§ 1. Such indeed is the majesty of Christian sacred things that they readily lead men dedicated to God to virtue and integrity, and neither art nor punishment would be needed for governing the priests of Christ. Nevertheless, because nature is fragile and it is of great importance that the leaders of piety be pious, no remedies are to be spurned by which religion is both introduced and fostered and vices are restrained. Of these I judge the first to be frequent and serious visitations by Bishops or by those chosen by them.
§ 2. Almost all the monuments of the Christian religion teach us that visitations of Churches have certainly been customary and that they pertain to Bishops. Acts 9:32: “Peter passed through all.” Paul himself had as much care to visit and confirm the converted as to convert the nations. A canon of the holy Council of Nicaea also entrusts visitation to Bishops. Athanasius visits the monks of Egypt in the year 382. In the same manner Chrysostom visits his Churches; Augustine, at Zosimus’s command, visits the interior regions of Africa and corrects many things in the year 418; Cyriacus visits Gaul and Spain in the year 599; Boniface promised Gregory that he would visit the Churches and refer the greater difficulties to the Pontiff in the year 740. Louis sent Archbishops with a count to conduct visitation in the year 819; Charles did so in the year 853. For abuses readily creep in, which inspection, instruction, and punishments correct.
From ancient practice, therefore, comes that law, Cause 10, question 1, canon 4: “The complaint of the peoples was related before the holy Synod that there are certain Bishops unwilling to travel through their parishes during the year for preaching or confirming, who nevertheless demand that those who ought to prepare the lodgings which they should have used on the journey redeem them for a price. This double infamy of negligence and avarice was a great horror to the holy Synod. They therefore established that no one should further exercise that contrivance of avarice and that Bishops should be solicitous in visiting their flocks.”
§ 3. The visitation ought to be annual. Cause 10, question 1, canon 10: “We have decreed that the order of ancient custom be observed, that the dioceses be visited annually by the Bishop, and that, if any basilica should happen to be found destitute, its ordainer be commanded to repair it, because we know it to have been established by ancient tradition that a third part of all things be received by the Bishops.”
But if he himself, detained by disease or occupied in another manner, cannot perform the office of visitor, it must be entrusted to another, Cause 10, question 1, canon 11: “The Bishop ought to go through all his dioceses and parishes every year, so that he may inquire what each basilica needs for its repair. But if he himself, detained by illness or entangled in other occupations, shall be unable to discharge this, let him send approved priests or deacons to inquire into the revenues and repairs of the basilicas and the life of those who minister.”
The Council of Aquileia urged the same severely.
§ 4. Visitation was judged so necessary that the canons wish no one to be excepted and have cut off all exemptions, evasions, and appeals. Thus the Council of Trent, Session 24, chapter 8 and the following chapters. That right is extended to all monasteries, provided that they are not visited by their own Prelates. Thus also the old law, Cause 18, question 2, canon 28. Nor is prescription admitted, as in the Second Council of Ravenna under Clement V, rubric 8: “Likewise we establish and, by the authority of the same Council, prohibit that any religious or secular persons of the aforesaid province of Ravenna, under pretext or by occasion of lapse of time, desuetude, or prescription, dare or presume to resist or contradict their Ordinaries and Prelates when they visit or wish to visit. Otherwise, beyond the punishments established by law, by authority of the present Council we pronounce sentences of excommunication against the persons who contradict and those who knowingly favor them, but sentences of interdict against the Churches.”
Deservedly so; for every soul ought to be subject to the authorities, nor has anything shattered the morals of the Church more than exemptions. But by common law after the Council of Trent, all Bishops are Pontifical Legates as regards visitation. Therefore all statutes, agreements, and ordinances contrary to this right of visiting, correcting, and punishing are unlawful in whatever manner; they can neither admit nor exact them, and if they have been made they must be remitted by both sides, because they are bonds of impiety by which unpunished license is sought. Consult also the Council of Trent, Session 14, chapter 2. Indeed, the Synod ought to rouse a negligent Bishop.
§ 5. The disadvantages of visitation are excessive rigor and the expense of those who are visited. As regards each, the Council of Trent requires rigor tempered by mercy and moderation of expenses.
Session 24, chapter 3: “But let the principal object of all these visitations be to introduce sound and orthodox doctrine after heresies have been expelled; to protect good morals and correct wicked ones; to incite the people by exhortations and admonitions toward religion, peace, and innocence; and to establish other things, according as place, time, and occasion permit, by the prudence of those visiting, for the benefit of the faithful. So that these things may succeed more readily and happily, all and each of the aforesaid to whom visitation pertains are admonished to embrace all with paternal charity and Christian zeal; and therefore, content with a modest retinue of horses and servants, let them strive to complete the visitation itself as quickly as possible, yet with due diligence. Meanwhile, let them take care not to be troublesome or burdensome to anyone by useless expenses; and let neither they nor anyone of theirs accept, by reason of procuration for a visitation, including the visitation of testaments for pious uses, anything beyond that which is owed by law from pious legacies, or under any other name whatsoever—neither money nor any gift, whatever it may be, even however it may be offered—notwithstanding any custom, even immemorial; only provisions are excepted, which shall be supplied frugally and moderately to themselves and their people merely for the necessity of the time, and no further.”
