ECclesiastical Property. — It is the aggregate of ecclesiastical goods (q.v.).
I. THE CHURCH’S RIGHT TO PROPERTY
The Church pursues a spiritual end, but since its members and ministers are human beings, it must also provide for their material needs, failing which it would be unable to fulfill its mission. Without the possession of material goods it would be very difficult to provide for the construction of churches, the needs of worship, the establishment 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 at all times. To fulfill its perpetual mission, temporal goods provide the Church with an indispensable means; hence possession is for it a vital right, belonging to it as an independent, perfect, and sovereign society.This right must first be described as a natural right; quite apart from its supernatural character, the Church cannot but be considered at least as any other association (coetus humanus) that pursues an honest end by honest means. Now the right of association is a natural right (q.V. LIBERTÀ POLITICHE), which carries with it the right to the means, even material ones, necessary for the attainment of the end.
If we consider the Church as instituted by Christ as an external society with public, universal, necessary, perpetual, perfect, and independent worship, such a society, precisely because it is external, is subject to the common exigencies and needs of human societies, not on account of the end, but by reason of the subjects that it must lead to the end. Thus, by positive divine law, temporal goods, both movable and immovable, belong to it for worship and for the congruous sustenance of its ministers, independently of any earthly authority. When therefore the State recognizes the Church’s civil personality and thus its capacity to possess, it is not conferring upon it any new right, but is merely taking note of the right that the Church possesses by natural and positive divine law and is safeguarding it even civilly.
Throughout the centuries the Church has not failed to exercise this its native right and to vindicate it with clarity and firmness, condemning doctrines tending to deny or diminish it and resisting with all its strength the usurpations and encroachments that have come from any quarter.
At the Council of Lyons in 1274 (canons 12, 13, I, 6 in VI) the Church imposed ipso facto incurring excommunication upon all lay persons who, taking advantage of the vacancy of ecclesiastical goods, should appropriate their revenues. Pope John XXII in 1327 condemned Marsilius of Padua, who with much greater violence than Arnold of Brescia (12th cent.) had attacked the Church’s right to possess (Denz.-U., nn. 495 ff.). In turn, Martin V (bull Inter cuncta, 22 Feb. 1418) reprobated (as had already been done by the Council of Constance on 6 May 1415) the errors of Wyclif, 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 Wyclif, were condemned, and a questionnaire was approved to be used in heresy trials, which sets forth the Church’s doctrine on its right lawfully to acquire and possess temporal goods (ibid., n. 684, q. 34; n. 685, q. 35). The errors of Wyclif and Hus were renewed in the 16th cent. by certain jurists and by the so-called Reformers, who in practice carried out numerous spoliations.
To stem this movement the Council of Trent imposed latae sententiae excommunication upon all who should usurp the goods and rights of the Church, dioceses, secular and regular benefices, montes pietatis, 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 to the Church its native and legitimate right to acquire and possess (Denz.-U., nn. 1726–27, prop. nn. 26–27).
The Code of Canon Law (can. 1495) vindicates for the Church the innate right to acquire, possess, and administer temporal goods necessary for the attainment of its end, and this in full freedom and perfect independence from civil authority. The same right belongs equally to all churches and to all moral persons to whom juridical personality is recognized by the legitimate ecclesiastical authority. Civil authority has frequently recognized, either explicitly or implicitly, this right of the Church. It suffices to mention the concordats with Colombia (art. 5), Poland (art. 16, 17, 24), Latvia (art. 14), Lithuania (art. 17, 22), and Italy (art. 10–27).
II. TEMPORAL POSSESSIONS OF THE CHURCH
The original source of temporal possessions was offerings (q.v.). Usage and canonical texts, however, perfected this system, which was too primitive and practical, only in periods of great religious fervor, by establishing regular offerings, later fixed by tariff, which were distinguished into: 1) first-fruits, the oldest and most popular form of ecclesiastical tax; 2) tithes, one of the oldest forms of ecclesiastical contribution; 3) honoraria on the occasion of ordinations (the first to give rise to the regular collection of pecuniary dues); 4) honoraria on the occasion of funerals; 5) income from immovable goods: a means to which the Church resorted to provide for its needs in the most difficult times, when, with the increase of poverty, income diminished; 6) relatively modern honoraria paid on the occasion of the administration of the sacraments: among these is the stipend (q.v.) for Mass. Monetary penances occupy a separate place (for the individual topics, q.V. BENI ECCLESIASTICI; DECIME; TASSE ECCLESIASTICHE).The regular employment 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 offerings, q.V. the relevant entry. From classical antiquity and increasingly during the early barbarian age, patrimonial centers with their own life and interests, distinct from the bishop, also formed, until gradually the benefice (q.v.) came into being.
