other Goods and Estates subject to the Civil Laws and Customs oâ— places Bishops and Abbots sold and exchanged the Rents of their Churches without consulting the Pope The Lease which they termer convenientia or agreement was for a certain number of lives so that the Lands were engaged for many year on Condition of a yearly Revenâ—â— paid to the Abbey And for greaten security it was specified in the Deed (1) Ann. 970. Ad usum fruondi per nastrum praestitum cultandi exfructandi non vendendi nec donandi nec concambiondi c. That so much Land was let by way of loan to the third Generation to be laboured and emproved and the profiâ—â— thereof enjoyed without permission to sell exchange or any ways engage the same This way of letting of Leases is still in use in England and the Monks made use of it heretofore as all other Church men having the same liberty as they had to purchase sell and exchange Whereas in the beginning they made a scruple of enjoying the property of any Lands only they sometimes laboured and manured Lands that no body claimed a right to for their own subsistence There is mention made in the treatise of matters Beneficiary attributed to Father Paul An Explication of the Contract called Precarius of a form of a Contract called Precaria which hath much enriched Monasteries The Old Cartularies are full of such kinds of Deeds which consisted in a Donation made by private Persons of their Estates to Churches which they obtained back again from the same Churches by Letters which they call'd Precarias or Precatorias to be possessed by a kind of Copy-hold or Lease for Lives for most part granted a Lease for five six and even for seven Lives on condition of paying a yearly Revenue to the Monastery People bestowed their Lands more willingly upon the Church when they perceived that they still reserved the profits of them for many years And I have seen in ancient Cartularies forms of Precarious Contracts wherein private Persons sold their Estates to a Monastery and afterward obtained (1) Literas precarias usque in quint im ginerationem Under Lonis 11 Son of Lotharius Letters or Leases of them to the Fifth Generation So that after the Fifth Life the Monasteries could dispose of the Lands whereof they had the property from the date of the Contract the sellers enjoying only the Profits upon Condition of paying yearly a certain sum of Money and obliging themselves to cultivate 2 and improve the Lands without any Power to sell give engage or exchange the same according to the tenour of the Contract or Deed. (1) Beneficiali ordine usu fruendi cultandi laborandi meliorandi non verò vendendi nec donandi nec concambiendi c. In those days there were many other Deeds of the like nature which were authorised by the Civil Law and Customs of Countries and no distinction was made betwixt Secular and Church Lands Monks were allowed to purchase and sell in the same manner as Lay-men Those who embraced a Monastick Life Other means of Acquisition contributed much also to the enriching of Monasteries For it commonly happened that they who made choice of that Profession thought it not enough to give themselves to God unless likewise they offered all they had of which they made a Conveyance according to the forms used in several Countries The Tenour of that Deed is to be found in the Ancient Cartulare of Casaure in these terms I. N. Son of N. in such a year of the Emperour N. and of the Count N. offer and give of my own free will and motion this present day my proper Person and all the goods which I possess in such and such places to such a Monastery where I intend to live the rest of my days And for the greater solemnity of this offering it was made in the Church where the Person laying his hand upon the Altar was with all his Estate offered to God It is also to be observed that the profession of a Monastick Life hindred not the Monks from inheriting the goods of their Relations which they might dispose of in favour of their Monastery Besides Widows who having taken the Veil from the Hand of the Bishop could not Marry again gave part of their Estates to the Monastery or other Churches of which a Deed past in the following Tenour I. N. Daughter of N. the Servant of God who have taken the Veil of Religion give to N. Abbot or to such a Monastery such and such goods for the remedy of my Soul and of the Soul of my Husband Besides all these ways that have brought great wealth to Monasteries it is to be observed that the Constitutions of the Order of St. Benet allowed a Monk to leave the Society of his Monastery that he might live Solitary and an Anchorite which was called (1) De Claustrensi fieri Archoritam of a cloystered Monk to become Anchorite These Anchorites who retired from the Monastery with the permission of their Abbot went and lived in some neighbouring place and they were not so Solitary but that they were visited by the People that came to recommend themselves to their Prayers They received large Alms as being esteemed holier than the rest and took all kinds of Donations whether in Lands or Moveables When they were grown Rich in one place they went to another where they met with the same Charity from the People The Estate which they had acquired belonged to them and before their death they made it over to the Monastery out of which they came And that their Donation might be in form an Act past upon it in these terms (2) Cartuiary of Casiure Am. 10 â— J. N. Priest and Monk of such a Monastery out of which I came with Permission of the Abbot that I might lead a more retired Life give to my Abbot N. for the repose of my