§ 1. The office of Canons is to live canonically. On Consecration, Distinction 5, chapter 34:
We have therefore decreed in all things, so far as human frailty permits, that Canon clerics live canonically, observing the teaching of divine Scripture and the precepts of the holy Fathers; and that they presume to do nothing disorderly without the permission of their Bishop or their master. In each Bishopric let them eat and sleep together where the means of doing this are available to them; or, in the place where they receive a stipend from ecclesiastical property, let them remain in their cloister. Every day, first thing in the morning, let them come to the reading and hear what is commanded them. At table likewise let them hear a reading and show obedience according to the canons to their own ministers.
Canons are the more honorable of the clerics. They are so called either because they live according to the canons of the Apostles and Councils, or because they have been entered in the canon—the Greeks say οἱ ἐν κανόνι, that is, entered in the register of the Church—so that they receive a fixed allowance and have a voice and the right of pronouncing an opinion in the chapter. Among the Pythagoreans, harmonic theorists who gave the principal parts to reason were called Κανονικοί.
The same men are called prebendaries, although a prebend extends more broadly than a canonry. Of old, the things which parish priests were bound to furnish to envoys publicly sent were called prebends. Horace, Satires 1.5:
The little town nearest the Campanian bridge furnished a roof, and the things which hosts owe: firewood and salt.
A prebend, therefore, is called an ecclesiastical right in the Church—for we are not treating lay prebends—of receiving certain annual revenues in the Church on account of the ministry of the divine offices performed by the man who lives from the fruits of the prebend. When the right of voting in the chapter is joined to this right, if the other things are present, it is called a canonical prebend. For although certain Canons are not in the chapter, they nevertheless have canonical prebends, but some cause prevents their being admitted.
Therefore, to receive the fruits of a prebend legitimately, it is necessary to have a title and legitimate possession, and then to engage in the divine offices to which one is assigned. For a benefice is given on account of an office. Thus all foundations and all canons declare.
§ 2. Three kinds of stipends are commonly given to Canons. Some are annual and are called the corpus; some are daily and are called presences, and are distributed only to those present. Finally, certain sums are collected by the chapters besides the corpus and the presences, which they call fruits of the table; these are distributed at the discretion of the Canons.
But since the avarice of certain men is so great, and their torpor is joined with such greed, that they hunt prebends in every place, reside in one place, and travel to the other colleges for the sake of collecting the fruits, it would be advisable, whenever and wherever it can be done, to convert the corpora into presences, or at least to diminish the corpora and increase the presences. But I shall treat these matters hereafter.
§ 3. Canonries and prebends are in general of two kinds. Some are cathedral; others belong to secondary Churches. Hence that distinction has gained force whereby the clergy who serve God in the cathedral church are called primary, and those in other collegiate Churches secondary.
Prebends and canonries are also commonly called benefices, because they are given benevolently and gratuitously by the Church, with the joy both of the recipient and of the giver. They contain two things: the right of receiving fruits and the obligation of rendering service to God. A benefice, however, is given on account of an office. Therefore, when the office ceases, the benefice is withdrawn; and when the benefice is retained after the office has been renounced, an injury is inflicted upon God and the Church. I think the whole ordering can be gathered into a few laws.
Law 1. In the collation of a benefice let the collator retain nothing for himself and expect nothing, neither service nor money. Because he appoints a minister for God, he ought not to be a moneylender in a sacred matter and claim for himself a portion from the patrimony of the Church, much less divide with God the services of God’s servant.
Law 2. Let them reside in their own Churches. For this reason they were both founded and received privileges from Emperors. Title On Nonresident Clerics.
At this point I shudder as I relate the matter, when I remember the frauds by which wretched men strive to circumvent God. Long ago this evil began, whereby greed sought great revenues by doing little or nothing. How very few are present in the manner required! But let us hear our Fathers. In 1286, in the Council of Ravenna under Honorius IV, title 5, it was determined thus:
It is fitting that those whom the ornaments of life and examples of domestic praise do not recall should at least be restrained by the medicine of correction. We have indeed learned from the report of many that in certain Churches of our province it is observed by custom, and in certain others confirmed by constitution, that besides the revenues of benefices and prebends—concerning which we wish nothing to be altered at present—those residing in the Church alone receive certain other revenues, according as they reside daily and in proportion to the residence which they make in the Church. Certain men, obeying such a custom and statute according to a perverse interpretation and thinking too little of the things of God, to the peril of their souls, usurp for themselves those revenues especially assigned in favor of residence so that God and the Church may be served and the instruments of divine praise be sung therein at every hour, provided only that they reside in their chamber, even though they enter the Church to celebrate the divine office only once in the month. From these things a great scandal is generated among their neighbors who serve the Church as they ought, and the praiseworthy purpose which they had grows cold in them.
Therefore, lest we be made participants in their faults, having removed that perverse interpretation while preserving such a custom, we establish by declaring, and declare by establishing, that with respect to the aforesaid revenues which are distributed according as men reside daily—whether they are grain, wine, money, or other goods—only those shall be called resident in the Church who, in their own Church together with their other brethren, have performed at the due hours the measure of our service, namely, Matins, Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers, and Compline. Otherwise, they shall receive from those revenues only according as they have served the Church, pursuant to our ordinance noted immediately below.
In order that this constitution be inviolably observed, we will and command under penalty of excommunication that, within two months computed from the day of the publication of the present Council, all and singular clerics of the Churches of our province where there are several ordained clerics and revenues of the kind mentioned above shall be bound to confirm this constitution by oath; and likewise all who shall be admitted hereafter, before they are admitted to the revenues. Where, however, there are no such revenues in a Church, let the local Diocesans provide in the Synods which they happen to celebrate, as best they can according to God, that the office at the canonical hours not be neglected in those Churches. If the senior of the Chapter—or, where all are equal, the man who presides immediately over those clerics—has not caused this oath to be given, he shall be subject to peril of his benefice and shall be fined by the provincial Council, by his superior, or by another who is able to do this.
