The Purposes of the Church's Temporal Goods (Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83) E-Book

Andrea G. Röllin

• Herausgeber: GRIN Verlag
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Beschreibung

Essay from the year 2018 in the subject Theology - Miscellaneous, , language: English, abstract: The allegation that the goods of the Roman Catholic Church are not always administered and used according to their ecclesiastical purpose can be heard time and again, especially in the German-speaking countries, and is fueled by corresponding financial church scandals that have become public knowledge. The general prevailing view is that the Church's goods should be used for conducting worship services, the construction and maintenance of places of worship (churches, chapels), the remuneration of church employees and – above all – charitable purposes. This raises the question of whether this view coincides with the canonical approach.

Leseprobe

Imprint

Copyright © 2018 GRIN Verlag, Open Publishing GmbH

GRIN – Your knowledge has value.

This e-book is copyright material and must not be copied, reproduced and distributed except as specifically permitted by the publishers.

Upload your papers now on www.grin.com and publish them worldwide.

Cover image: Andy Hay @Flickr.com

The Purposes of the Church's Temporal Goods

(Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83)

Andrea G. Röllin

Dr. iur. et BTh, Rechtsanwältin

Contents

1. Introduction

2. An Overview of the Historical Development of the Purposes of Ecclesiastical Goods

3. The Demand of the Second Vatican Council:  Strict  Appropriation of Ecclesiastical Property

4. Different Purpose Declarations in CIC/17 and CIC/83

5. Appropiation in the Legislative Reform

6. The Concept Used in CIC/17 and CIC/83

7. Ecclesiality of the Purposes Mentioned in the Applicable Law

8. Content of the Purposes Specified in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83

9. Ranking of these Purposes

10. Direct or Indirect  Use of Assets for their Intended Purpose

11. Limiting Function of Asset Purposes

12. Appropriated Legal Unity of Ecclesiastical Goods

13. Conclusion

Footnotes

1. Introduction

(1) The allegation that the goods of the Roman Catholic Church are not always administered and used according to their ecclesiastical purpose can be heard time and again, especially in the German-speaking countries, and is fueled by corresponding financial church scandals that have become public knowledge. The general prevailing view is that the Church's goods should be used for conducting worship services, the construction and maintenance of places of worship (churches, chapels), the remuneration of church employees and  – above all – charitable purposes. This raises the question of whether this view coincides with the canonical approach.

2. An Overview of the Historical Development of the Purposes of Ecclesiastical Goods

(2) From the fifth century onward, it was widely established that the church's income was divided by four namely the quarter for the poor, the quarter for the church, the quarter for the bishop and the quarter for the clergy, thus indicating the purpose of these shares. These purposes still appear today in an adapted form within a general view of the Church's own purpose.[1] Moreover, the text of Canon 1254 § 2 of the Codex Iuris Canonici of 1983 (CIC/83) reminds us of the trilogy of the purposes of ecclesiastical goods: The poor – the cult – the proclamation, which originated in the Church from the Protestant spirit: Whatever the apostles received was for the poor and for the practicing their apostolic mission.[2]  The purposes stipulated today in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 – the orderly conduction of the whorship services, guaranteeing the appropriate support of the clergy and other church servants as well as practicing the works of the apostolate and charity, especially towards the poor  -  have been a tradition[3] since Gratian's time (the end of the 11th century until before 1160)[4]. Despite many aberrations in the history of ecclesiastical property law, assisting the needy was and is the genuinely Christian purpose of temporal goods.[5] In old documents, the poor are the first and most important purpose.[6] The passage ‘especially towards the poor’ in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83, of art. 17 par. 3 of the decree Presbyterorum Ordinis of 7 December 1965 (PO) still draws attention to this today. In it, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council (1962 - 1965) wanted to point out the original purpose of ecclesiastical property, which, over the centuries, threatened to be lost in a multitude of individual canonical provisions.[7]

3. The Demand of the Second Vatican Council:  Strict  Appropriation of Ecclesiastical Property

(3) The Second Vatican Council insisted that the funds needed by the Church must be used to fulfil its mission (Art. 8, para. 2 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of 21 November 1964 [LG]). For the church may possess temporal goods only for the fulfilment of its own purposes (Art. 76 para. 5 of the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes of 7 December 1965 [GS]).[8] Art. 76 GS demands the appropriation of ecclesiastical property, which the legislature specified in Can. 1254 § 1 CIC/83 in 1983.[9] This § 1 ties the Church's legal capacity ‘to the realization of  its own purposes’.[10] The aforementioned Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 follows this appropriation and defines it more precisely[11] – in accordance with Art. 17, para. 3 PO.