Soul all the goods which I possess and which I have purchased with his Permission The Deed of Donation contained a list of Goods Lands and Churches which these Anchorites left to their Monasteries and at the same time they delivered up the Deeds of private Donations which were kept among the other Records Besides all this Monasteries made no difficulty to sell the Ornaments and consecrated Vessels of their Churches There is mention sometimes made in Ancient Cartularies of Chalices and Silver Crosses given in payment for Lands bought from private Persons when there was no necessity for it But what is more surprizing Monks bought indifferently from all sorts of men and often enough from those who had abused their Authority in seizing the Goods of the Poor Which gave encouragement to many great men to usurp the Estates of their Neighbours because they were sure to find Monks to whom they could sell them we find a very considerable Instance of this in the Cartulary of the Abbey of Mire in Suisserland which
Evagr who pretends that the Elders or Priests enjoyed that Right a long time in the Church of Alexandria where the Priests who in imitation of the Apostles were twelve in number chose one from among themselves to be their Bishop on whom they all together laid their hands as the Patriarch Eutychius observes in his Annals of the Church Having now spoken of the Persons who had the care of the Revenues of the Church The nature of Church-Revenues in the beginning and observed wherein those goods did consist it will not be amiss to subjoyn that those Revenues were rather a kind of Subsidies employed for the Relief of the Poor than any real Rents Nor was there need of any solemnity for consecrating them to the Church seeing they were not fixed and the Laws of the Empire permitted not Christians to possess publick Estates After all the Collections which we have mentioned ceased not upon the death of the Apostles for we read in one of the Apologies of St. Justin Martyr (1) St. Just Apol. 2. that in the Publick Assemblies Believers bestowed their Charity after the Communion and that one of the Brethren kept the money to be afterward distributed among those who were in want That Custom was also in use in the time of (2) Tertul. Apo. Tertullian and the Church had no other Revenues but such Alms or Contributions until the time of Constantine who permitted Churches to possess real Estates and to be endowed with Lands and Inheritances (3) Plin. Epist lib. 5. Pliny the younger observes that private persons were prohibited to give their Estates to any Colledge or Society but that they ought to chuse certain and special Heirs and not the Gods in general It is true the Laws made afterwards a Restriction that one might bequeath or give his goods to lawful and allowed Colledges or Societies and that by special Priviledge the Jewish Synagogues which were of the number of those Allowed Societies were nevertheless excluded from that Priviledge And because Christian Assemblies were always rejected under the Pagan Emperours as unlawful Conventicles it is certain the Church never enjoyed any Possessions until the Fourth Century under the Empire of Constantine All these Laws may be seen in the Body of the Civil Law wherein they are inserted It was about that time then The Original of immoveable Estates in the Church that Churches began to be endowed as well as the Pagan Temples because Christian Congregations were no more then considered as Conventicles The Emperour Constantine granted them great Priviledges and permitted People to bestow upon them Possessions of all kinds He ordained also that they should inherit the Estates of the Martyrs Confessors and of those who had been banished when the true Heirs did not appear I speak not here of the Donation which Constantine accord-to some (1) Euseb l. 2. de vita Const cap. 36. Authors made to the Church of Rome because it is notoriously known that the deed is false and that the Successors of Constantine possessed Lands that are mentioned therein It may be affirmed that the Priviledges granted by Constantine to Churches for injoying of Rents have occasioned great disorders Which made St. Jerome say (2) Potentiâ quidem divitiis major sed virtutibus minor facta est Hier. in vita S. Malch that the Church was indeed become more Powerful and Rich under Christian Princes but that it was less Virtuous St. Chrysostom (3) Chrysost homil 86. in Matth. describes at length the sad State of Bishops and other Church men since the Church enjoyed Lands and other fixed Revenues because they forsook their employments to sell their Corn and their Wine and to look after their Glebes and Farms Besides much of their time was spent in Law-suits He wishes that he might see the Church in the State that it was in in the times of the Apostles when it injoyed only the Charity and Oblation of Believers St. Austin was also in the same Opinion and (4) Possid in vita Aug. cap. 24. it is reported in his Life that he often refused the Inheritances which were offered to his Church thinking it fitter that they should be left to the lawful Heirs And in the same Life we read that St Austin would never purchase Houses nor Lands nor any other Possessions for his Church Wherein he shewed his wisdom and prudence for nothing does more obstruct the Charity of Believers towards Churches than when they see that they enjoy vast Estates the Revenues whereof are nevertheless more uncertain than the Alms that are given to a Church that hath not the repute of being Rich. And so it was also that those who knew St. Austins mind sold their Lands and gave him the money which the more willingly they did as being persuaded that the good Bishop bestowed it on pious uses not in making new Purchases for the enriching of his Church Though at that time Abuses in the Administration of Church-Revenues Bishops and Deacons had the care of the Revenues of the Church yet notwithstanding even in the time of Constantine many abuses were committed in the management of them And this made the Fathers of the Council of Gangres to make a Canon against the Eustathians who divided among themselves the Revenues of the Church It was decreed in that Council (1) Conc. Gangr Can. 7. 