§ 2. On The Legitimate Use Of The Fruits Or Revenues Of The Church

2245. • It is equitable that he who serves the altar should also live from the altar; for the Apostle says (1 Cor. 9:7): Who ever serves as a soldier at his own expense? And hence it is that the faithful, by natural and divine law, are held to assist the necessities of the ministers of God (cf. n. 553, 2). - Yet they are exempted from that obligation if somewhere benefices have been constituted from which Clerics are able to live.

But here it is ASKED: In what way, and in what measure, has this enjoyment of ecclesiastical goods been conceded to Clerics? To understand this well, FOUR species of goods which can be possessed by Clerics MUST BE DISTINGUISHED: - 1. Patrimonial, which come to them from any profane cause whatever. - 2. Quasi-patrimonial, or industrial, which Clerics acquire from Masses, sermons, stole-rights, funerals, choral distributions, offerings of the faithful, pious legacies, pension, whether lay or ecclesiastical.⁶ - 3. Merely ecclesiastical, which are had from Benefices (whether directly through legitimate administrators, or indirectly through usurpers in compensation, at least partial, for usurped goods⁷). - 4. Parcimonial, which a Cleric has subtracted for himself from ecclesiastical goods out of his support, by living more sparingly than he could have lived honorably.⁸

These things having been posited, the following are commonly established.

2246. • Principles. I. Clerics have FULL DOMINION both in patrimonial goods, and in quasi-patrimonial goods, and also in parcimonial goods. The reason is because these goods are either extraneous, or stipends of labors, or fruits of industry. Therefore they pertain altogether to them and can be expended by them even for profane uses.⁹

2247. • II. It is licit for Beneficiaries to take from merely ecclesiastical goods SUITABLE SUPPORT, although they are rich from elsewhere; but they are held, under mortal sin, to expend REVENUES SUPERFLUOUS to their support upon the poor, or upon pious uses. - The reason of the first is because a minister of the Church can live honorably from the goods of the Church, since Benefices have been instituted especially for this end; nor is it an obstacle that he is rich; because he has the right to support not by reason of poverty, but by reason of labor.¹⁰ The reason of the second is first of all the precept of the Church, which is found promulgated in innumerable decrees of Councils and of the sacred Canons. It will suffice to have adduced here the authority of the Council of Trent, which (sess. 25, cap. 1, de Ref.) expressly forbids Bishops and other beneficiaries "to strive to increase their relatives by blood, or their familiars, from the revenues of the Church; since (it says) even the Canons of the Apostles prohibit that ecclesiastical things, which are God's, be given to relatives by blood; but if they are poor, let them be distributed to them as to the poor; but let them not divert or dissipate those things on their account." But

2248. • There is a great QUESTION: Whether a beneficiary is held FROM JUSTICE to distribute superfluous goods to the poor, so that those goods badly expended are liable to RESTITUTION to the poor?

Resp. One opinion, and this the more probable, affirms, because by no reason can it be proved that beneficiaries acquire the very dominion of the fruits of benefices; but if they acquire it (the supporters of this opinion continue), there is conceded to them, according to the mind of the Church and the institution of the founders, only a limited dominion: from which they can take only that which is required for their honorable support, the superfluous things being expended upon the poor, which indeed by the holy Fathers Basil, Augustine, Bernard, and also by many Councils are called the goods of the poor, the patrimonies of the needy.

But the other opinion denies it, and this, according to the judgment of St. Alphonsus, seems sufficiently probable in practice; especially on account of the authority of St. Thomas, who teaches that concerning the goods of benefices the same account is to be held as concerning patrimonial goods, and therefore that a Cleric, if he abuses the fruits of his prebend, "is not held to restitution, but only to performing penance."¹¹ Nor do the words of the holy Fathers stand in the way: for these do not seem to be taken so rigorously, especially in present times; for since now a division of ecclesiastical things has been made (which the Angelic Doctor holds for certain), his own has been assigned either by the Pontiffs themselves, or step by step through usage itself, to each one; namely, his own to the Bishop, his own to Clerics, his own to the Church, and his own to the poor. And this same thing seems to be confirmed by that common manner of speaking which the sacred Canons everywhere admit: he does not make the fruits his own. Therefore a Cleric satisfying the burden makes the fruits his own; therefore, expending them badly, he does not injure justice, but only religion or charity.¹²

2249. • Several things WORTHY OF NOTE seem to be added here, namely: 1. The superfluous is estimated as that which exceeds honorable or suitable support. "Furthermore, the suitable support of a cleric is judged," says St. Alphonsus, "to be that which is necessary for the support of his state and family, according to the condition of state, grade, dignity, quality, and region in which he himself dwells."¹³

2. That superfluous expenses for profane uses reach mortal sin, a quantity greater than in theft is required. St. Thomas¹⁴ requires much excess, i.e. according to the truer opinion, a twentieth part of the superfluous things, if this twentieth part itself reaches a notable sum. Thus a Cleric, expending from twenty thousand superfluous things a thousand for profane uses, sins gravely.¹⁵

3. Under the name of the poor there come not only those begging door to door, but also those who otherwise cannot preserve their state; also relatives by blood, if they are truly poor: and these can be preferred to the others, even those more gravely in need; "because assistance of needy relatives also pertains to preserving the proper state of the Cleric, since their poverty redounds to his disgrace."¹⁶

4. Beneficiaries can also reserve superfluous things for the future for pious uses; provided they beware lest such revenues, death supervening, be plundered by relatives by blood.¹⁷

It is ASKED. Whether Clerics can make a testament concerning revenues of benefices which are superfluous?

Resp. Affirmatively, from custom received in many places, but only for pious causes; for although where the custom has prevailed they validly make testament for profane uses, nevertheless they sin mortally, unless they do this from an Indult of the Pope.¹⁸