Wishing, insofar as we rightly can, to ordain and declare the immediately preceding Council, we establish that within the space of two months from the day of publication of this Council it be ordained how many and how great a share the man who attends Matins, and the other canonical hours, ought to have from the revenues mentioned above in the immediately preceding Council, wherever there are such revenues. Because we cannot give a specific rule in this matter, since some Churches abound more and others less, we provide as we can in this manner: namely, that the man who has attended Matins shall have twice what the man who has attended Mass will have; that the man who has attended Terce and Sext shall have half of what was given to him at Mass; that the same be observed at None as was stated concerning Terce and Sext; and that the man who has attended Vespers and Compline shall have as much as the man who attended Mass, according to the foregoing.
To understand clearly, suppose that ten denarii are to be distributed daily to each Canon. From those ten denarii you will give four denarii to the man who attended Matins; two to the man who attended Mass; one to the man who attended Terce and Sext; one to the man who attended None; and to the man who attended Vespers and Compline you will give two denarii, as you gave at Mass.
But because even in this way, according to what has been stated, complete provision has not been made against deceitful men, who could come to the canonical hours but not at the due time, and, even if at the due time, nevertheless not remain until the office was completed, we establish against them that the man shall be said to attend Matins who has come to the Church before the Venite is sung with the hymn, when the hymn is said; otherwise, when the Venite is said with the first psalm, since the hymn is not then sung; and who has remained until Prime has been completed. The man shall be said to attend Mass who has come before the Kyrie eleison is sung and has remained until the Mass has been finished. Those attending Terce, Sext, None, Vespers, and Compline must come before the psalms begin and remain until the said hours have been completed; otherwise they shall receive nothing. Whoever acts contrary to this, besides the guilt of perjury, shall be bound to restore to the Church from which the service due has been withheld twice what he received, to be converted into ornaments of that Church.
The same matters were thereafter treated and determined far more forcefully in the Council of Ravenna in 1317.
I cannot refrain from transcribing the words of the Council of Basel, Session 21:
Whoever has not attended the divine office until the end—at Matins before the end of the psalm Venite exsultemus, at the other hours before the end of the first psalm, and at Mass before the last Kyrie eleison—shall be judged absent for that hour, unless perhaps, compelled by necessity and having sought and obtained permission from the president of the choir, he must depart; the customs of Churches, if any stricter ones exist concerning this, remaining unimpaired. The same shall be observed concerning those who have not remained in processions from beginning to end. For the execution of this provision, let someone be deputed who has the charge of noting the individual persons who do not assemble at the appointed time, bound by oath to act faithfully and spare no one.
This holy Synod also commands that in those Churches in which definite distributions have not been established for the individual hours, they be assigned absolutely, even from the gross fruits if necessary, so that each person may receive more or less emolument according to the measure of his labor. It entirely abolishes that abuse by which a man present at only one hour usurps the distributions of the whole day, and that abuse by which Provosts, Deans, or other officials receive daily distributions solely because they are officials, even though they are not actually absent for the utility of the Church.
I have already made mention above of the Council of Mainz under Sebastian in the year 1549, in which the matter is commanded in these words in chapter 72:
Since the Apostle judges idle men who eat bread not acquired by their own labor, to the burden of others, unworthy of food and therefore of life itself, to how much graver a divine indignation must those men be thought subject who idly consume the revenues of the Church, the patrimonies of the holy Martyrs, and the gifts of the pious people bestowed for the support of the divine Ministry, but do not care to repay to those Churches the services owed for them? We, therefore, wishing to meet the peril of souls and provide for the necessity of the Churches, decree and ordain by the present statute that hereafter, in the Metropolitan, Cathedral, Collegiate, or any other Churches established throughout the whole province and subject to us, daily distributions shall not be assigned to certain very brief moments—as, for example, to the reading of the Epistle or of one Psalm or Responsory—but to whole and complete offices and hours, and shall be given only to those who have attended from beginning to end the divine offices for which the emoluments are given.
But those who have been accustomed to divide their departures and returns in such a way that they receive the least of the labors but the greatest of the emoluments shall hereafter, unless they take care to attend the complete offices and hours, be fined the entire fruit of that office or hour, notwithstanding any irrational or depraved customs, which must rather be judged corruptions. Yet if any are hindered by infirmity or a legitimate cause, let them excuse themselves before the Prelate or another to whom this belongs by the custom of the Church, and obtain leave for their absence. We will, however, that Canons be excused from entering the choir by capitular business for as long as they are present at Chapters, and no longer.
In this matter we admonish the Deans of Churches, or those upon whom that care devolves for the time being, and command them not to appoint Chapters, except from necessity, at the hour in which the divine offices are performed, since Chapters can be held either earlier or later so that the Prelates and Canons themselves may more conveniently be able to attend the divine offices. Surely the labor of capitular acts ought not to burden those who, over and above the offices of the choir incumbent upon them in common with the vicars, also enjoy a richer emolument from their prebends over and above the common distributions.
In like manner we will that the distributions received from processions be given only to those who have persevered in attending them personally from beginning to end.
And lest benefices throughout the Churches be defrauded of the services owed, we enjoin upon all possessors of benefices, under loss of the benefices, that if they do not yet have the orders which their benefices require, they receive them at the next times established by law. We also will that the Canons of Churches be bound to this, each according to his order, so that, when the matter requires it, he may be able personally to furnish the Church the service which each owes according to the requirement of his office.
