Question VI: How poverty is violated

INNUMERABLE cases are to be defined here, and so this question must be treated more broadly.

NOTE first, from what was said in question 1 from the obligation induced by the vow, by what means it is violated. The vow of Poverty therefore strips one of all dominion, and of use independent of the free will of the Superior. Wherefore anyone whatsoever usurping some dominion, or use independent of the will of the Superior, will be guilty of rashly violating Poverty.

NOTE secondly, that the will of the superior grants the disposition of some thing in two ways: first expressly, second tacitly, or interpretatively, as D. Bonaventure teaches in the Apology of the Poor, cap. 3. of the fourth response. The will is express, when the Superior expressly grants the faculty by word, in writing, or by signs. The tacit interpretative, or presumed will, is that by which the superior, knowing and able to object, freely permits something; and for that reason we can act, interpreting the will of the Superior, which we morally presume not to resist, and which, if he knew this were being done, he would not refuse, nor would he demand that an express faculty be sought. And this has been introduced chiefly from the custom of doing these things without a sought faculty, as D. Bonav. notes in the opuscula cited, and Bassaeus V. Paupertas, num. 3. It is gathered also from the circumstances of the superior: whether he be discreet, whether gentle, whether friendly. From the circumstances also of the subject: whether he be upright and serious. From the things themselves: whether they be studious, whether useful to the Religion, etc.

But OBSERVE, as Faustus notes in the treasury, lib. 8. question 162, and Bassaeus loc. cit., and Rodrig. part. 3. on the Vow of Poverty, that the Religion in which these things occur must be keenly observed; for what in this one will be venial, or free from fault, in another will be mortal. The customs also must be observed: whether they were introduced and kept by the God-fearing, or rather are corruptions and abuses creeping from the looser morals of the age into the Religion, which the Prelates tolerate for the sake of peace, lest seditions be stirred up. Truly these faculties do not have the character of a privilege in the manner of one, so that they be given and diffused to all by communication; for although all vow Poverty, some vow a stricter one than others, as I showed in question 1, and where the pledge is equal, the observance is not equal.

THEREFORE against the vow of Poverty a Religious sins if he accepts, keeps, consumes, exchanges, or gives away any thing whatsoever, whether of the Religion, or from outside, without the tacit or express consent of the superior: Azor. tom. 1. lib. 12. cap. 12. Valent. d. 10. question 4. point 3. Sanchez lib. 7. moral. cap. 19. Less. lib. 2. cap. 1. num. 78. Bassaeus num. 2. Arag. with D. Thom. 2. 2. question 32. art. 8. Diana on Poverty resol. 31. part. 1. Laym. lib. 4. tract. 5. cap. 7. Sanchez lib. 7. moral. cap. 18.

It is PROVED from the first noting, because he promised the opposite.

THEN among consumable things are also foods, to the grave loss of the Religion; which if they are taken from outside, it is against Poverty; but if from the Monastery, it will also be theft. Yet these are not to be weighed with so delicate a scale, that if anyone, even with a companion, frequently consumes them by eating, it be mortal (except if grave loss were inflicted). Thus Suarez Tom. 3. on Religion lib. 8. cap. 11. num. 41. Tannerus adds 2. 2. d. 7. question 3. d. 4. num. 106. Nor can any severity of the Prelates render such acceptances, with respect to the substance of the thing accepted, iniquitous. Caramuel subscribes d. 60. num. 888.

RESTRICT however, if the Religion were poor, as Barthol. a Sancto Fausto says of himself in the treasury lib. 8. question 110. Sayrus lib. 9. cap. 16. num. 20. Bassaeus num. 3.

But WHAT quantity is required for it to be mortal, Diana does not determine first part. on Poverty resol. 30, nor Faustus, nor Sayrus, nor even Bassaeus.

MOREOVER many things must be weighed, as the quality of things, scarcity, or abundance, as Bassaeus notes with Caramuel.

You will ASK: whether in ownership there can be parvity of matter, say, an obol.

SOME have denied it, and Doctors Benedict, Jerome, Bonaventure, Anthony, and Cassian are brought forward, according to Faustus in the treasury, lib. 8. question 187.