8. that the Bishop alone and those to whom he did commit the care of the Revenues of the Church should receive and distribute what was bestowed on Churches But it happened not long after (2) Conc. Antioch Can. 25. that the Bishops themselves abused their power For most of them being Poor and charged with Families they reserved part of the Church Rents for their subsistence And all that could be done to put a stop to that corruption was (3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Apost 37. to suffer them to give somewhat to their Reâ—â—tions if they were Poor but withal prohibiting them to sell the Estates that belonged to Churches Nay the Fathers were even obliged not to leave the administration of the Revenues of the Church in the power of Bishops Priests and Deacons without giving an account of them For the Council of Antioch ordained that the Bishops should give an account of the administration of those Revenues in the Provincial Synod And that the goods which properly belonged to Bishops might not be confounded with those that appertained to their Churches every Bishop upon his Election (1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Apost 39. gave a list of the Goods and Estate that he possessed which was separated from that of the Church to be disposed by will or otherwise at his pleasure according to the Provision of the Civil Law But notwithstanding all this caution the Bishops made themselves still Masters of the Revenues of the Church and the Fathers were obliged to create Treasurers or Stewards to take the care of them
belonging to Monasteries lived only by their labour and the Alms they received as being poor And since they were not employed in Ecclesiastical Functions they could not apply to themselves these words of St. Paul They which wait at the Altar are partakers with the Altar And therefore it seems they ought never to pretend to the enjoyment of Church Revenues which according to Natural Evangelical Law belong to none but the Ministers of the Church The contrary notwithstanding hath come to pass For most part of Church-Men have been deprived of the Revenues that belonged to them and the Monks endowed therewith It hath been already observed that Monks applied themselves much to Prayer and that that got them the Charity of many private persons But since Bishops allowed them to have Oratories or Churches for their own use this Charity was doubled and People began to leave their Parish Churches and flock to their Chappels Nay there were some Monks that made Fonts in their Monasteries in the same manner as there are in Baptismal Churches The Bishops did indeed forbid them to administer any Sacraments but to those of their Monastery and denied them Baptismal Churches But though they were at that time subject to them in all things even in what concerned the Monastick Discipline yet it was not in their Power to hinder the People from giving them Charity There were nevertheless some Bishops who would have reduced them to the observance of the Ancient Canons and not suffered them to have Priests among them But Pope Gregory who was favourable to the Monks wrote in their behalf to one of his Suffragans that he should permit them to Celebrate Mass in their Monastery The Original of private Masses and that was chiefly the Original of private Masses which have been very useful to the Monks and bring at present some profit to most Religious Societies It is to be seen in Ancient Manuscript Missals that in that which they call the Canon of the Mass mention was made of the Alms which the Priests received For whereas the Priest says only these words Remember Lord thy Servants and Hand-maids and all who are present He heretofore said Remember Lord thy Servants and Handmaids who make me subsist by their Alms. (1) Memento domine famulorum famularumque tuarum omnium circumstantium Memento domine famulorum famularumque tuarum quorum eleemosynis sustentor Can. Missal MS. With many other words which are not at present in the Canon of the Mass As it hath always been the belief of the Church that Prayers and especially those of the Sacrifice were very advantageous to the dead so the Monks quickly found the benefit of having Priests among them thereby to attract the Charity of the People which turned to very good account to them To them may likewise be Attributed the Original of Private Chappels and the multiplication of Altars for celebrating several Masses at one and the same time For according to Ancient Custom it was not lawful to say more than one Mass at which all assisted and it was even a thing unheard that many should celebrate Mass the same day upon the same Altar Which Custom is still observed in the Eastern Church In the Formularies of Marculphus many Deeds of Cessions or Donations in favour of Monasteries are to be found The most Common form was expressed in these Terms JN the Son of N. give to such a Monastery (1) Pro remedio animae meae for the remedy of my Soul such such