In connection with the principles on which it based its right to possess, the Church claimed for its goods immunity (q.v.) from fiscal burdens. In fact, however, ecclesiastical goods at all times, and especially in the Middle Ages, when a great wealth of immovable goods had accumulated in the Church, were subject to dilapidation and secularization (q.V. SECOLARIZZAZIONE DEI BENI).
III. PRESENT-DAY LAW
1. Subjects of the right of property
The subjects of the right of property in ecclesiastical goods are the individual ecclesiastical juridical persons (canons 531, 1495 § 2, 1498–99); but subjects of patrimonial right in the Church are, besides ecclesiastical juridical persons, also physical persons, who may be clerics or religious or even lay persons. Clerics may be holders of piae causae, i.e., of goods that have been constituted for the necessary title of their ordination to the priesthood, with norms that vary according to dioceses and times (canons 1476, 1482 § 1, 1183 § 1, 974 § 1 n. 7). Lay persons mayEcclesiastical juridical persons are distinguished into collegial and non-collegial. Those which are such by divine ordination itself (by divine right, such as the Universal Church and the Apostolic See); those which are such by ecclesiastical law, that is, by human ecclesiastical law; these, in turn, derive their quality as moral persons either by law, that is, by the very prescription of the law, or by man, that is, by a special concession of the competent ecclesiastical superior, given by formal decree (cc. 99, 100 §1).
2. Administrators of ecclesiastical property
A juridical person needs organs to administer its property. The norms from which the administrative organization of juridical persons derives belong to common canon law, but there also exists particular diocesan law. The bishop has regulatory power within the diocese over all institutes (cc. 1519 ff., 1521 §2, etc.). He can not only dictate the regulations for the administration of the juridical person but also create the juridical person and grant it the foundation charter, statutes, or organizational regulations (cc. 492, 495, 686 §2, 689 §1-2, etc.). Forms of administration can also be established by the will of founders or donors (c. 1514, etc.). Regarding ecclesiastical moral persons, statutes are discussed. 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 *jus condendi statuta*, considering the norms of such statutes as juridical norms (cc. 410, 715 §1). These corporations are cathedral chapters, collegiate chapters, religious orders, religious congregations, associations of common life without vows, and confraternities (cf. cited canons). Custom may have a certain sphere of application. This occurs, for example, in relation to tithes and first-fruits (c. 1502), to the cathedral church (c. 1504), etc. The bishop may also issue general norms for the administration of ecclesiastical goods in his diocese within the limits of common law and in consideration of legitimate customs (c. 1519 §2). However, administrative organs cannot be regulated by custom, since common law, particular law, and the law of foundation are the only normative sources, and no value can therefore be attributed to custom, except where common or particular law and the foundation charters are lacking (cc. 1521 §1, 1523 n. 2, 1525, etc.). The founder may grant the institution an autonomous organization or entrust its administration to other moral persons, public or private entities, lay or ecclesiastical, or pious works (cc. 1490, 1504, 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 and partly by the foundation charters (cc. 1521 §1, 1525 §1, etc.).Administrators can be designated by the founder or his heirs; the power of appointment can be entrusted to specific persons or families, to civil or ecclesiastical authorities, or to the assembly of members if the person has a corporate character, but the vigilance of the Ordinary can never be excluded (cc. 1515 §3, 1492 §2). If not designated by the foundation charters, the appointment of administrators can be entrusted to the parish priest, the bishop, religious orders or congregations, or to persons belonging to religious institutes. Administrators can be ecclesiastics or laypersons, and administrative offices can be temporary or lifelong (c. 1521 §2). The legal representation of the Holy See in judicial matters belongs to the Pope. Camera (v.), presided over by the Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, administers the temporal goods of the Holy See, especially during a sede vacante.