In the same manner the fifth Council of Milan, chapter On Residence, and the first Council of Milan, On Residence, establish many things with the greatest gravity and sanctity. On these matters see Session 6 of the Council of Trent.
Law 3. Let no one receive a benefice from a layman.
Since, according to the Apostle, no one ought to assume honor for himself unless he has been called by God as Aaron was, those men, forgetful of their salvation, who intrude themselves into ecclesiastical dignities or benefices and procure that they be elected and intruded through the power of laymen, consider and attend to this too little. Wishing, therefore, to oppose such and similar things by the remedies we can, we establish and more strictly prohibit anyone hereafter from presuming to attempt such things, or permitting or procuring them to be attempted. If anyone acts contrary to this, let him not only not be confirmed or instituted, but let him likewise be stripped by his Diocesan of every hope of promotion throughout the province of Ravenna; and nevertheless let him be excommunicated by the deed itself and stripped of every privilege of ecclesiastical protection and defense.
Law 4. Not only must nothing be sought for a benefice, but not even what is spontaneously offered may be received; nor may it be received on the condition that the man who received it yield at the will either of the giver or of another. First Council of Milan.
Law 5. The man who has given in this manner is deprived of the right of giving, nominating, and presenting—indeed, also of electing. The man who has received does not make the fruits his own. First Council of Milan, section Those Things Which Pertain to the Collation of Benefices.
Law 6. Those about to receive a benefice shall affirm by oath that they have not acted simoniacally. Thus it stands in the first Council of Milan, section Let the Bishops Admit or Institute No One Who Has Been Presented, Nominated, Elected, or Provided by Inferiors Before They Have Required from Him the Oath Written Below:
I, N., presented or elected, and so forth, to the benefice N., swear by the sacrosanct Gospels of God which I touch with my hands that neither I, for the sake of obtaining the benefice or of being presented or nominated to it, and so forth, nor any other person in my name or with my consent or knowledge, has promised, given, compensated, confirmed something previously given, or deposited anything with anyone, to the collator, patron, or anyone else for that reason.
Nor have I given it as a loan or lease, remitted or relaxed something previously given as a loan, lent for use, leased, or owed in any manner whatsoever. Nor concerning the houses, lands, estates, revenues, fruits, tithes, or offerings of that Church, past, present, or future, have I made, promised, or entered into a gift, remission, or lease, or has another, at my command or with my consent, promised, made, or entered into one. So help me God and these holy Gospels of God.
Law 7. Let the intermediaries of simoniacs be punished: notaries, advocates, procurators and interposed persons, and sureties. In the same place.
Law 8. Let the man who seeks ambitiously be without it for two years, and likewise those who petition for benefices not yet vacant.
Law 9. Let several benefices not be given to one man. This is an ancient and frequently repeated law, but one that is frequently violated. Many possess several; few are there who do not desire several.
I shall first set forth the statutes and laws of the Church, and then my own opinion. For in title On Prebends and Dignities, chapter Iam Dudum, it was established that the first benefice is lost by the law itself if another is received. And in title On Election, chapter Dudum, it is forbidden that several be held without dispensation. Therefore two things must be established. First, plurality is most gravely prohibited, especially in benefices with cure. Second, dispensation from that law is possible.
Concerning the first, therefore, the Fathers, Councils, and Pontiffs establish as follows. The Council of Clermont in 1095 under Urban II, chapter 22: “Let it hereafter be lawful for none of the clerics to hold two prebends in two cities, since he cannot have two titles.” But now a multitude of titles is accounted an honor. And in the appendix to the Lateran Council, Alexander III writes to the man of Bordeaux that his Archdeacon should resign one of them. And the Lateran Council under Innocent III, chapter 29, De Multa—
§ 3 (continued).
By great foresight it was prohibited in the Lateran Council that no one should receive diverse ecclesiastical dignities and several parish Churches contrary to the institutes of the sacred canons. Otherwise, the recipient would lose what had thus been received, and the collator would be deprived of the power of granting. But because, on account of the presumptions and cupidities of certain men, no fruit or true benefit has thus far arisen from the aforesaid statute, we, wishing to oppose them more evidently and expressly, establish by the present decree that whoever has received a benefice to which the cure of souls is annexed, if he previously held such a benefice, shall be deprived of it by the law itself; and if perhaps he contends to retain it, let him be despoiled of the other also.
Here it treats only two benefices with cure, not simple benefices. But the Council of Salzburg under Gregory X treats all:
Since in the province of Salzburg various secular clerics, setting no limit to avarice and not regarding their own salvation, do not fear to burden themselves with several ecclesiastical benefices, we, who desire to meet the needs and salvation of others and provide for the necessities of Churches, by the authority of the present Council firmly and strictly command that every possessor of several benefices either be content with the last one received or, at the immediately following provincial Council or Episcopal Synod—which deadline we assign to them peremptorily—demonstrate by legitimate documents that a dispensation has been made for him by the man who could do this by right. Otherwise, with respect both to benefices and persons, we shall take care to provide according to the form of the Canons handed down concerning this matter and the statute of the Lord Guido, Cardinal of good memory, formerly in our province, A.S.L.
The Synod of Augsburg in 1548, chapter 11, acted with the same intention:
Whoever, whether impelled by cupidity or even by any honorable pretext, holds several ecclesiastical benefices is commanded by this our mandate—as we command by strict precept—that, retaining the single benefice among them which he prefers, he resign the others within a year or exhibit to us, or to those deputed by us for this purpose, the privileges of his dispensations of this kind. Unless they furnish due obedience, let them know that, from our diligence to be applied in the right and true dispensation of ecclesiastical benefices, they will undergo the legitimate penalties of their disobedience or cupidity.
