ECCLESIASTICAL PATRIMONY. - It is the complex of ecclesiastical goods (v.).
I. THE CHURCH'S RIGHT TO PROPERTY
The Church pursues a spiritual end, but since its members and its ministers are men, it must also concern itself with their material needs, on pain of falling short of its mission. Without the possession of material goods it would be very difficult to provide for the building of churches, the needs of worship, the erection of seminaries, the instruction, formation and support of the clergy, the propagation of the faith in mission lands, and all the numerous works of charity to which the Church has devoted itself in every age. In order to fulfill its perpetual mission, temporal goods furnish the Church with an indispensable means; to possess is therefore for it a vital right, belonging to it insofar as it is an independent, perfect and sovereign society.
Such a right must be called first of all a right of nature; indeed, apart from its supernatural character, the Church cannot but be considered at least as any association whatsoever (coetus humanus) that pursues an honest end by honest means. Now the right of association is a natural right (v. LIBERTÀ POLITICHE), which carries with it the right to the means, including material means, necessary for the attainment of the end.
If one then considers the Church as instituted by Christ as an external society with a public, universal, necessary, perpetual, perfect and independent worship, such a society, precisely because it is external, is subject to the common requirements and needs of human societies, not by reason of the end, but by reason of the subjects whom it must lead to the end. Thus, by positive divine right, temporal goods belong to it, both movable and immovable, for worship and for the congrua substantatio of its ministers, independently of any earthly authority. When therefore the State recognizes the Church's civil personality and hence its capacity to possess, it does not attribute to it any new right, but takes note of the right that the Church has by natural and positive-divine norm and protects it also civilly.
In the course of the centuries the Church has not failed to exercise this native right of its own and to claim it with clarity and firmness, condemning doctrines tending to deny or diminish it and resisting with all its strength usurpations and outrages from whatever quarter they came.
At the Council of Lyons of 1274 (cann. 12, 13, I, 6 in VI) the Church struck with excommunication ipso facto incurrenda all those laymen who, taking advantage of the vacancy of ecclesiastical goods, had appropriated their revenues. Pope John XXII condemned in 1327 Marsilius of Padua, who with far greater violence than Arnold of Brescia (12th cent.) had attacked the Church's right to possess (Denz-U, n. 495 ff.). Martin V in turn (bull Inter cuncta, 22 Feb. 1418) reproved (as the Council of Constance had already done on 6 May 1415) the errors of Wycliffe, who claimed that it was necessary for the Church not to possess, in order to remain faithful to the will of the Master and of Holy Scripture (ibid., n. 590, can. 10; n. 612, can. 32; n. 613, can. 33; n. 616, can. 36). In the same document thirty propositions of Hus, very similar to those of Wycliffe, were condemned, and a questionnaire to be used in heresy trials was approved, which expresses the Church's doctrine on its right to acquire and legitimately possess temporal goods (ibid., n. 684, q. 34; n. 685, q. 35). The errors of Wycliffe and Hus were renewed in the 13th century by certain jurists and by the so-called reformers, who in the practical field carried out numerous spoliations.
To check this movement the Council of Trent struck with excommunication latae sententiae all those who had usurped goods and rights of the Church, dioceses, secular and regular benefices, monti di pietà, etc. (sess. XXII de reform., c. 11). In the bull Apostolicae sedis of Pius IX (12 Oct. 1869) this excommunication appears among those reserved speciali modo (P. Gasparri, Fontes, III, Rome 1938, n. 552, p. 24 and nn. 11-12, p. 26). The Syllabus, moreover, condemns the doctrines of those who contest the Church's native and legitimate right to acquire and possess (Denz-U, nn. 1726-27, prop. nn. 26-27).
The CIC (can. 1495) claims for the Church the innate right to acquire, possess and administer temporal goods, necessary for the attainment of its own end, and this in full freedom and perfect independence from civil authority. All churches and all moral persons to which juridical personality is recognized by the legitimate ecclesiastical authority have equally the same right. Civil authority has frequently recognized this right of the Church either explicitly or implicitly. It suffices to mention the concordats with Colombia (art. 5), with Poland (arts. 16, 17, 24), with Latvia (art. 14), Lithuania (arts. 17, 22) and Italy (arts. 10-27).
