Category talk:Acta Pontificum (Nova Roma)
From NovaRoma
(Difference between revisions)
(Corrected link) |
(Corrections) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
[[Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus (Nova Roma)|Q. Metellus]] [[Pontifex (Nova Roma)|pontifex]] replied (message 8855): | [[Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus (Nova Roma)|Q. Metellus]] [[Pontifex (Nova Roma)|pontifex]] replied (message 8855): | ||
| − | : Simply, | + | : Simply, [''decreta''] carry specific legal implications, per the ''lex constitutiva''. [A ''responsum''] however, does not carry any specific legal implications, and is simply a statement by the College on a given topic (i.e., a response). |
: As things go on, however, I think we will be seeing more ''responsa'' and less ''decreta'', though only time can tell. | : As things go on, however, I think we will be seeing more ''responsa'' and less ''decreta'', though only time can tell. | ||
Revision as of 12:45, 26 June 2006
Decreta & Responsa : Commentary
A. d. VII Kal. Qui. K. Buteone Po. Minucia cos. ‡ MMDCCLIX a.u.c. on the ReligioRomana e-mail list (message 8854 in the archive) A. Apollonius asked about decreta and responsa:
- Is this intended to be a technical distinction and, if so, what do the pontifices intend the terms to mean?
Q. Metellus pontifex replied (message 8855):
- Simply, [decreta] carry specific legal implications, per the lex constitutiva. [A responsum] however, does not carry any specific legal implications, and is simply a statement by the College on a given topic (i.e., a response).
- As things go on, however, I think we will be seeing more responsa and less decreta, though only time can tell.