The Saintly Doctor is BADLY brought forward; for ad cap. 6 of the Rule in these words: Let the brothers appropriate nothing to themselves — from which words some deduce that it is forbidden under penalty of ownership to take to oneself even the smallest thing above nothing, as Sanctes reports, among whom they place D. Bonaventure; but the Saintly Doctor shows this exposition to be false, because there is subjoined: Neither a house, nor a place, nor any other thing, inferring that there are excluded not only money, of which above, but also other kinds of things under grave guilt, not singly down to every kind whatever. Nor do the holy Fathers will anything else, or that the appropriation of a minute thing be ownership; but from the parvity of matter they knew that a light one, in the judgment of prudent men, is not a higher precept than this natural precept of not stealing, in which parvity of matter is admitted.

THEREFORE they require grave matter for a mortal sin, and that it be determined, as I showed for constituting the grave theft of sons, in the disputation on theft.

On this matter see Diana part. 1. on Poverty resol. 36, where he says, as many heads, so many opinions; Rodr. tom. 4. cap. 118. posits two aurei; Soto taught it on justice lib. 4. question 3. ad 3, and Aragon. judged it probable 2. 2. question 66. art. 6.

Cenedo on the Poverty of Religious dub. 20. with Ledesm. addition to the summa tom. 2. cap. 4. posits ocho o nueve reales [eight or nine reals], 6. the value of them.

MENDOZA question 8. on Poverty posits two silver coins, which are eight reals.

IOANNES DE LA CRUZ on the Religious state lib. 1. cap. 3. d. 5. and Sanchez sum. tom. 3. lib. 7. cap. 20. posit four silver coins, namely 16 reals. So also Faustus in the treasury lib. 8. question 193, who adds in the wealthiest Religions three silver coins; in middling ones two; in poor ones one; Diana subscribes.

MIRANDA in the Manual tom. 1. question 28. art. 17. teaches that this must be measured according to the variety of the Religion, of persons, of place, and of time, by the judgment of a prudent man. Bassaeus subscribes V. furtum 2. num. 6. This seems right to me.

This is the opinion of D. Bonavent. in the mirror of the soul, cap. 2. §. On theft, where he wills not to determine the quantity, but shows that it varies according to the circumstances.

Bassaeus however WARNS V. Paupertas 3. that there can be grave matter of theft from loss, say of an instrument for gain, for example, a needle; yet it will not be grave by reason of ownership; just as ownership can be grave, say of gold, yet it will not be grave in the genus of theft, say, if it were taken from the King.

But WHEN several petty thefts make one grave one, I taught sufficiently in the disputation on theft.

From the first foundation you have also that a Religious cannot usurp to himself for another use money precisely destined by the superior to one use, Less. lib. 2. cap. 41. Layman. lib. 4. tract. 5. cap. 7. Sanch. lib. 7. cap. 19. num. 115. Faust. lib. 8. question 101. Rodrig. tom. 3. 99. rule question 29. art. 10. Bassaeus num. 5.

You HAVE also that Poverty is violated if he accepts, or keeps those things which are given from outside, cap. ad Monasterium, on the state of Monks. Molina tom. 1. tract. 2. d. 140. For whatever a Religious acquires, he acquires for the Monastery, if it be capable. And if the Religious by a contract or offense does not bring the Monastery under an obligation, cap. Quod quibusdam on suretyship. Except if he has compromised it, or drawn profit from it.

He will VIOLATE Poverty also by hiding a thing from the Prelate, even if he had license from a preceding Prelate. Likewise, he who murmurs with a resisting will, if the thing be taken away by the Prelate; thus Less. cit. num. 79. Sanchez cit. cap. 19. num. 60. Sylvest. V. Relig. 6. question 7. Layman. cit. cap. 7. n. 8. Faust. lib. 8. question 126. Rodtig. cit. art. 10. and 12. Petr. Nauarr. lib. 3. on restitution cap. 1. num. 174. and 179. Bassaeus num. 7.

The Steward also will violate it by distributing against his ministration. Thus D. Thom. question 32. art. 8. Molin. tom. 2. d. 276. Sylvest. ad D. Thomam.

SIMILARLY the Prelate badly distributing the goods of the Monastery, cap. Fraternitatem on donations. Sanchez cit. cap. 19. num. 30. Graff. part. 1. lib. 3. cap. 5. num. 133. Bass. num. 8., who nevertheless numbers various cases in which it is lawful for a Religious to give alms without consulting the superior. But with him unwilling, he can bestow it in extreme necessity. Thus D. Thom. 2. 2. question 32. art. 8. ad 1.