(4) One has to keep in mind that Art. 17, para. 3 PO, which ordained all ecclesiastical goods -  and not only the ecclesiastical tithes as Can. 1496 of the Codex Iuris Canonici of 1917 (CIC/17) had decreed – to the aforementioned threefold purpose,  which was the decisive directive.[12] According to this, all ecclesiastical goods must always be used for the purposes that allow the Church to possess temporal goods, namely: The organization of worship services, the worthy support of the clergy and the promotion of works of mercy and charity, in particular for the benefit of the poor (Article 17, para. 3 PO).[13] Thus, Presbyterorum Ordinis names the three essential purposes of the Church's property  –  worship services, the support of priests and other (clerical) church servants as well as works of apostolate and charity – which are also adopted into the CIC/83 in the legislative process.[14] It follows the instructions of Art. 17, para. 3 PO.[15]  Its statement forms the concrete background for Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83.[16] For Art. 17, para. 3 PO already lists the purposes mentioned in § 2 - with the exception of guaranteeing the support of non-clerical church servants.[17] In this legal provision, the support of other church employees was naturally also included in the clarification of the financial purposes.[18] The second part of the appropriation was  -  for no apparent reason  -  reflected in a shortened version by the Second Vatican Council and is limited to the salaries of the clerics.[19] The third part of the appropriation formula, which was very broadly defined in Can. 1496 CIC/17, is more appropriately formulated in Art. 17, para. 3 PO.[20] The addition ‘especially towards the poor’ (Art. 17 para. 3 PO) has given a positive accentuation to an original purpose, which had been lost in the last formulations of the legal norms.[21] Thus, following an ancient spiritual tradition, the CIC/83 resumes the statement ordaining all ecclesial property to the service for the poor[22].[23]

(5) The statement in Art. 17, para. 3 PO is remarkable in that it claims that the Church may have temporal goods solely for the fulfilment of the purposes mentioned.[24] Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 mentions - in content-related conformity with Art 7 PO - in a demonstrative, non-exhaustive list the Church's own purposes, which all temporal goods of the Church are destined to serve.[25] Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83, which defines[26] the purposes of the Church's temporal goods, replaces the declarative-explanatory ‘namely’ in Art. 17 para. 3 PO with the exemplary-listing ‘special’, which weakens[27]  the strict exclusivity.

(6) However, it must be taken into account that the Second Vatican Council emphatically reminds us of the principles of Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 in Art. 17 PO and Art. 76 and Art. 88 GS. It is clear from these declarations that ownership of goods intended for purposes other than the Church's own mission, or even for purposes that are unnecessary or unhelpful, is neither lawful nor in any way justified.[28] The appropriation of the Church's property stems from the texts of the Second Vatican Council. In doing so, the Council focuses on two essential aspects. The first aspect is the Church's pursuit of poverty of secular means and, ultimately, a justification for the strict attachment of the Church's property to the purposes mentioned by law or the Council, respectively. Money or temporal goods, respectively, should not become the Church's end in itself. The second aspect concerns the scope of the financial purposes. If CIC/17 only names worship services and the support of priests and church servants as explicit purposes, the Council will, when confirming the property purposes mentioned in CIC/17, require an explicit expenditure of the temporal church goods for the works of the apostolate and charity.[29] The actual determination of material goods for the pursuit of institutional purposes justifies the legitimacy of the Church's possession of these goods (cf. Art. 17 PO).[30]

(7) However, the purposes mentioned in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 are obviously not identical with the Church's goal, which is building the Kingdom of God and the salvation of mankind. All (partial) purposes are designated to this one goal. Unlike the Church's goal, the purposes provide information about the means to be used. From the Church's goal, which belongs to the religious, supernatural order (cf. Art. 42 GS), the purposes receive their ecclesiastical significance.[31] Priests, for whom the Lord is ‘possession and inheritance’ (Nm 18,20), may lawfully use temporal property only for purposes consistent with Christ's teachings and the order of the Church (Art. 17, para. 2 PO).[32]

4. Different Purpose Declarations in CIC/17 and CIC/83

(8) Can. 1254 § 1 CIC/83 and Can. 1495 § 1 CIC/17 speak of different purposes in order to achieve the Church's goals via the Church's assets.[33] The two legal provisions implicitly refer to the purposes mentioned in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 and Can. 1496 CIC/17. These two regulations deal with the specific purposes of the Church's assets.[34]