II. THE TEMPORAL POSSESSIONS OF THE CHURCH
The original source of temporal possessions was oblations (v.). However, usage and the canonical texts perfected this system, which was too primitive and practical only in periods of great religious fervor, by instituting regular offerings, later fixed at a tariff, which were distinguished into: 1) first-fruits, which is the oldest and most popular form of ecclesiastical tax; 2) tithe, which appears as one of the oldest forms of ecclesiastical contribution; 3) fees on the occasion of Ordinations (the first to give rise to the regular collection of monetary dues) and 4) fees on the occasion of funerals; 5) income from real estate: a means to which the Church resorted in order to provide for its needs in the most difficult moments, when, as poverty increased, revenues diminished; 6) fees, relatively modern, paid on the occasion of the administration of the Sacraments: among these is the alms (v.) of the Mass. Pecuniary penances, on the other hand, hold a place apart (for the individual topics, v. BENI ECCLESIASTICI; DECIME; TASSE ECCLESIASTICHE).
The regular use of ecclesiastical revenues may have been determined by the intentions of the donors, expressed or at least presumed: otherwise it is established by the Church. For oblations, v. the relevant entry. From the classical age onward, and increasingly during the early barbarian age, patrimonial centers with their own life and interests also formed, distinct from the bishop, until gradually the benefice (v.) came about.
In connection with the principles on which it based its right to possess, the Church claimed for its goods immunity (v.) from the burdens of the treasury. In fact, however, ecclesiastical goods in all times, and especially in the Middle Ages, when a great wealth of real estate had formed in the Church, were subject to dilapidations and secularizations (v. SECOLARIZZAZIONE DEI BENI).
III. CURRENT LAW
1. Subjects of the right of property
The subjects of the right of property over ecclesiastical goods are the individual ecclesiastical juridical persons (cann. 531, 1495 § 2, 1498-99); but subjects of patrimonial right in the Church are, besides ecclesiastical juridical persons, also natural persons, who may be clerics or religious or even laypersons. Clerics may be holders of sacred p[atrimony], that is, of goods that have been established for the title necessary for their Ordination to the priesthood, with norms that vary according to dioceses and times (cann. 1476, 1482 § 1, 1183 § 1, 974 § 1 n. 7). Laypersons may be owners of sacred things: churches, oratories, sanctuaries, sacred furnishings and tombs.
To certain ecclesiastical juridical persons, however, patrimonial capacity is denied by the rules and Constitutions: for example, for the Mendicant Orders, everything acquired by the Order passes in ownership to the Holy See (cann. 579, 580, 569 and the related constitutions of the Orders). Moral persons are those that have received a canonical statute from the authority.
Ecclesiastical juridical persons are distinguished into collegiate and non-collegiate. Those that are such ex ipsa ordinatione divina (by divine right, such as the Universal Church and the Apostolic See); those that are such ex iure ecclesiastico, that is, by human ecclesiastical right; these in turn derive their quality of moral persons a iure, that is, ex ipso iuris praescripto, or ab homine, that is, ex speciali competentis superioris ecclesiastici concessione, given by formal decree (cann. 99, 100 § 1).
2. The administrators of ecclesiastical p[atrimony]
A juridical person needs organs in order to administer. The norms from which the administrative organization of juridical persons draws its life belong to common canon law, but there also exists a particular diocesan law. The bishop has a regulatory power within the diocese over all institutes (cann. 1519 ff., 1521 § 2, etc.). He can not only lay down the regulation of administration of the juridical person, but also create the juridical person and give it the foundation charter, the statute or the regulation of organization (cann. 492, 495, 686 § 2, 689 § 1-2, etc.). Forms of administration may also be laid down by the will of the founders or donors (can. 1514, etc.). With regard to ecclesiastical moral bodies one speaks of statutes. Canon law recognizes in certain corporations the right to regulate in a general way their internal social relations, that is, it recognizes autonomy or the ius condendi statuta, considering the norms of such statutes as juridical norms (cann. 410, 715 § 1). These corporations are cathedral Chapters, collegiate Chapters, Orders, religious Congregations, Associations of common life without vows, Confraternities (cann. cited). Custom may have a certain sphere of application. This occurs, for example, in relation to tithes and first-fruits (can. 1502), to the cattedratico (can. 1504), etc. The bishop too can issue general norms for the administration of the ecclesiastical goods of his diocese within the limits of common law and having regard to legitimate customs (can. 1519 § 2). But administrative organs cannot be governed by custom, since common law, particular law and the law of foundation are the only normative sources, and therefore no value can be attributed to custom, unless common or particular law and the foundation charters are lacking (cann. 1521 § 1, 1523, n. 2°, 1525, etc.). The founder can give the institution a self-governing organization or entrust its administration to other entities or moral bodies, public or private entities, lay or ecclesiastical, or to pious works (cann. 1490, 1514, 1523, n. 2°, etc.). The most varied forms of organization can arise from the foundation charters. The organs of administration are determined for individual juridical persons partly by law, partly by the foundation charters (cann. 1520 ff., 1521 § 1, 1525 § 1, etc.).
