to say pay the Physician Now seeing the Priest-hood was a Real Employment and Divine Function St. Paul had reason to give it the Title of honour which properly belonged to the Magistrats of States The Church hath not only imitated the Synagogue in the way of distributing its Charity but also The Original of the Ministers of the Church hath followed the Discipline observed amongst the Jews in respect of their Ministers The Synagogues were composed of a Ruler of the Synagogue which the Hellenist Jews called Archi-Synagogus Priests or Elders and Deacons and that was the cause why the Apostles established in Christian Assemblies those three sorts of Ministers under the names of Bishops Priests and Deacons The Bishop in these Assemblies had the same honour as the Ruler of the Synagogue amongst the Jews had in their Synagogues The Superiority of the Rulers of the Synagogue in respect of the Priests or Elders consisted only in some Titles of honour as being the Chief amongst their Brethren And therefore they are all comprehended under the name of Priests or Elders in the Hundred and seventh Psalm where we have these words (1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 107.32 Let them also exalt him in the Congregation of the People and praise him in the Assembly of the Elders which was the place of their Meetings So we find in the New Testament that the names of Priest and Bishop are indifferently taken the one for the other and that Assembly or Council of the Elders which was called Presbyterium consisted of the Bishop and the Priests or Elders The Bishop or President as the Ancient Fathers speak had indeed the chief Direction or Superintendency from whence he was called Bishop which word is also found in the Greek of the Septuagint or Hellenists but he made up but one Body with the Elders or Priests who in Quality of Judges had their Jurisdiction jointly with him Hence we may infer that in the beginning of the Church the management of affairs and the Jurisdiction which is now called Episcopal did not depend on the Bishop alone no more than the distribution of the Offerings but on the whole Senate or Assembly of the Priests and this continued so long as there was but one Church in every City one Altar and one Consistory of Priests joined to their Bishop because it was not easy then for the Bishop to become Master of the whole Jurisdiction and Administration of the Revenues But so soon as it was necessary to encrease the number of Churches The Original of the great Authority of Bishops there was some cause to fear lest those who governed the new Churches might attribute to themselves the quality of Bishops finding themselves at the head of a particular Church And therefore the Bishops began to take to themselves authority over them for which it was necessary to appoint that there should be but one Bishop in every City on whom the Elders or Priests should depend who were to take upon them the Government of the new erected Churches which were called Titles St. Jerome strongly maintains this opinion in his Commentaries on the Epistle of St. Paul to Titus where he affirms that before this division each Church was governed by the Common Councel of the Priests but that for avoiding all occasion of Schism one of these Priests or Elders was chosen to be the Chief and to take upon him the care of the whole Church He pretends that the names of Priest and Bishop did not at all differ in the beginning and that therefore St. Paul made use of them indifferently Then he subjoyns (1) Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam dispositionis dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores Hieron com in Epâ—st ad Tit. That it is only Custom which hath made Bishops greater than Priests And this may be confirmed by the authority of St. Paul who writing to the Churches under the name of Elders comprehends both Bishop and Priests It is to be observed however that the Church being encreased hath borrowed many terms and points of Government from the Republicks of Greece and that when there was a necessity of erecting Dioceses it hath in that followed the distinction of Provinces according as they were established in the Empire Of the Government of the Church in its Commencement The Church which in its commencement allowed much to the people grew afterwards more Aristocratical in its Government when by experience it appeared that the multitude of people served only to confound and perplex affairs and then the Polity of Aristocratick Republicks came in vogue Nay we find in the very Acts of the Apostles two sorts of Assemblies as well as in Republicks The one is composed of the Chief amongst the Believers and is called Ecclesia The other admits all indifferently and that the Republicks of Asia named Agoraia which they have always distinguished from the Assembly that they named Ecclesia And therefore the name of Ecclesia or Church hath still been given to Christian Congregations and constantly retained by the Greeks who made the first Ecclesiastical Laws from whence it hath been derived to the Latines who are indebted to the Greeks for all the Ecclesiastical Polity that was setled in the first Ages In this sense we ought to interpret the words of (1) Origen contra Celsum Origen concerning the Form of Church-Government which he explains with relation to the Greek Republicks The Athenians for instance called those Bishops to whom they committed the care of the Towns that depended on their Commonwealth It was long before the Church owned any other name but that of Bishop to distinguish him who had the principal Administration nay when it was even necessary to denote a Bishop who had Jurisdiction over others she called those Bishops (2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 33 Apost the First Bishops of a Nation or made use of some other expression without inventing new words We find nevertheless the name of Metropolitan in the Council of Nice but the Greeks whose Language is fruitful in new words invented a great many to express the different Offices of the Ecclesiastick State which were not so soon brought into use in the Latine Church The names of Archbishop Primate and Patriarch are but Titles of Honour and External Jurisdiction whereas the quality of Bishop and that also of Elder or Priest The Original of the Ordination of Bishops and Priests is a Character that marks the Ordination which the Apostles borrowed from the Synagogue that chose its Ministers by the Imposition of hands In that manner Moses laid his hands on Joshua and the other Elders who were presently filled with the Holy Ghost And if we will credit the Authority of the Rabbies the power of Imposing of hands belonged not only to the chief of the Sanhedrim but also to the other Elders which seems likewise to be confirmed by St. Jerom (1) Hier. in Episi ad
