual labours of prayer and study, have gardens and open spaces suitable for their recollection or recreation, and for bodily withdrawing themselves sometimes after such labours, and also for having necessary garden produce for themselves: yet, to have some gardens to cultivate and sell vegetables or other garden produce for a price, and also vineyards, conflicts with their Rule and with the purity of the Order. According to what the said predecessor declared and also ordained, that if such things for the uses just stated were left as a legacy to the Brothers, as for example a field or vineyard for cultivating and the like, the Brothers should in every way abstain from accepting such things, since even to have the foregoing in order that the price of their produce should be had in their seasons, approaches the nature and form {proventuum} of income. Again, since the aforesaid saint showed both in the examples of his life and in the words of the Rule that he wished his Brothers and sons, relying on divine providence, to cast their thoughts upon God, who feeds the birds of the air who neither gather into barns nor sow nor reap, it is not likely that he wished them to have granaries or cellars, when they should hope to be able to pass their life in daily begging. And therefore they should not from slight fear become slack {relaxare} and make such gatherings and preservings, but only at that time when it would be very credible from what is already experienced that they could not otherwise find the necessaries of life. We have decided that this should be left to the judgment of the ministers and custodians together and separately in their administrations and custodies, with the advice and assent of the guardian and two discreet priests from the convent of the place who have long been members in the order of Brothers, burdening their consciences on this matter especially. Hence it is also that, since the holy man wished to found his Brothers in the highest poverty and humility, in respect of the desire and equally of the effect, as almost the whole Rule proclaims, it befits them that from now on they should in no way cause to be made, or permit to be made, churches or any other buildings at all that should be regarded as excessive in number and size, considering the number of Brothers living in them. We wish, therefore, that from now on every where in their order they should be content with modest and humble buildings, lest what is open to the eyes proclaim to outsiders the opposite of this great poverty that was promised. Also, although church {paramenta} furniture and vessels are dedicated to the honour of the divine name, on account of which God himself did all things, nevertheless, he who is the knower of hidden things looks mainly to the mind of those ministering to him, not to their hand,nor does he wish himself to be served through those things [illas: substitute illa] that are not in harmony with the condition and state of those who serve him; accordingly vessels and church furniture that are fitting, and in number and size competently sufficient, should suffice them. But superfluity, or too much preciousness, or any anxiety whatever in these things or in any others at all, cannot befit their profession or state. For since these smack of the amassing of treasure or of plenty, in respect of human judgment they manifestly derogate from so great a poverty. Therefore we will and command the foregoing to be observed by the Brothers. Concerning offerings of horses and arms we decree that that should be observed in all respects and through all {in omnibus et per omnia} that is known to have been defined by the aforesaid declaring in respect of money offered as alms.

From the foregoing there has grown among the Brothers a question of no little scrupulosity, namely, whether by the profession of their Rule they are obliged to a restricted or thin or poor use of things. Some among them believe and say that, just as in respect of lordship of things they have from their vow a most strict abdication, so in respect of use the greatest restriction and poorness is imposed upon them. Others on the contrary assert that they are not obliged by their profession to any poor use not expressed in the Rule, though they are bound to a moderate use of temperance, just as, and fittingly, more than, the rest of Christians. Wishing therefore to provide for the quiet of the consciences of the aforesaid Brothers, and to put an end to these disagreements, we say, making a declaration, that by the profession of their Rule the Brothers Minor are particularly obliged to the restricted or poor uses that are contained in their Rule, and to the mode of obligation under which the Rule contains or posits the said uses.

But to say, as some are said to assert, that it is heretical to hold that poor use is included or not included under the vow of evangelical poverty, we judge presumptuous and rash.

Finally, because from the fact that, when it determines by whom and where the elections of a Minister General should be done, the said Rule makes absolutely no mention of the election or appointment of Provincial Ministers, a doubt could arise among the Brothers upon this, we, wishing them to be able to to proceed in all their {factis} acts clearly and securely, declare, enact also and ordain in this constitution, to be valid {in perpetuum valitura} in perpetuity, that when provision concerning a Minister is to be made for some province, the election of that Minister remains with the provincial chapter; that the chapter is bound to make this election on the day after it meets; and that the confirmation of this election pertains to the Minister General. And if indeed they proceed to this election by way of scrutiny [note], and, with the votes divided in different directions, several elections happen to be {celebrari} announced in discord, let that election which has been announced by the numerically larger part of the chapter (making no comparison or consideration of zeal or merit), notwithstanding any exception or contradiction whatever of the other part, be confirmed, or even disallowed by the said General Minister with the advice of discrete members of the order (a diligent examination having first been carried out officially, as pertains to him), as has seemed to them advantageous according to God. And if it is disallowed, let such election revert to the provincial chapter.

Besides {ceterum}, if the chapter mentioned omits to elect the Minister on the aforesaid day, from that time provision of the provincial minister freely devolves to the General Minister. However, if it were to seem advantageous sometimes to the aforesaid General Minister and General Chapter for a certain, manifest and reasonable cause, in the overseas provinces of Ireland, or Greece, or Rome, in which hitherto another mode of providing is said to have been preserved for a certain and reasonable cause, for the provincial minister to be appointed {praefici} by the General Minister, with the advice of virtuous members of the Order, rather than by the election of the aforesaid chapter in the provinces of Ireland and in the overseas provinces inviolably, and in Rome or Greece when the minister of the said province dies or is discharged {absolveretur} on this side of the sea, let that be observed instead, without trickery, partiality or fraud (upon which we burden their con sciences) which the said minister, with the advice of the said virtuous members, shall have decided should be ordained.

But in the deposition of the said provincial ministers we wish to be observed what has hitherto been observed by this order on the matter.

However, if it were to happen that they lack a Minister General, let the vicar of the Order do upon this what the same Minister would have to have done, until provision has been made for a General Minister. Moreover, if perchance anything happens to be attempted otherwise concerning such provincial minister, let that be ipso facto invalid and empty. Let it therefore be licit to no man at all to weaken this page of our declarations, sayings, commission, response, prohibition, ordinance, mandate, constitutions, judgments and wills, or by rash deed of daring to go against it. If anyone presumes to attempt this, however, let him know that he will incur the indignation of almighty God and of blessed Peter and Paul, his apostles.
33