goods Children made the like Donations to Churches and especially to Monasteries for the repose of the Soul of their Father or Mother The form of Ancient Donations It was enough for most part to put these Terms in general into the deed (2) Pro mercede animae meae vel genitoris genitricis meae For the remedy of my Soul or of the Soul of my Father or Mother without particularising the Number of Masses as it is practised at present And by that means they might receive all the Foundations that presented without being obliged to encrease the Number of Priests It is true there are other Forms of Pious Legations which are larger and wherein besides these terms pro remedio animae nostrae it is likewise added ut pius deus dominus noster Ann. 1061. Jesus Christus peccata nostra dimittere minuere dignetur paradisi portas nos gaudentes introire jubeat ut in ultimo tremendo Judicio non inter hoedos ad sinistram sed inter oves ad dextram aggregari mereamur consortio c. But in these Deeds there is only mention made of Prayers in General There are nevertheless pretty Ancient Forms wherein mention is made of particular obligations wherewith the Founders or Benefactors charge the Monasteries But these Deeds are very rare and even sometimes supposititious The Emperour Lovis II. Son of Lotharius in a Priviledge which he granted to the Abbey of Casaur seated in the Abruzzo of which he was the Founder obliges the Monks to say daily three Masses for him to sing the Hundred and twentieth Psalm in all the Offices and Hymns of Vespers and Matins and that for the ransom or remedy of his Soul This priviledge is Printed at the end of the sixth Tome of the Book Entituled Italia Sacra and though the Author hath taken it out of some Cartularies yet there appear several Additions and Marks of Forgery which I found by comparing it with an Ancient Cartularie of that Monastery where the same Priviledge is written without all these Additions It is true the Number of the Masses and the other Obligations that are in Print are likewise in the Manuscript but seeing in that Cartulary there are many other Priviledges of the same Emperour in favour of the Monastery for the same thing where these Conditions are not to be found there is ground to doubt of the truth of that Priviledge besides that in the first Deed of the Foundation there is nothing of it mentioned However it be it is certain that those kinds of Grants contained nothing commonly but Obligations for Prayers and sometimes for Masses and that but in general Which hath much contributed to the augmenting of the Revenues of Monasteries because the Monks could still receive new Foundations Pious Legacies without obliging themselves for all that to any new Obligations and private Persons who were perswaded that the Prayers of the Monks would be available to them made no difficulty of giving their goods to Monasteries Means of acquiring Estates among the Monks By this means the Monks have acquired great Estates in Lands which because they would not labour them themselves they let out by a kind of Leases or Copy-holds which they called convenientiae There was no notice taken at that time of the Canon Laws which prohibit the Alienation or Farming out of Church Lands for a long term of years they were then as all
effect real Titles which give to Comendatary Abbots all the Rights which Regular Abbots enjoyed to whom they have succeeded That Principle which is unquestionable being supposed it is plain enough to whom the Right of Patronage belongs whether to the Abbot alone or to the Monks Jointly with him There needs no more for that but to consult the Right of the Regular Abbots of every Order If the Constitutions and Custom of the Order attribute to the Abbot alone the honorary Rights there is no doubt but the Abbot Commendatary ought to enjoy the same Rights If on the contrary the Regular Abbot cannot enjoy these Rights but with consent of the Community and that he be not the absolute Master of them they must be divided betwixt him and his Community in the same manner as temporal goods are For then the Rule gives to the Monks the same power in respect of their Abbot as the Canon Law gives to Canons in regard of their Bishop We must nevertheless take notice that it is not enough to establish the Right of Monks that the Abbots have taken the counsel or even the consent of the Community when there has been occasion of nominating to Benefices for many may have done that without any obligation upon them from their Constitutions But it must besides be made out that their Nominations would have been null without the consent of the Community The reason of that Maxim is because the Canon Law and Popes Bulls give all the honorary Rights to Abbots and so there is no derogating from them but for great reasons It is certain the first Monks were entirely subject to their Abbots in all that concerned their Functions and Employments St. Benet hath also reserved to the Abbot that Superiority over the Religious And when that Order began to receive Lands and that it was necessary to give the charge of them to some Monks in particular the Abbot alone gave them their Commissions which were at first but Administrations though since they are become Benefices I make no doubt but the Popes Bulls which are very favourable to Commendatary Abbots are founded on that Ancient Right of Regular Abbots But as to what concerns Temporal goods the same Bulls of the Pope do not allow them to be alienated because they belong to the whole Community and not to the Abbot alone And therefore when the question is of selling or alienating