the Tithes and other Ecclesiastical Revenues A distinction betwixt the Church and the Altar which they possessed but most of these Restitutions were only made to Cathedral Churches and Monasteries though the goods belonged to private Churches Now seeing the Church at that time was distinguished from the Altar Monasteries retained the Churches that is to say the Lands Tithes and other Revenues But because the right of providing these Altars belonged to the Bishops it behoved the Monks to obtain from them that which was called (1) 〈…〉 the Redemption of Altars Godefroi of Vendome and other Authors of the same Age make mention of that right Besides the Council of Clairmont ordained That the Altars which had been given to Chapters or Monasteries by the Vicars whom they called Parâ—ons should return to the Power of the Bishop unless the Bishops had confirmed in writing the Donation made to the Chapters and Monasteries To obtain this confirmation from the Bishop a certain sum of money was required And this abuse caused another for private men would alse have Churches of which they receiveâ— the Profits in imitation of the Canonâ— and Monks and had the cure supplied by Vicars There was no necessity that they who were provided with such Altars should be Priests seeing they substituted Vicars in their places John oâ— Salisbury condemns that abuse (1) Nolunt Sacerdotio enerari an t servire a 〈…〉 de altario vivunt sed personatus qiosdam introduxerunt quorum jure ad alium overa ad alium reseruntur emolumenta and cannot endure that those that did noâ— wait at the Altar should partake with the Altar applying to themselves the Revenues of Churches without rendring any service to the same Churches Yveâ— Bishop of Chartres complains likewise of that corruption in a Letter to Pope Vrban II. wherein he lays open the baâ— Custom that was in France in respect of such Personages which had been authorised by the Bishops his Predecessors Qui altari non serviunt says he de altari vivunt à quo sacrilegio cum eos absterrere velim monedo increpando excommunicando altaria à me redimere volunt sub nomine personae sicut a predecessoribus meis ex prava consuetudine redemerunt Pope Vrban indeed condemned that abuse in a Council held at Clairmont to hinder the Simony that Bishops committed in selling Altars but it seems that they who had bought them from the Bishops gained by their Simony for it was decreed in that Council that such as had for the space of thirty years enjoyed these Altars should not be molested for the future and that the Bishops should exact no more from them but the due which they called redemptio altarium Pope Pascal Successor to Vrban confirmed the same Decree in one of his Epistles to Yves Bishop of Chartres and Ranulphus Bishop of Xantes wherein he speaks to them in these terms Ipsi Arvernensi concilio adfuistis in quo praesidente Praedecessore nostro bonae memoriae Papâ Vrbano consentientibus Galliarum Episcopis decretum est ut altaria quae ab annis triginta sub vicariorum redemptione Monasteria possedisse noscuntur quietè deinceps sine molestiâ qualibet Monasteriis ipsis firma permaneant In this manner did Monasteries and Chapters who were also comprehended in the Decree of the Council of Clairmont retain to perpetuity several Altars which did not all belong to them and they were at the same time exempted from paying to the Bishops the usual dues that were paid after the death of the Vicars for obtaining liberty to put other Vicars in their places It had been me thinks more convenient and agreeable to the Ancient Canons to have left the power of providing for Altars to the Bishops And to prove that that right belonged to them when Laicks were forced to restore to the Church the Tithes and other Church Revenues which they possessed it was decreed in the Council of Melfi under Pope Vrlan II. That no Laick should have Liberty to give to Monasteries or Chapters Tithes Churches or other Ecclesiastical Rights without the consent of the Bishop of the place or the permission of the Pope But it happened that the Bishops abused their Power and permitted Chapters and Monasteries to receive these Rights from Laicks on Condition of a certain sum of money to be paid to the Bishops for granting Liberty of establishing Priests or Vicars who might take upon them the Spiritual care of Churches These decrees of the Popes that were backed with Excommunications frightned many Laicks who instead of restoring the Church Revenues to private Churches to which they belonged restored them to Chapters and Monasteries with the permission of the Bishops The Lay-men liked it much better to restore the Tithes and other Ecclesiastical Revenues to Chapters and Monasteries from whom they got money than to private Churches which had none to give And therefore Councils decreed that these Restitutions should not be made without consent of the Bishops thereby to prevent all compacts or agreements betwixt Laicks and Ecclesiastical Communities There were nevertheless a great many Laicks whâ—â— were not startled at the Excommunications of Gregory VII and other succeeding Popes but notwithstanding them kept still the Tithes and other Ecclesiastical Revenues They did more for they instituted Priests to take care oâ— Souls without expecting the Institution of the Bishops And that was thâ—â— cause why the Council of Lateran under Alexander III. decreed (1) Con. Later III. cap. 14. Thâ—â— Clerks or Priests that should take upon them the Government of Churches from the hands of Laicks without the Authority of the Bishop of the place should 〈◊〉 excommunicated and that if they persisted they should be deposed from their Ministry Nevertheless the Popes suffered Lay-men still to enjoy the Tither of Churches whereof they were in possession But they granted Chapters and Monasteries Priviledges to geâ— them out of their hands even when the Bishops would not consent to itâ— These kinds of Priviledges which were casily obtained from the Court of Rome brought in great Revenues to Chapters and Monasteries who put Secular Priests into the Government of Churches allowing them such moderate Stipends that the Popes were obliged to condemn that Avarice of the Canons and Monks who denied Priests even a necessary subsistence The vast Rents that Monasteries enjoyed gave umbrage to the Bishops Canons and to Princes themselves to whom it was represented that most part of these Revenues ought rather to belong to secular Priests who served the cures than to Monks who by their Profession were excluded from all Ecclesiastical Functions But seeing the Monks had taken advantage of the ignorance of Secular Priests and that the government of most Churches was committed to them it was a difficult task to turn them out and to re-establish Secular Priests in Churches And therefore there happened great contests betwixt the Canons and Monks especially in England where the Monks had deprived the