Administrators may be designated by the founder or by his heirs; the appointment may be entrusted to determined persons or families, to civil and ecclesiastical authorities; they may be designated by the assembly of the members, if the person has the character of a corporation, but the vigilance of the Ordinary can never be excluded (cann. 1515 § 3, 1492 § 2). If they are not designated by the foundation charters, the appointment of administrators may be entrusted: to the parish priest, to the bishop, to religious Orders or congregations, or to persons belonging to religions. Administrators may be ecclesiastics or laypersons, and administrative offices may be temporary or for life (can. 1521 § 2). The juridical and procedural representation of the Holy See belongs to the Pontiff. The Apostolic Camera (v.), presided over by the Cardinal Chamberlain of the Holy Roman Church, administers the temporal goods of the Holy See, especially during a vacancy of the see.
Titular cardinals have the representation of the rights of the church that constitutes their title.
The representation of the Roman Seminary (v. COLLEGI ECCLESIASTICI) belongs to the cardinal vicar by his own right and not as a delegate of the Pontiff. The goods of the episcopal mensa are administered by the bishop, who represents the diocese in court (can. 1653 § 1). During the vacancy the representation of the mensa belongs to the capitular vicar or to the apostolic administrator (v. MENSA VESCOVILE).
The rectors of churches are the administrators of the individual churches. Placed alongside them there may be other persons, ecclesiastical or lay, with whom together they form the Council of the Fabbrica (v. FABBRICA E FABBRICERIA).
The administration of the p[atrimony] of the cathedral church with its spiritual and temporal rights, the goods of the Fabbrica, of pious foundations to which the founder or custom did not assign a special administrator, belongs to the bishop together with the cathedral Chapter (cf. can. 1633 §§ 1, 4).
With regard to the administration of the p[atrimony] of the Orders, the appointment of special treasurers is prescribed (cann. 516 §§ 2-4, 2347, nn. 2-3). Benefices are administered and represented by the individual beneficiaries (cann. 1653 § 2, 1526). The goods of non-collegiate ecclesiastical institutes, that is, hospitals, orphanages, schools, etc., are administered by the individual rectors according to the norms of the foundation charters (cann. 1489 § 3, 1649). Provisional administrators exist in case of refusal or neglect on the part of the holder, in case of conflicts of interest, of bad administration, of sequestration (cann. 1649, 1653 § 5, etc.).
3. How ecclesiastical goods are administered
A distinction that is very important, because it marks the boundaries of the powers of administrators, is that between acts of ordinary administration and acts of extraordinary administration (can. 1527 § 1; v. AMMINISTRAZIONE, atti di). The duties of administrators are: the oath of service, formation of the inventory, security of beneficiaries, rendering of accounts (cann. 1522, 1525 § 1, etc.). There are moreover other obligations of a general character, such as to watch over that the ecclesiastical goods entrusted to their care in no way perish or suffer detriment; to observe the prescriptions of canon law, to invest the money of the church, to keep orderly books and documents (can. 1523).
Major clerics who should dare to abandon the office entrusted to them by their own Ordinary, and without the license of the Ordinary himself, can be suspended a divinis for a time determined by the Ordinary (cann.
1528, 2399). The ways in which ecclesiastical bodies acquire their p[atrimony] are distinguished by the code into ways of natural right and of positive right (can. 1499 § 1). But one can also make the distinction between ways of acquisition of private right and of public right.
Modes of private law are: occupations of things without an owner; accessions, usucaptions; contracts; act inter vivos (= donations); act of last will (= testament); legitimate succession. The modes of acquisition of public law are numerous: succession that is a consequence of the partial or total suppression of inferior ecclesiastical bodies; tithes and first-fruits; oblations, alms, collections, quests; diocesan taxes; postal taxes; fees.
The administration of the p. of ecclesiastical bodies comprises acts of conservation and acts of utilization. Administration is carried out not only by exercising one's own real rights, but also by entering into obligatory relationships. Moreover, patrimonial law and the respective legal order vary from country to country, both in old Europe and in non-European countries. And it varies according to the history of the spread of Christianity and the political situation in the various countries.