any Lands or Possessions belonging to the Abbey the Abbot is not then absolute Master but his Community must consent to it For the same reason Commendatary Abbots are obliged to divide the goods and Revenues of the Abbeys with the Monks or to give them Money to the value of their share or Portion And though they are very willing to rest satisfied with a yearly pension yet they have still the same Rights to the Lands and Inheritances It concerns them to have a care that they be not imbazeled in the hands of the Abbot in as much as their Portion diminishing by the diminution of the Revenues of the Abbey their Pension would be lessened at the same time The Abbots themselves cannot hinder the Monks from taking cognisance of the Leases which they make of the Lands of their Abbey and from having always an eye over their actions because they have the same right that the Abbots have of enjoying the Revenues of the Monastery Agreements betwixt Abbots and Monks That common Right of the Abbots and Monks in regard of the Temporal Profits of Abbeys has given occasion to Agreements and Transactions that are made betwixt them for the partition of the same In France the Revenue of the Abbey is divided into three parts of which there is one for the Monks one for the Charges and a third for the Abbot But the Abbots enjoy commonly two parts because they oblige themselves to defray the charges and if they neglect to do it a third part of the Revenue may be sequestrated until it be done Upon that foot it is easy to decide the difficulties that might arise betwixt the Abbot and Monks about the division of the Revenues There needs no more but to give a third part to the Monks and two thirds to the Abbot who is obliged to the reparations of the Fabrick payment of Tenths and other Charges As to the honorary Rights they ought not to fall under a dividend because by the Canon Law they all belong to the Abbot alone who may make them over either in whole or in part to his Monks But that gratuitous Concession does not prejudice the Rights of his Successours because the Abbot can only dispose during his life of the Rights that subsist in his person and the Monks cannot enjoy them after the death of him that hath granted them because that Concession is no more in force It is not the same as to Agreements or Transactions because all Transaction supposes the Right of two Parties who are agreed together and so the agreement will always subsist in respect of the Religious though the Abbot be dead until it be broken off by his Successour In France Abbots may break the Agreements of their Predecessours especially if they think themselves injured We have many instances of that practice And there seems to be reason for so doing because Abbots may make secret Compacts with the Monks and take the advantage of such to the prejudice of their Successours And therefore the Abbots have right to break the Agreements of their Predecessours It is a harder matter to dissolve those Transactions when they have been confirmed at the Court of Rome and in the Parliaments with cognition of the cause for then they become real and by consequent oblige the Successours In that case the Abbots cannot rescind the Concordat or Agreement till they have obtained a Rescript from the Pope and letters from the Parliaments upon a Bill preferred Farthermore we are to take notice that many times the partition of the honorary Rights is inserted in the Concordats with the division of the Revenues and especially the Presentations to Benefices as if that could be divided betwixt the Abbot and Monks It is a vicious clause in the Agreements because it is of the nature of a Concordat that they who Transact have some Right to the thing for which they do Transact otherwise it is not an Agreement but a Concession This Maxim which is undeniable being supposed it is easy to resolve the difficulties that daily happen betwixt Bishops and Religious communities during the Vacancy of the Abbatial See To whom it belongs to present to Benefices during the Vacancy of the Abbatial See The Ordinaries provide to Benefices that are vacant at that time and the Monks also on their side present which daily occasions great suits and it seems that there is nothing as yet fixt and determined as to that But according to the principle which we have laid down there is no doubt but when the Religious Community presents to
of Jerasalem from whom descend those that are called Knights of Malta That Order is much different from other Religious and their Benefices differ also from the nature of all other Benefices They are rather the Administrations of Hospitals than Benesices and in effect that Order began by an Hospital that was built at Jerusalem for the reception of those who went to see the holy places The founding of Hospitals for Lodging of Strangers is Ancient enough and there was either in the Bishops House or elsewhere places appointed for that end that the sick might be taken care of and other charitable works performed for which part of the Revenue of every Church was allotted Afterward in process of time they were distinguished from the common Revenue of Churches and many private persons gave Lands and Inheritances to be erected into places of piety in imitation of Monasteries They cannot be said properly to be Benefices because the Rents of them are not designed for Church men but for all men who are in misery and want And therefore there are as many kinds of Hospitals as there are calamities In the beginning the Bishop had the care of these Monasteries because he ought to provide for the necessities of