that so the Bishops might apply themselves entirely to the duties of their Office These Stewards were likewise necessary for preserving the Revenue of the Church which the Bishops and other Church men did not employ according to the Canons But because they were appointed by the Bishops they relapsed again into the same abuse the Poor had cause to complain of the same Bishops who gave them but a very inconsiderable share of the Goods that were destined for their Use Upon all these accounts the Fathers of the Council of Calcedon decreed That for the future the Stewards should be chosen from among the Clergy and that it should be no longer in the power of the Bishops themselves to administer the Revenues of the Church That Office became so considerable in the Church of Constantinople that the Emperours took from the Clergy the nomination of the Stewards and appointed them themselves And this lasted until the time of the Emperour Isaac Comnenus who remitted that right to the disposition of the Patriarch The power of Stewards was not so great in the Western Church The Custom of the Western Church diâ—â—ers from that of the East as in the Eastern for seeing the Bishops and other Ecclesiasticks did not according to equity distribute the Church Revenues and that besides the Churches were meanly endowed there was a necessity of making a particular designation of the use to which these Rents were to be employed And that was adjusted in this manner to wit that the Bishop with consent of his Clergy should divide the whole Revenues of his Church into four parts of which the First should be for himself the Second given to the Church-men the Third to the Poor and the Fourth and last applied to the Fabrick of the Churches (1) Gratian caus 12. qâ—â—â— 2. cap. 23. Gratian relates a letter of Pope Zosimus directed to an Arch-Deacon where that distribution is mentioned but without permitting the Rents of the Church to be dismembred as some Church men pretended who would have had Lands assigned them for their portion St. Gregory answering some Questions that were put to him by Austin the English Bishop confirms that Dividend St. Greg. Pope which had been already approved by several other Popes and withal appoints that the Bishops portion should not only be for himself but for as many as were necessary for his Retinue and for maintaining Hospitality The Bishops wrangled with their Clergy about that distribution pretending that they had no right to the new Acquisitions of the Church A Dispute about the distribution of the Revenues of the Church but the same Pope St. Gregory adjusted the matter in favour of the Clergy The Priests pretended farther that they ought to have two parts of the share that was assigned to the Clergy and that the other Churchmen ought to have but a third of the same That matter was referred to the Bishop who was to give to every one according to his merit and pains Nevertheless St. Gregory who in that followed a Law established in the Churches of the West writing to Austin concerning the Discipline that he was to observe in England tells him that it was more convenient to persist in the Community of Goods in the Church of England than to introduce into it those kinds of dividends And indeed it will appear in the sequel of this Discourse that the dividing of Ecclesiastical Revenues hath been the cause of most of the disorders that have happened in the Church and I dare boldly affirm that the thing that hath preserved a greater purity of the Ancient Discipline in the Eastern Church has been chiefly that the Orientals never made any such partitions None but the Western Church hath put the Estates of the Church into Titles and Livings in the same manner as if private persons were the absolute masters of those Estates The Barbarous Princes A change of Discipline in the Church who seized part of the Empire brought great changes into the Church and the Discipline of the Canons was onely preserved in the East The Greeks nevertheless have sometimes remitted certain Ecclesiastical rights in favour of their Princes But that is nothing if compared with what hath been done under the Barbarous Princes in the West The Stewards of whom we have spoken The Office of the Stewards took upon them not only the care of the Revenues of the Church by order of the Bishops but also preserved them during the vacancy of the See and distributed them among those to whom by right and according to the Canons they belonged But because most part of the Church-men had Estates of their own either by Inheritance or Purchases that they had made there arose great difficulties upon their Death about the distinguishing of those Estates Some there were that pretended that those who lived on the Revenues of the Church could not in conscience retain their own Inheritance St. Jerom who was of that opinion St. Jerom. is positive that the goods of the Church were designed for the Poor which agreed very well with the Edict of Constantine that prohibited the Rich to enter into any Office of the Church Whether Church-men can keep their own Estates though he did it upon Politick Reasons and for the good of the State Most of the other Fathers were also of St. Jeroms mind St. Austin and St. Austin admitted no Clerk into his Church till first he had disposed of all his goods either in favour of the Poor or by Sale He was for having all Clerks really Poor in imitation of the Apostles and for living altogether in common upon the Revenues of the Church Nevertheless it is to be observed that he did not require that of them but as a greater perfection and that he never thought it absolutely necessary for entring into orders and enjoying the allowance of the Church that one must possess nothing at all Otherwise he must have gone against the Ancient Canons which leave Church-men at liberty to dispose of their own Estates as they please It is true these Canons were made in the Eastern Church where most of the Bishops having been Married before their Election had Wives and Children to provide for and where Priests and Deacons might Marry if they pleased And therefore it was not reasonable to take their Estates from them Besides it must be considered that when these Canons were made Churches were but â—oor Nay and some time after Constantine no Churches but those of great Cities were Rich. However these Ancient Canons of the Eastern Church were (1) Caus 12. Quaest 3. renewed in the Church of the West though they had not the same reasons for doing it Church-men were only prohibited to bequeath by Will the Goods which they had got in their Livings because Believers did not give to Churches only to enrich the Church-men If it happened nevertheless that the Bishop died without making a Will and had no heirs
