On the Fifth Precept of the Church: To Contribute Some Subsidy for the Suitable Support of Pastors

This precept is of natural and positive law, both divine and ecclesiastical. It is natural, indeed, insofar as it involves the necessary support of the ministers of the Church; for, as St. Thomas excellently proves, natural reason dictates that, just as to those who watch over the common utility, namely princes and soldiers and others of this kind, stipends for livelihood are owed by the people, so also to those who minister to divine worship unto the salvation of the whole people, the people themselves should supply the necessities of livelihood. In this same sense that precept is also of positive divine law, as is clear from Matt. x, 10, and I Cor. ix, 7 and seq. But St. Thomas adds: "the determination of a certain part is reserved to the ordering of the Church." Moreover, in the beginnings of the Church there was no determination of this kind, and priests were supported by the gifts of the faithful spontaneously contributed, especially those which were offered on the occasion of celebrating the sacrifice. To this ancient custom succeeded the payment of tithes, which several Councils enjoined, especially in the ninth century. But today in most places tithes have been removed, and the Clergy is supported either by the revenues of benefices, or by a pension received from the Government, or by the uncertain generosity of the offerings of the faithful, as obtains among us. This is indeed uncertain and diverse according to the statutes and customs of diverse dioceses, but perhaps up to now it has been lacking to no one. - Cf. St. Thomas, 2-2, q. 87, art. 1. - Kenrick, tract. 4, part. 2, nn. 62 and seq.

The Church also has the right, independent from the civil power, of requiring from the faithful those things which are necessary for divine worship, for the honorable support of clerics and of other ministers, and for the other ends proper to itself (Can. 1496).

Question 1. Are the faithful among us who never contribute anything toward the support of pastors to be considered guilty of mortal sin?

Response. Concerning this matter Kenrick writes thus: "All must be persuaded of this, that individual persons ought for their part to contribute something, lest priests lack necessary support; but as long as no certain law imposes and defines the burden, we do not dare to condemn as guilty of mortal sin him who omits to contribute an equitable portion, whenever there is no danger lest priests lack on that account, or other faithful be too heavily burdened. But those who from avarice refuse to give anything, in the circumstances which we have indicated, seem gravely guilty and unworthy of sacramental absolution; for they violate the law of Christ the Lord concerning the support of ministers of the Gospel, and they expose themselves and others to danger to salvation." - Cf. Kenrick, loc. cit. n. 64.

Here the following statute of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, under n. 292, is to be attended to: "Report says (may it be vain and false) that in some places priests are found who, where grave fault does not appear, deny the benefit of sacramental absolution to the faithful who are unwilling to give alms to collections, to which it is not established that they are held under grave sin; indeed also (which is far more detestable) they refuse to assist the sick and those near to death and to provide the sacraments. We can scarcely bring our mind to suspect anything so atrocious and unworthy concerning the ministers of our churches. But if anyone exists who has attempted any such thing, let Bishops remember that they are gravely failing in their office unless they take action against the guilty one according to his desert."

Question 2. Can priests who do not have equitable support from their own faithful collect alms outside the limits of their parish?

Response. Negatively, unless they have permission of their own Bishop granted in writing. For thus the Baltimore Fathers established: "Since from the wandering about of vagabond and unknown priests for collecting alms from the faithful grave inconveniences arise, it has seemed good strictly to prohibit that any priest, without the permission of his own Bishop, granted in writing, should ask alms outside the congregation committed to him, or in another diocese without the license of the Ordinary." - Cf. Conc. Plen. Balt. II, n. 119; and Conc. Plen. Balt. III, nn. 294 and 295.

Question 3. What must be said concerning those priests who, during the solemnities of Masses, withdraw from the altar, for collecting offerings?

Response. They are altogether to be condemned, as is clear from the following words of Conc. Plen. Balt. III, n. 293: "Most grave are the words of the former Council, by which it condemned the perverse manner of acting of those priests who, during the solemnities themselves of Masses, withdraw from the altar and walk around the sacred building, asking alms from individual faithful. But so great appears the obstinacy of certain persons and their negligence even in observing the strictest laws, that we who have been constituted guardians of ecclesiastical laws are constrained with a loud voice to promulgate and inculcate anew the decree of our Predecessors. Therefore, the 'most shameful abuse, injurious to the Church and its sacred rites, and which provokes the shame and indignation of Catholics and the mockery and contempt of non-Catholics, we reprobate and decree must be utterly extirpated. In this matter the conscience of individual Bishops is burdened.'"

Entrance into the church for sacred rites is to be altogether free of charge, any contrary custom being reprobated (Can. 1181).

§ 1. There can be a distinct place in the church for magistrates, according to their dignity and rank, according to the norm of liturgical laws.

§ 2. Without the express consent of the local Ordinary, let no faithful person have a place in the church reserved for himself and his own; but the Ordinary is not to provide consent unless sufficient care has been taken for the convenience of the rest of the faithful.

§ 3. In concessions once made there is always present the tacit condition that the Ordinary can, for a just cause, revoke the concession, notwithstanding any lapse of time (Can. 1263).

Note. - Concerning the sixth precept of the Church, it will be treated where Matrimony is treated.