Cardinal titulars 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 Pope. The goods of the episcopal table are administered by the bishop, who represents the diocese in court (c. 1653 §1). During a vacancy, the representation of the episcopal table belongs to the capitular vicar or the apostolic administrator (v. MENSA VESCOVILE).
The rectors of churches are the administrators of the individual churches. Alongside them, other persons, ecclesiastical or lay, can be appointed with whom they form the Fabbrica Council (v. FABBRI, FABBRICERIA).
The administration of the property of the cathedral church, with its spiritual and temporal rights, the goods of the Fabbrica, and the pious foundations to which the founder or custom does not assign a special administrator, belongs to the bishop together with the cathedral chapter (cf. cc. 1633 §1, 4).
Regarding the administration of the property of religious orders, the appointment of particular stewards is prescribed (cc. 516 §2-4, 2347 nn. 2-3). Benefices are administered and represented by the individual beneficiaries (cc. 1653 §2, 1526). The goods of non-collegial ecclesiastical institutes, such as hospitals, orphanages, schools, etc., are administered by the individual rectors according to the norms of the foundation charters (cc. 1489 §3, 1649). Provisional administrators are appointed in cases of refusal or negligence by the titular, conflicts of interest, poor administration, or sequestration (cc. 1649, 1653 §5, etc.).
3. How ecclesiastical goods are administered
A distinction of great importance, because it marks the boundaries of the powers of administrators, is that between acts of ordinary administration and acts of extraordinary administration (cc. 1527 §1; V. AMMINISTRAZIONE, ATTI DI, atti di). The duties of administrators are: the oath of office, the drawing up of an inventory, the giving of security by beneficiaries, and the rendering of accounts (cc. 1522, 1525 §1, etc.). There are also other general obligations, such as to ensure that ecclesiastical goods entrusted to their care in no way perish or suffer detriment; to observe the prescriptions of canon law; to invest church funds; and to keep orderly books and documents (c. 1523).Major clerics who may be found to abandon the office entrusted to them by their Ordinary, and without the Ordinary’s permission, may be suspended *a divinis* for a determined time by the Ordinary (cc. 1528, 2399).
The ways in which ecclesiastical entities acquire their property are distinguished by the Code into modes of natural law and modes of positive law (can. 1499 §1). But a further distinction can be made between modes of acquisition by private law and by public law.
Modes of private law are: occupation of ownerless things; accessions; usucapion; contracts; inter vivos acts (= donations); acts of last will (= legacies); and legal succession. Numerous are the modes of acquisition by public law: succession resulting from the partial or total suppression of lower ecclesiastical entities; tithes and first-fruits; oblations, *clemoline*, collections, quests; diocesan taxes; postal taxes; and fees.
The administration of the property of ecclesiastical entities includes acts of conservation and acts of utilization. Administration is carried out not only by exercising real rights but also by entering into obligatory relationships. Moreover, patrimonial law and its respective organization vary from country to country, both in old Europe and in extra-European countries. It varies according to the history of the spread of Christianity and the political situation in the various countries.
BIBL.:
PATRIZI, Costantino, *De administratione patrimonii ecclesiastici*, Roma 1607;
PATRIZI, Francesco, *De iurepatronatus*, Roma 1842;
— *De iure ecclesiasticorum beneficiorum*, Roma 1843;
— *De iure sacrarum eleemosynarum*, Roma 1844;
— *De iure praelationis*, Roma 1845;
— *De iure rerum ecclesiasticarum*, Roma 1846;
— *De iure sacri ordinis*, Roma 1847;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis*, Roma 1848;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis in bonis ecclesiasticis*, Roma 1849;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis circa sacra*, Roma 1850;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis circa clerum*, Roma 1851;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis circa sacramenta*, Roma 1852;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis circa sacramentales*, Roma 1853;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis circa sacramentales actiones*, Roma 1854;
— *De iure sacrae supremae potestatis circa sacramentales res*, Roma 1855.