it was impossible for Bishops to hinder them from performing all Ecclesiastical functions in their Monasteries and since that time there have always been disputes betwixt the Bishops and the Monks because the Monks on many occasions refused to submit to the orders of the Bishops which they pretended to be contrary to the Discipline of their Monasteries Though at that time most part of the Monks were in the East Monks in the West before St. Benet yet for all that there were a great many also in the West before St. Benet planted a particular Order there St. Jerom St. Ambrose and St. Gregory make mention of Monks in Italy amongst the Gauls and in several other parts of Europe Besides all the Authors who have written of the beginning of the Christian Religion in several Countries speak of Monks that were there There was this difference The difference betwixt the Ancient and Modern Monks nevertheless betwixt the first Monks that were in Europe before St. Benet and those that came after him that the first were barely Monks without being addicted to any particular Order To be a Monk was sufficient to make them received as such in all Monasteries wheresoever they travelled There was no talk then of particular Rules and Institutions But every Monk laboured to emprove himself by the example of others and to embrace what he thought most perfect in the Monastick life So that it may be said that the Monks both of the East and West were all of one Order having at that time no Mark of distinction amongst them The ancient Rules that have been written by the Primitive Monks ought rather to be lookt upon as different Commentaries upon the Monastick life than different Rules for the intention of those who embraced that kind of life was not to distinguish themselves by particular Rules from the manner of â—iving of other men but to submit themselves by a more particular resignation to the Maxims of the Gospel and to find out all possible ways how they might live up to the Counsels of our Saviour who will have us to wean our hearts altogether from the World that we may follow him alone who is above it I shall not here speak of the Institution of St. Benet which is in the hands of every body but shall only observe by the by that the design of that Saint was not to make any innovations in the Monastick life but to make a Collection of what he found most perfect in the Rules and Institutions of others Matters are much altered since All the several Orders of Monks make now a days so many petty different Republicks in the Church and are so many little States who have all their several interests But let us now return to our Subject concerning the Original and Progress of the Revenues of the Church No sooner were the Barbarous Kings become Masters of a part of the Roman Empire Changes in Church and State but the Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws suffered great alterations There was a necessity of complying with the humor and temper of these new Conquerours who medled in the affairs of the Church There was not now as formerly the same liberty in electing of Bishops Princeâ— thought of securing their States by conferring Bishopricks only on such as they could rely upon So that Ecclesiastical dignities began to be looks upon as mere Lay-Offices at the disposal of Princes with which they could Reward those that served them And which was more pernicious to the Church Princes and other great Lords began to make no more distinction betwixt goods consecrated to God and goods Profane The necessity of the times must be born with and the great Wars that Princes were engaged in was the cause that the best part of the Revenues of the Church fell into the hands of Lay-men The Revenues of the Church in the same condidition as temporal Estates They made Contracts of Alienation about them as about other Possessions and these Contracts past for lawful when they were made in the usual forms No body opposed it The Bishops Monks treated often with Laicks about those concerns either by way of Exchange or Purchase The ancient Cartularies or Registers of the Monks are full of such kinds of Contracts wherein it appears that Children succeeded to their Fathers as well in Church livings as in other Estates The Counts or Judges decided the differences that arose amongst private persons about such Estates in the same manner as about other Inheritances and Possessions It is true some scrupulous People made a Distinction betwixt Altars and Churches A distinctio betwixt Churches an Altars comprehending under the name of Churches Lands and other Revenues for which men might contract and assigning a Priest to the Altar who was to have a Salary for saying Mass and performing other Ecclesiastical Functions But some who were not so scrupulous made no such imaginary distinction For in the ancient Cartularies there are to be found forms of deeds of alienation of Churches and Altars with the Bells Chalices Crosses and other Ornaments of the Church This was practised even in Italy before the Popes entred into the cognisance of the goods of the Churches which depended not on their Diocese To these troublesome times we may attribute the total Ruine of private Church men The Ruine of private Church-men who were obliged to take wages from those who possessed the Churches And which is more unhappy the greatest part of those Revenues are fallen into the possession of Cathedral Churches and Monasteries to which they did not at all belong The truth is there are forms of Contracts to be found in the same Cartularies which make it appear that Monks have bought several Churches from Lay-men but part of these Churches had been usurped by the Laicks from the Church-men to whom they ought to have been restored and not sold to the Monks When the administrations of Church Revenues were erected into Benefices or perpetual Titles the Church-Men who were hired by the Chapters of Cathedral Churches by the Monks and even by Laicks became perpetual Vicars and Curats But the best part of the Benefices remained still to the Canons and Monks who took to themselves afterward the Quality of Primitive Curates Besides since private men were not able Princes and other great men bought the Churches from those Church-Men and gave them to the Monks who entertained Secular Priests to take the care of administring the Sacraments to the People all the Revenue and Tithes in the mean time remaining to the Monasteries Wherefore it will not be amiss to explain in this place more particularly the Original and Progress of the Revenues annexed to Monasteries and at the same time to speak of their priviledges and exemptions A great part of what we shall say of Monasteries being also applicable to other Ecclesiasticks We have shown before that Monks having made profession of poverty The Original of Lands and other Revevenues