The Council of Mainz under Sebastian, chapter 64, treats chiefly benefices with cure:
The matter itself declares that several benefices, especially those under which the cure of souls is placed, cannot be held by one person without grave loss to the Churches, since one person cannot duly perform the offices in several Churches or devote the necessary care to their affairs. We, therefore, following the admonition of reform and opposing to this calamity of the Churches, as a salutary remedy, that decree of the Council of Lyons, admonish every possessor of benefices with cure of this kind and enjoin them by strict command that within three months after the end of this provincial Synod they exhibit to us, or to our comprovincials, the local Ordinaries, the dispensations under pretext of which they hold such benefices.
If they do not do so, such benefices, as if thereby proved to be held unlawfully, must, after the three months have elapsed, be conferred upon other suitable persons by those to whom their collation pertains. But if anyone’s dispensation appears legitimate and sufficient, he shall retain the benefices without molestation. Nevertheless, by deputing suitable vicars and assigning a fitting portion of the fruits, he shall provide that the cure of souls not be neglected in these Churches and that the benefices themselves not be defrauded of the services due. Otherwise, his negligence must be supplied by the Ordinary from the fruits of the benefice, and he must moreover be punished, at the discretion of the Ordinary, by subtraction of a certain portion of the remaining fruits.
But if the dispensations appear invalid or insufficiently legitimate, and the man who under their pretext held several benefices with cure refuses, after retaining one, freely to resign the others, his case shall be referred to the Apostolic See and its judgment awaited concerning what it wishes the measure of his benefice to be. If anyone holds benefices with cure of this kind in different dioceses, he must be compelled by each Ordinary to make such an exhibition. And if he has not been fortified with a legitimate dispensation, let him retain the last benefice which he received and resign the others, since according to the disposition of the common law the benefice which he previously held is known to become vacant by the law itself through his acceptance of a subsequent benefice with cure.
In the same manner the Council of Trent, Session 7, chapters 2, 3, and 4:
Let no one, shining forth with any dignity, rank, or preeminence whatsoever, presume to receive and simultaneously retain several Metropolitan or Cathedral Churches, whether in title, in commendam, or under any other name whatsoever, contrary to the institutes of the sacred canons. For that man is to be accounted very fortunate to whom it has fallen to govern one Church well and fruitfully and with the salvation of the souls committed to him. Those, however, who now hold several Churches contrary to the tenor of the present decree shall be bound, retaining the one they prefer, to relinquish the others within six months if they belong to the free disposition of the Apostolic See, and otherwise within a year; otherwise the Churches themselves, excepting only the one last obtained, shall by that very fact be judged vacant.
Inferior ecclesiastical benefices, especially those having the cure of souls, shall be conferred upon worthy and capable persons who can reside in the place and exercise the cure personally, according to the constitution of Alexander III in the Lateran Council which begins Quia Nonnulli, and the other constitution of Gregory X issued in the general Council of Lyons which begins Licet Canon. But a collation or provision made otherwise shall be rendered entirely void, and let the Ordinary collator know that he will incur the penalties of the constitution of the general Council which begins Grave Nimis.
Whoever hereafter presumes to receive and retain simultaneously several benefices with cure or other incompatible ecclesiastical benefices, whether by way of a union for life, a perpetual commendam, or under any other name and title whatsoever, contrary to the form of the sacred canons and especially the constitution of Innocent III which begins Qui Multa, shall stand deprived of those benefices by the law itself, according to the disposition of that constitution and by force also of the present canon.
The same Council nevertheless establishes thus concerning all benefices in Session 24, chapter 17:
Since the ecclesiastical order is perverted when one person occupies the offices of several clerics, it was provided by the sacred canons that no one ought to be enrolled in two Churches. But because many, from an affection of wicked cupidity, deceiving themselves and not God, are not ashamed to evade by various arts the things which have been well established and to hold several benefices simultaneously, the holy Synod, desiring to restore the discipline owed to the government of Churches, by the present decree—which it commands to be observed in all persons under any title whatsoever, even if they shine with the honor of the Cardinalate—establishes that hereafter only one ecclesiastical benefice be conferred upon each person.
But if it is not sufficient for the honorable support of the life of the man upon whom it is conferred, it shall nevertheless be lawful for another sufficient simple benefice to be conferred upon the same man, provided that neither requires personal residence. These provisions shall pertain not only to Cathedral Churches, but also to all other benefices, both secular and regular, even those held in commendam, under whatever title and of whatever quality they may be. Those, however, who at present hold several parish Churches, or one Cathedral and another parish Church, shall be compelled absolutely, notwithstanding any dispensations and unions for life, to retain only one parish Church or the Cathedral alone and to relinquish the other parish Churches within the space of six months. Otherwise, both the parish Churches and all the benefices which they hold
shall be judged vacant by the law itself, and shall be freely conferred upon other suitable persons as vacant; nor may the men who previously held them retain the fruits after the said time with a safe conscience. The holy Synod desires, however, that provision be made for the needs of those resigning by some suitable means, as shall seem good to the Supreme Pontiff.
Since, therefore, that law has been established, confirmed, and received by many Councils; since the legal authorities decide according to it; and since its end also is weighty, it follows that it binds forcefully and must be observed inviolate. Yet because it is a positive and ecclesiastical law, the supreme Pastor of the Church can dispense from it, as the laws themselves sufficiently indicate when they prohibit the possession of several benefices without a dispensation.
Therefore this dispensation must be discussed, for I think there is no one who possesses several without a pontifical dispensation. Yet whether the dispensation is legitimate must be considered with the greatest attention, for dispensations are often dispensations in word but dissipations in fact. Sometimes they are valid in the external forum because they cannot be rejected, but criminal in conscience because they do not have a just cause. Nevertheless, those who possess several are bound, by force of the Council of Trent, to exhibit their dispensations.