(9) With regard to the purposes mentioned in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83, reference can be made to the introductory chapter 1 outlined above. They are already mentioned in Can. 114 § 2 CIC/83.[35] In Can. 1496 CIC/17,  CIC/17 dedicates its own canon to the purposes of the Church's temporal goods.[36] It mentions the following appropriation for church tax: ‘...what is necessary for the divine cult, for the worthy support of clerics and other church servants and for the remaining (Church's) own purposes’. These purpose triads – 1. Material expenses for the worship services, 2. Remuneration of clerics and other employees in the Church's service,  3. Other purposes specific to the Church – have undergone a long development in the legal formation of the ecclesiastical tax and levy system in internal and external Church disputes and grown.  However, the CIC/17 lacks the appropriation for the ecclesiastical property as a whole. Nevertheless, this defect must not hide the fact that the appropriation offered in Can. 1496 CIC/17 applies to all ecclesiastical assets.[37]

(10) The asset purposes of ensuring the worship service as well as the support of clerics and helpers or servants of the Church are thus found in both legal texts of Can. 1496 CIC/17 and Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83.[38] Even though the legislator takes up Can. 1496 CIC/17 in the latter, he complements it with the demand for service to one's neighbour, which is important to the Council.[39] Can. 1496 CIC/17, on the other hand, leaves room for almost any use of the Church's temporal goods, for all its own purposes that could be of concern to the Church.[40] Furthermore, it seems as if Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 is content to name the purposes of the temporal goods, while Can. 1496 CIC/17 still emphasizes that it is the Church's right to demand support from the faithful for the necessary goals or purposes, respectively.[41]

(11) Even if the legislature already established the church's assets' appropriation in 1917, this concern would certainly not be weakened[42] by the reorganization of the individual canons and the associated advance of the designation of purpose to the beginning of property law.

5. Appropiation in the Legislative Reform

(12) Although the drafts of the CIC Reform Commission spoke of ‘His own purposes’ with the addition 'which were determined by Christ's teachings and the order of  His Church'[43], the conciliar reference to the special appropriation of the Church's property for the poor was omitted.[44] In 1980, the Commission dispensed with an explicit reference that the following property purposes are in accordance with Christ's teachings and the Church. The Commission was content with a reference to § 1 and the ecclesiological appropriation referred to therein.[45] Only after the submission of many consultative bodies on this subject[46] was the Council's statement included in the legislative text in its unabbreviated version.[47]  The property purpose of the work of charity is supplemented by a purpose that these works are to benefit the poor in particular.[48] Based on the idea of a poor Church, which the Second Vatican Council expressly confirmed in its decisions, the legislature initiates a concentrated appropriation of the ecclesiastical property law for the purposes of worship services, the support of the clergy and church servants as well as for works of the apostolate and charity.[49]

(13) In Can. 94 § 4 of the draft Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis,[50] the declarative-explanatory 'namely' of the conciliar purpose, meaning the more detailed list of the purposes that catch the eye, was replaced by the exemplary-listing 'special'. The purpose has thus acquired an exemplary character; any other use of ecclesiastical property beyond the three purposes is not only kept open, but simply legitimized.[51] The Second Vatican Council and the unsuccessful draft of a Lex Ecclesiae Fundamentalis initiated a reconsideration of the purpose of the ecclesiastical property.[52]

6. The Concept Used in CIC/17 and CIC/83

(14) The translation of finis in connection with Can. 1254 CIC/83 and Can. 1495 § 1 and Can. 1496 CIC/17 does not seem to simply match the German legal terms for ‘goal’ or ‘purpose’. Thus, with regard to an exact translation, the term ‘goal’ should be favoured and concerning the contents-intentional definition, ‘purpose’ would be appropriate.[53] The German edition of CIC/83 as well as literature translate the Latin word fines (majority of finis) with ‘purposes’. If you follow the common dictionaries, however, you will find that finis - to be exact - should rather be translated with the legal term for goal.[54] With reference to Can. 1495 CIC/17, which can probably be regarded as a fundamental source for the valid canons, Rudolf Köstler particularly states the meaning ‘purpose, goal, intention’[55].[56] Even if the terms ‘purpose’ and ‘goal’ are mostly used synonymously, the question remains open - from a canonical point of view - whether the church's assets are actually oriented towards goals that can be reached – and rather static – stations of the path of faith, or towards purpose, which in its cause-related purposefulness demands and leaves room for dynamic process-related development.[57]Winfried Schulz seems to use the terms ‘purpose’ and ‘goal’ almost synonymously.[58] In view of the Church's purposeful orientation towards Jesus Christ, which Canon 1254 CIC/83, in particular § 2, describes can ultimately only be a purpose: Causal means which are the cause of ecclesial property that should support the Church on its path in following Jesus Christ.[59]