of Prevention Besides the Pope who daily derogates from the Rule de viginti diebus to favour Resignees does never derogate from it in prejudice of Cardinals in respect of Churches whereof they are the ordinary Collators and that is a Priviledge singular to them Neither are they subject to the Indults or Priviledges of the menbers of the Parliament of Paris So that they are not obliged to bestow upon the Indultees or Priviledged the Benefices whereof they are the Collators because they have a Grant from the Pope which gives them power of disposing of their Benefices to whom and in what manner they please Nevertheless the Parliament of Paris hath sometimes pronounced Sentence contrary to those Priviledges of Cardinals and hath favoured the Indultees by virtue of the nomination of the King who they thought ought to be preferred before the Indultees of Cardinals In fine the common Rule which says that Secular Benefices should be given to Seculars and Regular to Regulars is of no force in respect of Cardinals who (1) Habent os apertum ad omnia Beneficia in that quality can receive all kinds of Benefices To have explained the right of the Popes in France in respect of Beneficial matters is not sufficient to discover fully wherein the ancient Canon Law is abrogated which gave Bishops absolute power in the Collation of Benefices we must besides that examine the right of other Collators and Patro us whether Ecclesiastick or Laick In a word it is necessary to know the rights of all who are in present possession of providing to Benefices in what manner soever it be It would seem that none have more reason to challenge that Right The Rights of Chapters than the Chapters of Cathedral Churches for as heretofore they made but one body with the Bishops and were of their Council so they had some share in the Jurisdiction Wherefore when the Revenues were separated at the same time the Jurisdiction was divided especially the gratuitous Jurisdiction or the Right of providing to Benefices and I take that to be the true reason why Chapters are at present the Collators of some Benefices separately from their Bishop They have even made certain Laws among themselves which are different according to the diversity of places Every Canon presents by turn to Benefices that become vacant in his week or in the time that hath been allotted him in the Dividend which they have made among themselves Besides that dignified Canons can provide to Benefices that depend on their Dignities whether in particular or joyntly with other Dignitaries wherein the Custom observed in every Chapter is followed Care is to be taken though that all sorts of Customs be not authorized for it may be that Canons have made Agreements among themselves which are prejudicial to the Rights of private persons and there are but few that mind that Bishops cannot call into question that Right of Chapters The Original of Personages and Dignities without Employment since they have agreed on both sides by Transactions which were in their power to make But that hath given occasion to a very great corruption which hath established in the Church Benefices without any Employment For the Canons are not only separated from their Bishops but they have besides every one taken his Revenue in particular and minded the management of it This is the cause that many Offices which were necessary whilst the Revenues were in common are become useless and instead of suppressing them they are erected into Benefices which are called Dignities that is to say Sine-Cures or Benefices without Office I shall here give some Instances of them that the Original of these Dignities or Benefices may be known of which the Titulars for most part are uncertain whether or not they be obliged to reside on their Benefices I reckon then amongst these Dignities the Provostships of St. Martin of Tours which are pretty numerous These Provostships were heretofore possessed by the Canons of the Chapter who were chosen to take the care of the Temporal of the Church And seeing the Revenues of that Church were in several places the care of them was committed to different persons who had severally the management of the Rents of their distinct Quarters and because of that they were called Praeposiâ—i whence the name of Provost is derived But since the Canons took the care of their Rents every one in particular these Offices are become useless nevertheless they are still retained and are now called Dignities or simple Benefices whereof the Titulars cannot be obliged to Residence as heretofore they were because the obligation to reside proceeded not from the Office of Provost but of the Canonship which they enjoyed with their Provostship that was not then a Benefice but meerly a Commission or Office And in this manner also ought we to consider the dignity of Treasurer in several Cathedrals of the Kingdom which in all likelyhood was but an Office that consisted in taking care of the Revenues of the Church and is at present a Benefice without Office which is called a dignity of honour because it is only by Custom that it hath the name of dignity there being none but the Titles of Arch-Priest and Arch-Deacon that are dignities of right by reason of the Jurisdiction which they have retained It is the same with all other dignities or Sine-cure Parsonages therefore I shall insist no more on that Subject I shall only observe that several Persons do in some manner enjoy two Benenefices though they be not reckoned amongst those who possess plurality of Livings The Deans for Instance of Cathedral Churches and the chief Dignitaries of Collegiat Churches have double the Revenue of the other Canons though they be no more in effect but Canons as the rest are and have nothing over them but a Prerogative of honour But Custom which hath made that and many such other practices familiar to us is the cause why they are not reckoned in the number of those who have several Benefices besides they may alledge for their Justification the words of St. Paul who saith That the Elders who Rule well are counted worthy of double honour 1 Tim. 5.17 After all if the Chapters challenged no more to themselves in Beneficial matters but the rights whereof we have been speaking Bishops would have no cause to complain of them But there are some who have attempted upon the Jurisdiction of the same Bishops and pretend to an Episcopal Jurisdiction as well as they You shall see Canons who have rather out of vanity than necessity a great Vicar an Official and other necessary Officers for exercising Episcopal Jurisdiction as if they had a Diocese to govern Most part of Chapters besides pretend to â—e exempted from the Jurisdiction of their Bishops and have a little Territory depending on them in regard of which they exercise the functions of Episcopal Jurisdiction and hold the place of inferiour Ordinary Prelates which are