the Poor and of all those who were in misery as well as for the subsistance of Clerks But the Religious of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem made a particular Body in the Church which hath to this day its particular Constitutions To speak properly there is but one Hospital in all the Order and that Hospital is at present reputed to be in Malta All other private Hospitals or Commanderies are but members of that Hospital on which they depend And therefore their Revenue by Right belongs to the common Treasury of the Order I think Commanderies may be compared to the conventual Prieuries of Monks The Original of Commanderies which in the beginning were only administrations of the Revenues of certain places distant from the principal Monastery As Monks were placed in these Houses to taâ—e care of the Rents so also there hath been a necessity of sending Knights into those places where the Order had Lands The name of Commander hath great resemblance with that of Praepositus which was given to Monks who managed the Rents of these remote Houses Besides their administration was called Obedientia because they depended wholly on the Abbot who gave them that Commission It is Just so with the simple Commanders of Malta who are rather Farmers of the Order than Beneficiaries They have nevertheless converted their Commissions or Farms into a kind of Benetices paying a certain acknowledgment to the common Treasury of the Order and that acknowledgement is called Responsion We must put a difference then betwixt Hospitals which are by Foundation Secular and Regular Hospitals that are possessed by Religious such as are the Commanderies we speak of which are appropriated to the Religious of the Order and cannot be possessed by others Nay it is necessary also that those of the Order be qualified for peaceable enjoying of them and their Benefices are not all of the same nature We must therefore observe that there are amongst them Knights Chaplains and serving Brothers and that there are Commanderies or Revenues assigned to these three different qualities There are besides the great Officers the first of whom is he that at present is called the great Master of the Order and is the Head who in the beginning was the Master of the Hospital Under him are the great Officers of the Order who are for most part Military Officers because of the employments to which they are appointed such as the Admiral Mareschal and others I shall not speak here of the Bayliffs or Conventual Priors who are of the great Cross nor of their other Officers because the Institution of their Order and their Laws are Printed I shall only add that it is to be observed that though that Order be composed of so many Nations yet it is but one only Convent divided into several Tongues Every Tongue contains several Provinces and in every province there is a great Prior who from time to time holds Provincial Chapters For obtaining a Commandery one must be of the Nation where the Commandery lies have performed his Caravans which consist in some years Services at Malta and be of the quality requisite for the Commandery being besides bound up by certain Statutes But they are often dispensed with at the Recommendation of Princes who have also made Concordats with the Knights of Malta as well as with the Popes There is another kind of Knights who also enjoy Church Lands A Military Order wherein one may marry and nevertheless seem neither to be Religious not Ecclesiasticks because they are Married They call themselves however Religious and have their Laws as other Religious have In Spain the Commanders of the Orders of St. James of Calatrava and Alcantara are of that nature There are in France also the Knights of St. Lazarus who may Marry It is pretty difficult though to tell upon what Title these Married Religious possess Ecclesiastical Revenues unless it be said that being by Profession Religious they ought to be obliged to Chastity But that the Pope who according to the Maxims of the New Law is Master of the Canons has dispensed with that Obligation and that by an Apostolical Priviledge they may have Wives Which is conform to the opinion of the ablest Divines who think that the Pope may for lawful causes dispense with Monks as to their Vow of Chastity The married Commanders of these Orders must then be reckoned amongst Regulars and they may in conscience enjoy under the Title of Regulars Church Lands that are appropriated to their Order This at least is the opinion (1) Mart. Navar of one the most learned and strict Canonists of our age who calls Philip II. King of Spain the greatest Prelate in the Church next to the Pope because he was the chief or great Master of the three Military Orders of Spain and enjoyed a good part of the Tithes of Churches within his Territories Phil. 11. the richest Prelate of the Church In this quality of Prelate Regular the King of Spain is the richest Beneficiary in his Kingdom And seeing he is not only great Master of the Orders of St. James Calatrava and Alcantara but is also King of Spain he can as King appropriate to his own use the Revenues of his Commanderies at least as much as is necessary to make him live like a King In the same manner as it is lawful according to the Maxims of the New Law for Cardinals Sons of Kings Nobles and men of Letters to possess several Benefices that they may be able to live according to their quality From all that hitherto hath been said it is easy to Judge how much the Ecclesiastical Discipline hath changed in Beneficial matters and how much the present practice differs from Ancient Customs