WILL
627
WILL
manner as laymen [Cod., lib. I, titt. iii, liv (Ixvi),
§6], and their occlosiastical earnings were not brought
into computation (Cod., lib. I, tit. xxxiii). The same
law applied to regulars also (Cod., lib. I, tit. liv, §7),
but this was afterwards altered, the community
succeeding to the rights of regulars (Novel., v, .5;
cxxiii, 38). While it is not easy in the mass of legis-
lation of the first eight centuries to determine just
what is of ecclesiastical origin, we may conclude that
ancient canons forbade the inferior clergy as well as
bishops to bequeath property that they had acquired
from the church. Early ecclesiastical law gave to
bishops the right of ownership and the disposition
of property by will, while it was not licit for the
clergy of lower grades to own anything, all goods
being possessed in common. Property, too, of
bishops acquired in the episcopate with funds accru-
ing from the church reverted at death to the diocese
[cf. Canon, Apostolorum, nn. 39 (40), 7.5; Gratian.,
P. II, Cau. XII, q. 1). Inventories of private and
ecclesiastical goods possessed by bishojis were pre-
scribed, and the latter were not to be bequeathed
with the former (Counc. Antioch, a. d. 341, xxiv-v;
Counc. Epaon, a. d. 517, xvii).
Private ownership by the clergy of property ac- quired through family or other sources not ecclesias- tical was later acknowledged (III Counc. Carthage, A. D. 397; Gratian., 1. c, q. 3). Bishops and clerics of lower degree were forbidden to leave legacies to those outside the Church, even though relatives (Counc. Carthage, xiii), while bishops were anathe- matized if they named pagan or heretical heirs, or, if dying intestate, their property devolved on such (Codex Eccl. Afric, Ixxxi). The Church, when not constituted heir by bishops, was indemnified under certain conditions in France (Coun. Agde, A. D. 506, xxxiii) and in Spain (I Coun. Seville, a. d. 590, i). According to the Councils of Agde (vi) and Rheims (a. d. 625, xx) property bequeathed to a cleric was considered as given to his church. Canons, particularly of the sixth century, directing bishops (o make the Church their heir, affected hkewise succes- sion by intestacy (.\gde, xxxiii). This restriction applied to bishops only: attempts were frequently made to exclude also heirs of the lower clergy. Leg- islation was enacted against this abuse (Coun. Paris, A. D. 615, vii). The contrary practice by which heirs of intestate bishops appropriated church property had to be guarded against, especially in Spain [Counc. Terragona, a. d. 516, xii; Counc. Lerida , a. d. 546 (?), cap. ult.]. While in Roman law heirs of the clergy succeeded in case of intestacy, care was exercised by the Church that this should be in regard to private property only (Counc. Antioch, 1. c; Chalcedon, a. d. 451, xxii).
When ecclesiastical benefices were estabhshed their income was intended to furnish incumbents proper support: the residue, if any, clerics were encouraged to give in charity while hving, and they were for- bidden to bequeath it even to pious institutions. The Third Lateran Council in 1179 enacted (Deer. Ill, 26, vii) that this residue (see ,Ius Spot.ii) be returned to the church or churches (proportionately) whence it came. The purpose of this legislation was to prevent among the dergv- the insidious vice of avarice, to restrain those who would ama.ss wealth for the enriching of relatives, and likewise to enforce the ancient canons, viz. that such property be em- ployed for religious or charitable ends. Alexander III, then reigning, did not disapprove, however, of (Deer. 1. c, cap. 12) the custom of clerics bequeath- ing this surplus for charitable works, with a moderate sum to servants in appreciation of services rendered, though this was not in accordance with the canons. It wa.s decreed towards the end of the fourteenth century (Thoma-isin, Wt. et Nov. Ecel. Disciplina, P. Ill, 1. 3, Ivii, De Spoliis Cleric.) that these goods
or spoils be reserved to the Camera Apost-olica or
Papal Treasury to be applied to the needs of the
universal Church. Paul III (Romani Pontifices, a.
1.542) insisted on the force of this enactment and ad-
monished those concerned to collect the spoils. Pius
IV (Decens esse, a. 1560) decreed that all the posses-
sions of clerics of which they could not lawfully dis-
pose be reserved at death to the Papal Treasury: this
law was confirmed by Benedict XIV (Apostohcae
servitutis, a. 1741). Various decrees determine in
detail what is embraced in the spoils of clerics. Pius
VII transferred these spoils to the Congregation of
the Propaganda for the support of the missions.
There are, however, many exemptions from the law
of spoils, and Rome was always ready, were it
necessary, to renounce her title to these goods in
favour of the deceased prelate's own church. Special
legislation was enacted at times and agreements
entered into with civil governments in regard to the
estates of clerics. Gradually in the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries it became customarj', and a
special privilege was often granted by Rome to this
effect, for clerics to bequeath their possessions,
ecclesiastical authorities acquiescing to avoid numer-
ous suits and litigations, and because too of the diffi-
culty in individual cases of deciding just what con-
stitutes the residue of the ecclesiastical income in
question, since during life the surplus may have been
given in charity. Many canonists admit (cf. Bened.
XIV, "DeSyn.", L. Vll, c. ii) that clerics really own
or have dominion over this surplus, and hence there
is no obligation in justice on the part of legatees
of restoring these goods. Nevertheless, the law has
not been abrogated, but merely modified by the
Council of Trent (Sess. XXV, can. i, De ref.), pro-
hibiting the use of these goods for profane purposes.
Consequently by reason of ecclesiastical precept, as
well as owing to an obligation in charity, clerics are
bound not to bequeath to relatives or others for their
own use the income of ecclesiastical benefices. Goods
accruing to a cleric from other sources, e. g. from
family, literary pursuits, the exercise of fine arts,
etc., or even the income of his benefice saved by frugal-
ity, may be disposed of without hindrance in life or
at death. On accoimt of changed conditions and
civil legislation clerics are wont to bequeath all their
possessions indiscriminately without regard to the
mode of acquisition. These bequests are valid in
the external forum, though in conscience the testators
may be responsible for the loss suffered by charitable
works. In civil law in most countries the status of a
cleric in this regard differs in no way from that of a
layman, and legal heirs enter in when a cleric dies
intestate.
It is prescribed that bishops leave to their cathe- drals sacred utensils purchased with funds received from the diocese. Bishops are admonished (III Plen. Coun. Bait., n. 269) to provide by testament or other legal document for due succession in church property, and to determine what disposition after death is to be made of their personal belongings. Priests too (loc. eit., n. 277) are exhorted to make their will in due season, being mindful in their lega- cies of the needs of religion and charily. Cardinals when created receive in a brief (De benignitate Sedis Apos.) the right to make a testament. This brief, notwithstanding a previous prohibition of Urban VIII, allows cardinals to bequeath s.acred ve.s.sels, vestments, and the like, to churches, chapels, pious institutions etc., especially to their own churches or titulars. If they do not avail themselves of this right, the articles in question belong to the papal chapel. The six cardinal bishops and abbots nullitis must bequeath such articles to the po[)e's chapel (Pius IX, "Quuni illud", 1 Jvme, 1S47). Regidars, whether superiors or .■subjects, do not enjoy the faculty of making a will, since owing to a vow of