or at least of such as are useful to the Church for these Unions still subsist If for instance a Priory or Chappel is so ruined that it is impossible to restore it what remains of the Revenue ought to be united to another Church If the Prebends of a Chapter or Collegiat Church are too small several of them must be joined together If in a Town or Burrough there be too many Cures and they but poor it is convenient to suppress some of them and give the Revenue to others In the same manner a simple Benefice may be joined to a poor cure in a word Monasteries where the Rule hath ceased may be joyned to a Bishoprick that hath not a competent Revenue But in all these Unions the advantage of the Church is always to be regarded and the Rights of Superiours maintained otherwise they are abusive And therefore Unions are not to be made but upon good and necessary information The Bishop hath Right to make these Unions unless it be when the Union is to be made to his own Church because then he cannot be Judge in his own case Moreover the Union of Bishopricks is reserved to the Pope Though Reversions have been abolished Of the Indults or Priviledges of Members of Parliament yet there are in France Priviledges of the Members of Parliament and the degrees of those who have studied a certain time in the Famous Universities of the Kingdom which are a kind of Reversions and by consequent are prejudicial to the Rights of Ordinary Collators of Ecclesiastical Patrons I shall not speak here of the Original of these Priviledges Only we may observe that during the time of Schism Popes granted those favours to Princes to great men that were powerful in the Courts of Princes and to such as might be a hinderance to them in their settlement in the Papacy The Council of Trent hath abolished Indults as well as Apostolical Mandats But since its decisions are not received in France the Priviledges of the Members of Parliament have been still retained To the end a Priviledge whereof we are speaking may have its effect Letters must be procured from the King commanding the Ordinary Collator to confer on him who hath the Priviledge the first vacant Benefice of his Collation Besides these Letters must be intimated before the vacancy of the Benefice and then the hands of the Collator are tied The Indultee or Priviledged person hath six Months to require the Benefice in and the Collator can be charged but with one Priviledge during his life or if it be a Community which dieth not then it is regulated by the life of the King The Collator in the mean time could formerly oblige the Indultee to accept the first vacant Benefice provided it were worth 200 Francs because the Priviledge is de beneficio proximè vacaturo But he cannot at present be obliged to it unless it be worth 600 Francs of yearly Rent In the number of Expectative Graces or Reversions may also be reckoned the Kings nomination for his happy coming to the Crown and his nomination for the Oath of Allegiance which gives him Right to nominate to the New Bishop after the Conclusion of the Regale one for the first vacant Prebend Of Degrees The complaints of the University of Paris against the Bishops who commonly bestowed Benefices on their Domesticks and undeserving persons were the cause that in the Council of Basil it was decreed That the third part of Benefices should be set apart for the Graduats of Famous Universities and that if the Ordinaries gave them to others their Collations should be null The Pragmatick made in the assembly of Bourges ratified that decree of the Council of Basil but with this qualification that the third destin'd for Graduats should be divided into three parts and that two thirds of that third should be appropriated to those who had some notable employment in the University And therefore it was ordered by the same Assembly that the University should name those whom they would have preferred And thence arises the distinction of simple Graduats and Graduats named The Concordat hath preserved that Right of Graduats But because fraud might be committed in the third of Benefices which were given in course one after another they had four Months of the year allotted to them to wit January April July and October and the Benefices that fall during these four Months are appropriated to them January and July are called Months of Rigour because the Collator or Patron is obliged to give the vacant Benefice to the Graduat named who is the Ancientest and hath most Right whereas in the other two Months which are called Months of favour he is free to give the vacant Benefices to such enrolled Graduats as he pleases To be a Graduate it is enough that one hath studied two years Philosophy three years Divinity and taken the degree of Master of Arts. Yet this hinders not but that their Batchelour Graduats Doctor Graduats Graduats in Divinity the Canon Law and Medicine to whom also there is a certain time assigned and in case of competition the most qualified Graduate is preferred before the other though it be sometimes pretty hard to know who ought to be preferred That this Right may take effect the Letters of Degree Attestations of the time of Study and the Universities Letters of Nomination must be signified to the Ecclesiastical Patron or Collator And because Gentlemen have some Priviledge as to the time of Study they ought likewise to produce the proofs of their quality Of all these Instruments and Acts the Patron or Collator ought to keep a Copy They are besides obliged every year in Lent to renew the Register of their names which they may do in the Office of the Ecclesiastical Register When a Benefice falls in the Months that are appropriated to them they ought to demand it within six Months and that being expired they are no longer admitted to make their Requisition If the Pope prevent them before they have made their demand he that hath been provided by the Pope obtains the Benefice And there is no need that the Pope should even mention that the Benefice is destined to Graduats because he is not tied to the Law that is in France in favours of Graduats But the Ordinary ought to specify in his Collations the quality of the Graduat which is the cause for which he gives the Benefice Nevertheless he may still put questions to the Graduats though heretofore they pretended to be exempted from examination But the easiness of obtaining Degrees makes that there are to be found many ignorant vicious Graduats And therefore the Collator and even the Patron have always right to refuse them if they judge them uncapable of the Benefices which they have demanded It is to be observed that all sorts of Benefices are not Subject to Graduats I. Consistorial Benefices and such as are in Lay-Patronage are exempted II. The