Cardinal Otto, Bishop of Augsburg, indeed pressed that matter forcefully and religiously in the Council of Augsburg. He requires the instruments of the dispensations and adds:
But if any hereafter shall hold several benefices by dispensation of the Apostolic See, and it shall have become known to us that the same See—which in its letters, concessions, and privileges is accustomed to follow honorable and necessary reasons and causes according as they have been represented to it—has been deceived by the petitioners, let them know that, when our Most Holy Lord has been better informed, we shall procure the revocation of such dispensations. Hence we establish and ordain that hereafter no one, of whatever rank or dignity he may be, shall be admitted to possession of another or of several benefices unless he first exhibits to us, as Ordinary of the place, the letters of such a dispensation for inspection in order that the dignity of the Apostolic See may be preserved, the constitutions of the Supreme Pontiffs Boniface IX and Leo X always remaining unimpaired.
And if he appears worthy of a dispensation, we nevertheless establish that such men, or any other rectors of Churches and holders of benefices whatsoever, leave to their vicars so great a portion of the fruits as is sufficient for maintaining hospitality, paying Episcopal and Archidiaconal dues, and bearing the other burdens. Otherwise we decree that they be removed from their benefices, the right of each patron or collator nevertheless being reserved.
Deservedly so, indeed. For importunate demanders of dispensations bring it about that what they receive is no dispensation. I have seen instruments of dispensation whose openings declared that, on account of great learning, many labors endured for the Church, merits, and an exemplary life, by Apostolic kindness—which ought to bear a special affection toward such men—a dispensation was granted to the venerable lord N. But that venerable lord was an unlearned boy of depraved character and was not rightly educated by his own people. Here there was no dispensation, but an artful sacrilege by which the parents bound themselves, not the boy; for he, unknowing, was burdened with a benefice through procurators as a minor.
For this reason the Council of Cologne in 1536, part 1, chapter 31, most prudently established concerning this matter:
The ambitious cupidity for several ecclesiastical offices was always odious among the ancients and was condemned more than once by general Councils. At Chalcedon, among other things, it was provided that a cleric ought not to be enrolled in two Churches, because it appears difficult for one man to sustain the part of two, and absurd for the duties of affairs to be confounded by indiscriminate devices. This, however, is especially harmful where several parishes or dignities are committed to one presbyter, because he alone cannot either perform the office in all the Churches or devote the necessary care to their affairs. Therefore we will that both those who have the power of disposing of ecclesiastical offices of this kind and those who, led by blind cupidity, canvass for them be admonished to submit their affections to canonical institutes. But those who wish to defend themselves against this by Apostolic dispensation must see to it that they prove before God the cause of the dispensation obtained. For we do not strip eminent and very learned persons of their privilege, provided that they use it rightly and according to God.
Chapter 35, however, teaches that dispensations must be examined:
There is no one who does not know how shamelessly very many men abuse instruments and dispensations extorted from the Apostolic See contrary to the intention of the Supreme Pontiff, who both wills and ought to use the power granted to him not for destruction but for edification. “I do not forbid,” says a certain pious man, “dispensing, but dissipating.” A dispensation has indeed been entrusted, but now this is required among stewards: that a man be found faithful. Although the greatest share of the fault resides with those who finally elicit letters of dispensation by inserting into their supplicatory petitions either no cause, a less legitimate one, or even a fictitious one, who would call them secure before God, who searches the reins and hearts and abominates all hypocrisy and fraud? “Let no one,” says that same man whom we have just cited, “flatter you concerning an Apostolic dispensation when the divine sentence holds your conscience bound.”
But because there are few in whose sight God stands, while very many everywhere abuse sacred authority according to their own desire, it comes about that we are compelled to restore to use against the insolence of men of this kind the not unwholesome decree of the Council of Lyons celebrated under Gregory X. Relying upon it, we shall impose upon all who flatter themselves with such instruments the necessity of exhibiting their letters to us, as we shall examine whether they obtained them rightly and use rightly what they obtained. And even if those dispensations are as fully valid as possible, we shall nevertheless take care that the intention of the canon and of the Supreme Pontiff be satisfied: namely, that the cure of souls not be neglected in those Churches, personates, or dignities which they occupy under this pretext, and that the benefices themselves not be defrauded of their due services.
Having established, therefore, that dispensations, if they are to be valid, ought to have a legitimate cause—and this in a law which has been confirmed by so many canons and so many Councils, which is demanded by the consent of the world and by its outcry, and whose reason for observance remains and will always remain—we shall conclude that several benefices are rarely permitted by a true dispensation accepted in heaven.
But if anyone asks me what is a true and legitimate cause for dispensing, I answer that these are such causes.
First: the necessity of the Church. For a Church burdened with debt and situated amid dangers can petition for a powerful neighboring Bishop or another man for itself, so that it may be defended, relieved of expense, restored to its former condition, and the disobedient converted. The same must be said where there is great and evident utility to the Church.
For although advantages accrue to that Prelate, they nevertheless all redound to the utility of the Church. Yet in this matter sin is committed in two ways: 1. when there is no evident or probable danger, and provision can be made against it and it can be repelled by another; 2. when the more powerful man who has been elected does not furnish that for which he was elected, nor accepts the benefice in order that he may furnish it.
§ 3 (continued).
To this cause of necessity and utility I refer the case in which, through the election of one man, another who is unsuitable or less suitable is repelled. For many undertake political magistracies and Prelacies not because they desire them, but lest men unworthy of them be advanced to them. A dispensation can therefore be legitimately sought and given whereby Titius receives the benefice lest Caius—a heretic, concubinary, ignorant man, drunkard, dilapidator, and wrathful man—invade it. But these things must be done sincerely before God, not from love of self or hatred of others.
