Letter 16: From the king of the Goths, to our faithful servant,

From the king of the Goths, to our faithful servant, The question you have raised about the limits of ecclesiastical immunity from royal jurisdiction is one on which the canonical tradition and the civil law of our kingdom do not always speak with one voice, and I want to address it directly rather than leave the ambiguity in place. The general principle is as follows: clergy are subject to ecclesiastical jurisdiction in matters pertaining to their clerical status and their exercise of ministry. In matters that would be under civil jurisdiction if the parties were laypeople — disputes over property, questions of inheritance, certain crimes — the relationship between ecclesiastical and civil jurisdiction is more complicated and has been handled differently at different times. My position, which I believe is consistent with the decisions of our councils, is that the crown does not claim jurisdiction over clergy in matters that are properly ecclesiastical, and the church does not claim exclusive jurisdiction over clergy in matters that are properly civil. The boundary between these categories is not always clear, and cases that fall near that boundary should be referred to discussion between the relevant bishop and the relevant civil authority before either acts. I expect my officials to honor ecclesiastical immunity where it applies and I expect the bishops to cooperate with civil justice where it applies. By order of the king