Concerning expense, provision has also been made by many canons. The Council of Valencia under Leo IV, chapter 17: “Let the visitation itself of the peoples and parochial priests be made so moderately, and so far as can be done according to canonical institution, that it may be manifest that, whether by us or by our men, only gains of souls are sought there and that no one is burdened and saddened by importunity and excess,
lest the word of the Lord and doctrine be blasphemed.” It has pleased us; it is confirmed. But this was expressed particularly against expenses in the Lateran Council under Alexander III, chapter 4: “Since the Apostle decreed that he and his men were to be maintained by their own hands, so that he might remove an opportunity for preaching from false apostles and might not be burdensome to those to whom he preached, it is recognized as exceedingly grave and worthy of correction that certain of our brethren and fellow Bishops are so burdensome to their subjects in procurations that on occasion of this kind the subjects are sometimes compelled to expose ecclesiastical ornaments for sale, and the sustenance of a long time is consumed in a brief hour. Therefore we establish that Archbishops visiting parishes, according to the diversity of provinces and the resources of the Churches, shall not exceed a number of forty or fifty mounts; Cardinals shall not exceed twenty-five; Bishops shall by no means exceed twenty or thirty; Archdeacons, five or seven; and Deans constituted under them shall be content with two horses. Nor shall they travel with hunting dogs and birds; rather, let them proceed in such a way that they may be seen to seek not their own things but those of Jesus Christ. Nor let them seek sumptuous feasts, but with thanksgiving let them receive what shall have been honorably and suitably supplied to them. We also prohibit Bishops from presuming to burden their subjects with levies and exactions.”
What was said concerning feasts is also the subject of an admonition by Alexander to the Bishop of Vigevano. Nevertheless, in the appendix to the Lateran Council, necessary things are permitted: “Since the Roman Church, over which, though unworthy, we preside, is the mother and mistress of all Churches, we are compelled by the duty of the honor and government undertaken, according as the Lord shall have granted us, to respond to the consultations of each, so that doubtful questions may be unraveled by the providence of the Apostolic See. But you have asked, brother Bishop, that a response be written to your fraternity as to whether, for the consecration of Churches, you ought to have anything beyond a moderate procuration. Since the Apostle says, ‘No one is compelled to serve as a soldier at his own expense,’ you may exact it from that same Church.” Sumptuary laws were also made for the monasteries themselves in the Council of Salzburg under Archbishop Frederick, in the time of Martin IV. It says thus: “Likewise, lest monasteries be gravely burdened by the immoderate expenses of visitors, we establish that any Abbot who for the time is a visitor or attends a general Chapter shall not exceed the number of eight mounts; but let inferior Abbots be content with fewer.”
For how will they preach fasting and penance if they burden monasteries belonging to others with splendor and delicacies? For piety must not be compelled but persuaded. Nor is it to be hoped that amid the splendid banquets of Abbots the love of strict poverty and fasts will remain among the brethren when it has been shaken by the domestic example of the Prelates. The whole matter has been defined by the Tridentine Fathers, Session 24, chapter 3, to which I refer the reader.
Concerning gifts, the Council of Lyons under Gregory X had already made provision in chapter 24, and concerning revenues and procurations. But the Fifth Council of Milan and the Council of Aquileia restricted all these matters more greatly.
§ 6. Let the visitor himself be a pattern of Christian life; next let him first visit his own household and set it in order. Golden are the admonitions of the Council of Aquileia: “When a Bishop has resolved to set out upon a visitation, let him recollect himself for a little while and meditate upon the cause of his journey. For if he shall perceive in his reflection that he is undertaking to examine the life, morals, and actions of others in order to correct, amend, and restore them, he will certainly understand sufficiently that the visitation must be instituted from his own house and household, by whose example, even when silent, he will preach Christian virtues to the rest. Thus, if through negligence he shall present to others for inspection a house and household not well ordered, flowing away in idleness and levity, he will have lost the fruit of the whole visitation.” Although this may seem to be proposed in a certain simple train of discourse, it nevertheless pertains to two things which are the greatest in this category.
The first is that the Bishop present himself as such a pattern of life, of service, and of the modesty of his household as the people may be able to have set before them in place of an exemplar for imitation.
The second pertains to the visitation itself. For what if the Bishop declares, preaches, and inculcates chastity, modesty, piety, and all Christian virtues, while vices, wantonness, lasciviousness, and temerity flourish in his house? But if he has corrected and well ordered his own people, he will have them all as helpers in the work of God.
Therefore the malice of certain visitors is to be detested, who, themselves avaricious and drunken, correct nothing among the people and Clergy, judging it sufficient if they scrape together money. But if the salt has lost its savor, wherewith shall it be salted?