Second, I affirm that the necessity of the man who receives several benefices is a legitimate ground of dispensation. For if one is not sufficient for honorable support, it has been permitted to have two or even three. For it is just that the man who serves the altar live from the altar. I therefore restrict this to those who serve vigilantly in the Church: Cause 1, question 2, Clerici, and Distinction 86, Non Satis. Food and clothing are therefore owed to them, and honorable food and clothing: as servants of God, as presbyters, and as men given to hospitality, since they ought to give alms. Of old, benefices of the Church were not given to those whose patrimonies were wealthy. Cause 1, question 2:
But those clerics ought to be supported by the stipends of the Church for whom no goods of parents and kinsmen provide assistance. Those who can be supported by their parents’ goods and their own wealth, if they receive what belongs to the poor, assuredly commit sacrilege and, through the abuse of such things, eat and drink judgment upon themselves.
That canon and the following ones inculcate these things. Yet once the order of the Church had been established, it appeared proper that even the wealthy, if they undertake labors for the Church and vigilantly apply themselves to the divine offices, receive remuneration from the Church.
In this necessity the condition of the person, the place, and the other things pertaining to the matter must be weighed. For a benefice which suffices a citizen does not suffice a nobleman; and that upon which a nobleman is judged able to live honorably and becomingly will be too little for a count or duke. For such men can, and indeed ought to, make greater expenditures. Because the Church also needs the services of such men, she compensates their services in such a way that they are not compelled to renounce their station or be a disgrace to their kinsmen. For since Bishops, and therefore states, ought to be more liberal toward the nobler exiles, why should they not also be liberal toward priests illustrious by splendor of birth? Since one prebend does not suffice them, several can be granted so that they may be able to establish a house and household suitable to their lineage and station.
But here a broad road is now opened to an accumulation of benefices when nobility is exalted and nothing appears sufficient for dignity. Concerning this I judge as follows. These matters cannot and ought not to be pared to the quick and to the last farthing; for the Church is not a severe exactor of accounts, nor is the Pontiff a κυμινοπρίστης, “splitter of cumin,” so as to cut away every smallest thing. For since Bishops support counselors and satraps with greater splendor, the Church of Christ ought not to support her nobler members as though they were hired laborers.
In general, therefore, what suffices other noble Canons to support themselves honorably and exercise hospitality will suffice a noble Canon, and he too will have to be content with it. Thus, where there are Cathedral or Collegiate Churches in which nobles live becomingly content with one benefice alone, other nobles of the same station cannot hold several, and a dispensation by reason of support will lack a cause and therefore be invalid before the tribunal of God. The same reasoning applies to barons, counts, and dukes, although scarcely is there a Church in which a single prebend suffices for their station. Therefore those who hold five or six wealthy benefices, any one of which is sufficient to support a nobleman becomingly, cannot be secure by their dispensation. For six nobles can serve the Church in place of one. But the man who serves the Church negligently, or spends that wealth upon superfluous things such as the splendor of his house, enriching his family, and building projects, offends far more gravely.
Third, the merit of the man to whom a dispensation is granted, and indeed also that of his parents, is a legitimate ground of dispensing. Within this class there are many things. If he or a parent suffered loss in defense of the Church; if he relinquished profits and advantages; if he performed embassies; if he furnished other things which brought some contribution to the spiritual or temporal utility of the Church—for it is honorable for the Church to return favor to those who have deserved well of her. Since she grants whole regions in fief to her patrons, soldiers, and commanders, why should she not also permit several benefices to ecclesiastics if they have deserved this from her? I add that in this way the spirits of very many are kindled to deserve well.
Fourth, the distinguished learning of some man can also merit that he be furnished with several emoluments of the Church. For they are given as a reward for diligence and labor and to incite others, since it is evident that the Church cannot stand without the most exact diligence in studies. Labor and studies, moreover, ought to be compensated. Therefore, if a noble Canon is a Theologian, a jurist, powerful in eloquence, or versed in various languages, although he can live sufficiently from one cathedral prebend, provided that he is a prudent man of blameless life, another cathedral benefice can even be offered him voluntarily with a dispensation—not only as a reward for youth so honorably spent and as an incitement to others, but also because men of this kind can be of the greatest benefit through counsel and work, are an ornament to the Churches, and uphold their dignity. I judge the same concerning other learned Canons of other Churches: concerning the learned, I say, not those who display bulls of doctorates before their ignorance.
Outside these cases, I deny that even a hundred skins of diplomas can render the conscience tranquil. Indeed, even in these very cases I approve the golden mean. For it cannot happen that ten rich prebends are legitimately conferred upon any one Canon, however noble, learned, or deserving; since learning ought not to be the procurer of avarice, the distinction of nobility ought to shine forth in giving rather than acquiring, and merits which burden the Church ought to be omitted. Therefore those who dispose of benefices by sevens, and those who alone receive the revenues of an entire collegiate Church, will be ensnared not only by the ordering of ecclesiastical goods but also by the fraud of an extorted dispensation. For by what right does one man receive from the Church so much that twenty men equal to him could be honorably supported?
I know that I am going to offend certain men, and great ones indeed; but truth is the same among great and small. Therefore the Council of Trent expressly comprehends all, with whatever dignity they shine, even naming the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church. By this it shows that not even they can possess great wealth by any dispensation. For the moderate possessions and expenditures of many Bishops and Archbishops, indeed of many Cardinals, prove that certain moderate revenues suffice for the dignity of a Cardinal. But that one Cardinal should possess as much as
ten others, and this from the goods of the Church, neither equity admits nor can dispensation bring about.