dignities of Cathedral Churches but amongst these dignities the Penitentiary is not reckoned and there is some difficulty also as to the Divinity Lecture though there be Judgments as to that in favours of Graduats III. The right of Graduats has no place but when the Benefices are vacant by death IV. When the Graduate hath a Benefice of 400 Francs a year or an Annuity of the same value which stands him instead of a Benefice he is thought provided and cannot pretend to any Benefice in quality of a Graduate unless he had not that Provision by virtue of his degrees for in that case he may renounce his Benefice or Annuity and have right as before to demand the Benefics appropriated to Graduats The reason why a Graduat having a Benefice of 400 Francs is reckoned provided is that in the Concordat 200 Florins are mentioned which have been valued at 400 Francs But I think at present they ought to be valued at 600. V. When the Benefice that falls in the the month of Graduats is under Rule it cannot be demanded but by a Regular Graduat Just so the Regular cannot demand Secular Benefices VI. In fine if an Indultee or Priviledged person and a Graduat demand one and the same Benefice the Indultee is preferred before the Graduat The Exemptions which Popes have granted to several Churches Of Exemptions as well Regular as Secular have also much derogated from the Canonical Right of Bishops because Abbots and other Patrons confer in full Right the Benefices which are contained in their Exemptions and they failing the Right is devolved on the Pope who is become their immediat Superiour This is not a proper place to handle these exemptions to the full nor to speak of their Original besides we have elsewhere said somewhat as to that Subject I shall only mention what relates to the Custom of France I. The Decree of the Council of Trent that derogats from Exemptions is not received there But the Titles on which the Exemptions are founded are examined and if the Titles be lawful the Priviledges that are expressed are allowed II. Possession alone is not enough to authorise these Priviledges Legal Titles must also be produced in as much as many are in Possession of their Priviledges because their Titles have not been sufficiently examined which most commonly are false and it is not Just that Exemption which is but a Priviledged Right should prejudice the common Right of Bishops unless it be well grounded and granted for lawful causes To this may be added that (1) Fraus nemini debet Patrocinari falshood can never make a Prescription and that a Possession grounded on a bad Title is no true Possession All possible rigour ought to be used then against the Right of Exemption or Priviledge because it derogates from the Common Law and nothing should be granted to the exempted but what is expresly set down in their Title of Exemption And it is absolutely necessary that the Priviledges be mentioned in plain Terms without any ambiguity III. The more ancient the Titles of Exemption are of the less extent are the Priviledges of the Exemptions as appears by Ancient Formularies which hardly contain any thing else in respect of Monasteries but the liberty of chusing the Abbot and the free Disposition of all their Revenues as to the rest they were entirely Subject to the Bishops Exemptions as we find them now a days began only with the Reformations of Cluni and Cisteaux who were exempted from the Jurisdiction of Bishops by the Title of their Foundation Though that happened in a disorderly time yet these Exemptions are not medled with in France seeing they are owned by all men But there is great cause to doubt of the most part of others which are supposed to have been granted by Popes after the Foundation of Monasteries There are but few of them that are true in their full extent which is easily discovered when one sets seriously to work to examin the Titles And in that manner Peter de Blois Arch Deacon of the Church of Bath in England affirms that the Exemptions of Monasteries in his time were examined of which the greatest part were forged by the Monks The Bishop of Salisbury thought the Letters of Exemption of the Abbey of Malmesbury to be false quia in filo Bulla videbantur vitiosae stilumque Romanae curiae minime redolebant Nevertheless the Abbot refusing to submit to his Bishop fell into such a rage against him that the same Peter de Blois complained of it in his letter (1) Petr. Blaes Epist 68. to Pope Alexander III. To whom upon occasion of the Abbot of Malmesbury he represents the abuses of Exemptions take it in his own words Viles sunt Abbates miseri qui potestatem Episcoporum non exterminant cum pro annua Auri uncia plenam à sede Romanâ possint assequi libertatem By this it is apparent enough that Monasteries obtained for Money from the Court of Rome as many Exemptions as they pleased and that Simony was much practised by the Monks especially the Regular Abbots who by that means shook off Obedience to their Bishops that they might more freely squander away the Revenues of their Monasteries and have no Body to check them for their vices (1) Petr. Blaes ibid. Detestantur Abbates habere suorum excessuum correctorem vagam impunitatis licentiam amplectuntur claustralisque militiae jugum relaxant in omnem desiderii libertatem Hinc est quod monasteriorum fere omnium facultates datae sunt in direptienem praedam These and many other reasons which I omit are the cause that no great favour is shewn to the Exemptions of Monasteries in France though they be not wholly rejected there To which may be added that many of these Exemptions especially those of Chapters have been obtained in the times of Schism and it often happened that the Chapter which opposed its Bishop acknowledged one Pope and the Bishop another And that is to be taken notice of in the Titles of Exemptions Rules how to distinguish true Exemptions from false that what was done upon occasion of Schism may not be authorised That true Titles may be the more easily distinguished from such as have been foisted and counterfeited we shall here set down several Rules which are necessary to be known if one would with any exactness make that distinction And that will not only serve to discover the falsity of Priviledges and Exemptions but also to Judge of other Titles I. One must have seen true Titles that are past all exception according to which are to be examined those that are produced The Characters are to be minded if it be an Original Piece for it seldom happens that they who counterfeit Titles do exactly imitate these Characters whether it be that they write too hastily or that they are satisfied to do somewhat that comes near them but which is not altogether like II. The difference of
