Question V: Whether the Church, and bishops, have dominion over certain temporal things

THERE WERE certain heretics, whom Valencia disp. 5. quaest. 10. punct. 2. relates, whom Vuicleph followed; he was condemned for it in the Council of Constance, sess. 8., as were those also denying that dominion over things is lawful to ecclesiastics.

I ASSERT, however, as of faith, that dominion over temporal things is lawful to the Church, and to Bishops.

IT IS PROVED by D. Bonaventure, in Apol. pauperum, responsionis tertiae cap. 2., from Iosue 21, where the priests of the old law had possessions and fields.

IT IS PROVED secondly by the holy Doctor, resp. tertiae cap. 1. ex 5. Actorum, where Peter says to Ananias: While it remained, did it not remain to thee, etc., as Chrysost. observes, homil. 12. in Acta, and Valencia notes, disp. 5. quaest. 10. punct. 2. It was declared also by the Church, as the holy Doctor teaches, cap. 2. resp. quartae; and it was declared in the Councils of Antioch, cap. 24, Agath. cap. 48, Carthag. III. cap. 49, and it is had in multis decretis, which the holy Doctor brings forward, loc. cit.

FIRST, Can. si quis de clericis 12. quaest. 2. it is had: if any of the clerics should presume, with damnable and punishable obstinacy, either to suppress, or deny, or take away, or perhaps hand over to adversaries, the documents by which the possession of a Church is firmly held, whatsoever loss has been brought upon the Church through the absence of the documents, let him restore from his own means.

D. GREGORY the Great, registr. lib. 2. epist. 43., and it is related at 12. quaest. 2. c. Sicut, where it is had, as the Church ought not to lose her own things, so she ought not with the heat of rapacity to invade things belonging to others.

IN the Council of Agath.: If a Bishop shall have granted liberty to slaves of the Church, those things which had been given to them in the manumission they shall hold with perpetual firmness. The Church therefore has slaves; but where there is servitude, the correlative dominion is present, as the holy Doctor infers.

MOREOVER, that distinct dominions belong to distinct Churches is proved by the holy Doctor, 16. quaest. 2. Can. Si quis, Nicholas P., where he says: if any of the Bishops should arrange to build a church in the territory of another city for whatever advantage of his own, let him not presume to make the dedication, which belongs to him in whose territory the church arises.

THE SAME cause, quaest. 3. Can. Praesulum, Gelasius Pope: it has also pleased that this be annexed, that if, which God forbid, the means of a Church, and likewise Dioceses, should be possessed by certain Bishops, claiming them to themselves by right, the tricennial law has closed it: because the authority of our sons the Princes has so commanded.

THE SAME quaest., among the things mentioned, where the question of boundaries is decided, Innocent says: cap. 6. inter, si a legitimate boundary does not enclose the same Basilica, and yet a long-time prescription is proven to be alleged, the appeal of the present Bishop shall not avail: since the tricennial objection imposes silence upon them. These things also secular Princes enjoin, as the Roman authority decreed for prelates.

Hence the holy Doctor gathers not only that Churches have distinct dominion, because they prescribe mutually against each other, but also that they have it according to Divine law equally, and human, for the reason that prescription, as is evident in the alleged canon, arises from the edict of Princes; yet the approval rests on the authority of the supreme Pontiff.

He proves this more openly from 11. quaest. 1., the words of Ambrose against Auxentius: If the emperor demands tribute, we do not deny it; let the lands of the Church pay tribute (the holy Doctor infers) but he who is bound to tribute to Caesar by reason of estates — those estates are held not so much by divine law as by human, the Savior bearing witness, who says, Matth. 22: Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.

Further, dist. 8. cap. 1., from D. Augustine on John: By what right do you defend the villas of the Church? Divine, or human? Divine right is had in the Divine scriptures; human in the laws of kings. Whence by what right does anyone possess what he possesses? Is it not by human right? Not by Divine right: The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof, Psal. 23. The same he has on John: Do not say, what is it to me, and to the king? What then to thee, and to thy possession? for by the laws of kings possessions are possessed. Thou hast said: what is it to me, and to the king? Do not call them thy possessions, for thou hast thyself renounced those human laws by which possessions are possessed. What can be said clearer than these things (the holy Doctor says) to show that the Church truly possesses temporal goods by Divine and human right? Wherefore he proclaims him importunate and impudent who denies these things.

It is proved also by reason by the holy Doctor at the end of that chapter, and D. Thom. art. 6, which Gregorius de Valencia, puncto 6, proclaims evident. To that which is not in the precept, but only in the counsel, no one is bound, unless someone binds himself to it by a particular vow; or it be necessary to execute the duty of the office owed: But the renunciation of temporal things is not commanded by God, nor do ecclesiastics vow it, nor is it necessary for ecclesiastics to rightly fulfill their function: Therefore. Tannerus also uses this argument, disp. 6. quaest. 3. dubio 3. num. 61.

He proves the same from the Fathers, Chrysost. homil. 8. in Matth., Orig. homil. 16. in Genes., Gregor. lib. 3. Dial. cap. 14., August. cont. Adimant. c. 26. See the holy Doctor, resp. tertiae cap. 1.

You will object: as religious ought to be poor in order to serve God, so also clerics according to their name, because they are called into the lot of the Lord.

The holy Doctor answers, that clerics and Religious dedicate themselves to God in different ways; for clerics do not vow poverty.

You will say: the ancient clerics led a common life, 12. quaest. 1. cap. Scimus, from Pope Urban.

The holy Doctor answers, that clerics led the common life only by counsel; afterwards, charity growing cold, it had to be otherwise. And so D. Augustine, who admitted no one to orders who would not live in common, afterwards changed his opinion, as he himself testifies, 12. quaest. 1. cap. Certe ego, from serm. 2. de communi vita clericorum, or: ad fratres in eremo.