This matter is therefore pernicious, and the canons never speak of it without detestation. For ministers are withdrawn from the Church, the sustenance of the poor is converted into luxury, and the souls of the recipients perish.
The remedy is that all the laws enacted by the Fathers be observed, but especially that when anyone seeks a dispensation, he describe in detail his age, lineage, benefice, and the revenue both of what he has and of what he seeks. Then let him add the cause for which he seeks dispensation from so severe a law, and let him prove it. Once this has been examined, if a dispensation is given, only then let the matter be committed to Episcopal judgment, so that men may see in the place where either the benefice or the solicitor of the dispensation is whether the true cause was presented to the Pontiff. But if the Pontiff is unwilling to commit the matter to the Bishop or commissioners, nevertheless let possession not be given until the Church has fully informed the Pontiff. If the cause rendered to the Pontiff is not proved, let the solicitor of an inequitable dispensation not only be repelled from the benefice but also punished in addition.
When I expressed this opinion, someone objected to me that a different custom exists in many places and that these things would therefore be received harshly. But when I said that those who hold several could even be commanded to restore them, he denied that this could be done. Yet when I showed him title 3 of the Extravagants, On Prebends and Dignities, he approved the opinion. For that reason I shall transcribe it here:
The execrable ambition of certain men, both religious and secular—which, always seeking more, becomes the more insatiable the more indulgence it receives—and the importunate wickedness of those petitioning us and our predecessors, the Roman Pontiffs, are known frequently not so much to have obtained as to have extorted the permission that one man, sometimes less suitable even for one ecclesiastical benefice, may by dispensation, although otherwise it would not be lawful by the common law, receive and lawfully retain simultaneously, in different Churches not only neighboring but also far distant from one another, and indeed sometimes situated in parts of different kingdoms, two, three, or several dignities, personates, offices, or Priories, or diverse ecclesiastical benefices having the cure of souls.
From this, among other inconveniences, the things written below follow: namely, that one man who would scarcely suffice to fulfill even one modest office claims for himself the stipends of very many, which, if conferred by an equitable distribution, could abundantly suffice for many learned men, resplendent with purity of life and the testimony of a good reputation, who beg. Material for wandering is prepared for their possessors; divine worship is diminished; the hospitality owed in the benefices themselves is not observed. And since the Churches in each region do not have their own rectors, injury is done to their advantages and honor; lacking the aid of defenders, they collapse in many ways in their towns and liberties; noble buildings which the magnificence of their predecessors erected lie open to ruin; and—what is more bitterly to be lamented—the cure of souls is neglected, and dangerous nourishment is afforded to the thorns of vices.
We, therefore, desiring to meet so many and such great dangers, after diligent deliberation concerning this matter with our brethren, by their counsel and from our certain knowledge, have judged that all and singular dispensations concerning the reception or retention of several dignities, personates, offices, Priories, or benefices to which the cure of souls is annexed—under whatever form or expression of words, granted by us or our aforesaid predecessors to any person, with the sole exception of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, who, serving the universal Church around us, devote themselves to the advantages of the individual Churches, and sons of kings, who on account of their loftiness and the distinction of their lineage are to be raised by a more powerful prerogative of grace—must be moderated in the form written below, so that through our moderation we may restrain the unbridled multitude of such benefices about the same persons, yet those obtaining them may not be totally frustrated of the fruit of dispensations of this kind.
We therefore establish and, by the counsel of those brethren, ordain that those now holding by legitimate dispensation a plurality of dignities, personates, offices, Priories, or benefices of this kind which they could not otherwise hold without dispensation may lawfully retain only one of the dignities, personates, offices, Priories, Churches, or benefices of this kind upon which the cure of souls is incumbent, together with the dignity, personate, office, Priory, Church, or benefice without cure which they prefer to have, under pretext of a sufficient dispensation granted to them concerning this. They shall, however, be bound to choose these within a month reckoned from the time they learn of this constitution, having within the same time verbally and actually relinquished with effect, before the Ordinary and under public testimony, the other benefices with or without cure which they held under pretext of that dispensation and which otherwise they could not lawfully retain without dispensation. They shall not presume ever to return to those benefices without a new collation to be made by the man able to make it, or to involve themselves in their administration. Otherwise, they shall be deprived by the law itself both of these and of all other benefices which they could retain by force of our moderation of this kind, as aforesaid, and shall be altogether incapable of holding similar benefices.
Through this, however, we do not wish prejudice to be done to those who hold by dispensation—which gives them a right according to our prescribed moderation—dignities, personates, offices, or other benefices having the cure of souls, and await other similar benefices by the authority of our letters or those of the same predecessors, and with whom a dispensation has been made that when those benefices become vacant they may receive and lawfully retain them together with those already held. Rather, when they become vacant, they may within the space of the said time choose them and, having relinquished the others, receive and lawfully retain them in the form prescribed; they shall incur similar penalties if they presume to contravene this our sanction.
Further, because the vice of avaricious cupidity has so blinded the eyes of certain men that they presume simultaneously to retain very many such benefices without canonical dispensation, concerning them we establish by the present decree that they shall be bound, retaining only the one which they received last—provided that a right in it belongs to them by canonical collation—to relinquish, within the limited time prescribed, verbally and in fact, without fraud, before the Ordinary and likewise under public testimony, all and singular benefices detained. If they do not do this, let them be deprived by the law itself even of that one in which a right otherwise belonged to them and be judged altogether incapable of holding any ecclesiastical benefices whatsoever.