stile that occurs betwixt true pieces and counterfeit is very useful for distinguishing the one from the other for instance one must know in what manner Princes in different times began their Letters and how they finished them for it is certain the stile hath not been always the same Besides they have also expresied themselves in different manners in several times as to the Body and Contents of their Letters III. The way of dating Letters hath much varied and that is a thing that hath not been always minded by those who have counterfeited false I riviledges They have for most part followed the Custom of their times IV. Chronology and â—he Subscriptions of the Writing or Deed are to be minded examining if they who have subscribed it lived all in that time and if they could probably be all together in the place spoken of or if the matters of fact reported suit with the Customs and Practice of those times V. One must not be ignorant of the time when certain ways of speaking began to be in use For it is easily perceived that a Piece is New when it contains New terms and expressions VI. It is necessary to be acquainted with History and especially what concerns the Rights of Popes to know whether the Writing do not attribute to the Pope who grants the Priviledged some Rights which he did not as yet enjoy And that happens commonly in Ancient Priviledges because they who have counterfeited them have squâ—red themselves according to their own times and not the times of the Popes whose names they have borrowed VII One ought to know Chronology History the manner of beginning and dating of Writings the diversity of Stile and of Subscriptions not only in respect of different Times but also of different Places and Persons For it is certain that these things have varied according to the diversity of Places and Persons Princes do not always agree in that with Popes and Bishops and Princes differ also among themselves For instance the manner of beginning the year hath not been uniform in all places nor in all times Dates and Subscriptions are very different according to the diversity of Places and Persons And that has made those who have been ignorant of those different Customs fall into such gross faults that the falsity of the Deeds which they have counterfeited stares in ones face VIII There is nothing more common than to see counterfeit Marks or Monograms And therefore it is convenient to have true ones to make a distinction of the real from the false which is also to be observed in Seals that have been often counterfeited It must not for all that be concluded that a Deed is good because nothing seems wanting to the Subscription nor to the Seal For there was nothing more easy heretofore than to remove the Seal from one Deed to another Seeing the Seal was fastened to the Parchment and that there was no Counter-Seal the Seal was easily taken off without hurting the Impression by heating the Parchment a little It is true in after times that falsisication was remedied by means of a Counter-Seal and a little string that tied the Seal to the Parchment But for all the care that could be taken it is impossible altogether to prevent falsification There is nothing more easy than to keep the Subscription and Seal entire and with some Waters or Essences to wash out all the writing and to suppose another Title in what manner one pleases The reality then of the Subscription and Seal is not a sufficient proof but it will be convenient also to consider whether the Parchment has not received some alteration or whether the Ink be not too new or different from that wherewith the Subscription has been made IX The counterfeiting of a Deed hath sometimes been found out by the newness of the Parchment that had some Mark to make it known by On the contrary they who have affected to have Titles too Ancient and have for that end written their Priviledges on the Barks of Trees have rendered themselves ridiculous because it is easy to be made out that at that time when they are supposed to have been written there was no use made of the rind of Trees at least in Europe X. They also who have joined many dates together thinking thereby to render their Titles more Authentick marking the years of Princes and Emperours with the Indictions and such other things as were contrary to the Custom of the places and times wherein they lived thought to have imposed on others by an odd and unseasonable exactness Did I not fear to be too tedious I would give instances for confirmation of all these Rules But that deserves a separate work I shall only add some Remarks concerning Cartularies because I perceive men too credulously believe them and mind not that part of the Titles which are contained in Cartularies are either false or corrupted Cartularies are the Rolls or Registers of Churches or Monasteries Of what Authority are Cartularies wherein are recorded the Contracts of Buying Selling Exchange Priviledges Immunities Exemptions and other Deeds and Charters These Cartularies are long posteriour to most part of the Acts contained in them and they are only made for preservation of the Acts and that Posterity may have recourseâ— to them But there are strong reasons to doubt of the fidelity of those who have compiled the Cartularies because a vast Number of false or corrupted Titles are to be found in them In the first place seeing in the beginning the Custom of writing Titles or Acts of Foundations and Immunities or Priviledges was not as yet introduced the Compilers of Cartularies who saw that they enjoyed several Lands and that they were in Possession of some Priviledges without having any Titles for them have not failed to make and to insert them in their Cartularies I believe it is for that reason that the Titles which are in the Cartularies attributed to the Kings of France of the first Race are almost all false and for the same reason also we ought to mistrust the Primitive Exemptions which are the more to be suspected that they appear the more Ancient The Law-suits that Bishops have had with the Abbots of Monasteries have also much contributed to the Augmentation of false Titles For to back their several causes they spared no pains in falsifying of Deeds In the Second place the Compilers of Cartularies have not always inserted the acts as they were in the Original Writing Which is easily proved by comparing the Originals with the Copies that are Registred in the Cartularies or even by comparing Ancient Cartularies with others more Modern for the later they are of the greater extent they are We find for instance the Foundation of the Monastery of Casaure otherwise called of St. Clement in the (1) Ital. Sacr. Tom. 6. sixth Volume of the History of the Bishops of Italy and in the Title of that Foundation some Charters of Immunities Priviledges and