But those who hereafter receive a dignity, personate, office, or another benefice having the cure of souls annexed, if they previously held a similar benefice, ought in the same manner to relinquish the former into the hands of the Ordinaries—of which they are known to be deprived by the law itself, without the loss occasioned by delay, after they have obtained possession of the second, or after it has depended upon them, all deceit and fraud ceasing, that they do not obtain it. Otherwise, from that point they shall be deprived of the second also by the law itself and be judged incapable not only of receiving sacred orders but also of holding any ecclesiastical benefice whatsoever. All and singular benefices about to become vacant, as aforesaid, or relinquished, we reserve by the counsel of those brethren to the disposition of ourselves and of the
Apostolic See, forbidding anyone except the Roman Pontiff, fortified by whatever authority concerning this matter, to presume to dispose of benefices of this kind, or to change anything concerning them in any manner through exchange or otherwise. For we decree anything done or attempted otherwise null and void.
Moreover, in the cases aforesaid we understand by “Ordinaries” the Bishops in whose cities or dioceses the benefices, or any one of them, which must be relinquished according to the foregoing are situated, or in whose cities or dioceses the persons who must relinquish them reside; or, when Cathedral Churches are vacant, their Chapters. Let these take care to inform us or the Apostolic See concerning benefices both relinquished and lost, as aforesaid, without delay, as soon as they conveniently can, so that we may be able to dispose of them wholesomely.
But as concerns the modification previously made, we judge those ecclesiastical benefices alone, and no others, by whatever name they are called, to have the cure of souls which have parishes in which the cure of souls is to be exercised not through perpetual vicars, but through the rectors or ministers of the benefices themselves or their temporary vicars; and likewise those benefices to whose ministers, by reason of benefices of this kind, it belongs by custom or law to visit, inquire, receive procurations, suspend, excommunicate, or absolve from sentences of excommunication and suspension, the other laws speaking of the cure of souls remaining in their force as to the other matters.
Therefore let it be lawful for no man whatsoever to infringe this page of our moderation, statutes, constitutions, reservation, prohibition, and wills, or to contravene it with rash daring. If anyone presumes to attempt this, let him know that he will incur the indignation of Almighty God and of His blessed Apostles Peter and Paul. Given at Avignon on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of December, in the second year.
Law 10. No one initiated with the first tonsure, or even constituted in orders, may hold a benefice before his fourteenth year. A holy law; but it is not observed. Men are made Bishops in their cradles, and by their wailing condemn their parents. See Trent, Session 23, chapter 6. It is a rule of the Chancery that provisions to Cathedrals are not valid before the fourteenth year.
Law 11. Let all profess the faith according to Trent, and let the book written concerning this matter be preserved in the Cathedral Church, as in the Council of Aquileia, On the Profession of Faith. For this corrupted Germany: that Canons were admitted to benefices without an examination of morals and religion.
Law 12. Let all men whatsoever be bound personally to exercise the offices and orders which they owe. Council of Trent, Session 22, chapter 4. For if they judge prayers, singing, and the humility of ceremonies unworthy of their majesty, why do they unworthily snatch away the fruits from others who would perform them? They wish to be splendid from the patrimony of Christ, and on account of this splendor judge it unworthy of their lordship, nobility, and distinction if they serve Christ, by whom they are fed.
Law 13. Let the decrees of the Council of Basel, Session 13, be observed; let the salutary and numerous decrees in it be read.
Law 14. Let all Cathedral prebends have a major order annexed. This has now been obtained in nearly all, since they are admitted to the council or Chapter.
Law 15. Let Cathedral Chapters be subject to the Bishop with respect to the censure of morals; otherwise let their jurisdiction and administration of goods be left intact to them. This matter was discussed above.
Law 16. Whoever—Council of Basel, Session 21, On Those Who Wander through the Church during the Divine Offices—being beneficed in a Church, especially one of the greater men, has been seen during the divine offices to wander through the Church or outside around it by walking about or conversing with others, shall by that very fact lose not only the presence for that hour but that of the whole day. If, after having once been corrected, he has not ceased, let him be without the distributions for a month, or be subjected to a graver penalty if his obstinacy requires it, so that at length he may be compelled to cease. Let it also be prohibited that the tumultuous running of any persons through the Church impede or disturb the divine offices. Regulars who in conventual Churches offend concerning the foregoing shall be chastised gravely at the discretion of the superior.
Law 17. Benefices are not to be leased out.
Since a certain monstrous custom has gained force in certain places contrary to the constitutions of the holy Fathers, so that priests are appointed to the government of Churches for an annual price, we prohibit by every means that this be done. For when the priesthood is disposed of as venal under a payment of this kind, consideration is not given to the reward of eternal recompense.
Law 18. They are not to be burdened with annates, much less with pensions and reservations. For these diminish the fruits of benefices, so that when clerics need them most, they cannot enjoy them.
Law 19. They are not to be divided, except where the revenues for one are immense and those for the rest meager. Alexander III also admonishes on many grounds that several benefices are not to be committed to one man, nor one divided among several. In the appendix to Lateran III, part 30.
Law 20. The license of turns is to be corrected altogether, as is stated in Trent, Session 24, chapter 14. Indeed, let all Turnarii swear that they will observe the law which is in Cause 8, question 1, Moses, and that in a benefice they will regard the merit of life rather than the degree of consanguinity. Now good men frequently destroy through the vices of their kinsmen as much as they edify the Church through their own life.
Finally, these things must be directed to the glory of God. Benefices must not be regarded as gifts of Princes, as patrimonial possessions, or as though they had been founded by ancestors only for the support of youth or nobility. No: all the Fathers, Councils, canons, instruments of all foundations, oaths of Canons, statutes of Chapters, and consciences of upright men cry out the complete contrary. They testify that a benefice is given on account of an office, and that only then are its fruits retained by right if men are assiduous and frequent in divine service.