7. Ecclesiality of the Purposes Mentioned in the Applicable Law

(15) Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 refers to the Church's own purposes for the achievement of which the temporal goods are intended.[60] The purposes are therefore ecclesiastical. The strong emphasis on the Church's own purposes, the realization of which ecclesial property must serve exclusively, and the explicit quotation of the three primary purposes in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 shows a spiritualizing tendency.[61] When Canon 1254 § 2 CIC/83 emphasizes the proprium of the Church's own purposes, those goals are first and foremost addressed,which can only be realized by the Church. This, of course, means that the list given in this canon is not at all taxative.[62] This is being agreed upon in the teachings, as this already arises from the word ‘special’ (or ‘above all’ in Canon 1007 of the Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium of 1990 [CCEO]),[63] particularly since the insertion of this word indicates other purposes. A minority opinion , however, believes that it was inserted solely because the paragraph generally speaks of the Church's purposes, which is, after all, a taxative definition.[64] An interpretation that the list of purposes in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 is not taxative,  not only includes the word 'special' at the beginning of the list in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 but also follows the different way of speaking of the legislature itself, which has expressed himself at various points in CIC/83 concerning the setting of goals and purposes: Thus - except in property law - the purposes of charity and piety are listed[65] as equal with the promotion of the Christian vocation in today's world (cf. Can. 215 CIC/83) in the fundamental rights provision of freedom of association and assembly, for instance.  Moreover, the purpose of the Church's property indicated in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 is not exhaustive.[66] Otherwise - and at the same time more comprehensively - stipulated, however, are ‘the Church's own purposes’, which are to be determined from the entire mission received from its founder. In comparison to those, legal mentions of church purposes are rather of exemplary, indicative value but offer justiciable indications for determining the ecclesiality  of an asset's value and to be able to vindicate it to the outside world.[67] The triad of purposes (works of piety, apostolate and charity) can be found in the general norms via a legal person (cf. Can. 114 § 2 CIC/83) as well as slightly modified in the context of the Christian faithfuls obligation to contribute to the needs of the Church (cf. Can. 222 § 1 CIC/83).[68] Works of piety, apostolate or charity are mentioned in Can. 114 § 2 CIC/83 as the purposes of the legal person, who is indeed the carrier of the Church's property. According to Can. 298 § 1 CIC/83, the purposes of the association include a life of higher perfection, the promotion of official worship services or Christian teachings, respectively, and ‘other apostolate works, i.e. projects of evangelization, works of piety or charity and to animate the secular order with the Christian spirit’.[69] According to the list of property purposes in Can. 222 § 1 CIC/83, the faithful are obliged to contribute to the needs of the Church "so that it may have at its disposal the means necessary for worship services, the works of the apostolate and of charity as well as adequate support of those in its service".[70] These other listings of ecclesial purposes can be inserted into the broad purposes mentioned in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83, while making them more concrete at the same time.[71] This diversity, however, should not be misunderstood in the sense of arbitrariness, as if the determination of the purposes for the acquisition and use of temporal goods in the Church were entirely within its free discretion.[72] In particular, the non-exhaustive listing in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 must not be misunderstood in such a way that any random purposes could be added. Rather, the statement is to be understood concentratively as a general clause-like and binding framework of interpretation.[73] To the extent that the Church's property serves the mission of the church in its basic purpose, it also finds its limit.[74]

8. Content of the Purposes Specified in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83

(16) The purpose ‘worship service’ includes everything regulated in the Fourth Book of CIC/83 regarding the Holiness Service of the Church, as the sanctification of man is always worship service at the same time (cf. Can. 834 § 1 CIC/83).[75] Thus, the purpose of worship service may include the construction and maintenance of churches, their furnishings, the organisation and financing of worship services, etc.[76] Works of piety (Can. 114 § 2 and Can. 1285 CIC/83) fulfil the sanctification and thus the divine service from the base.[77] The liturgy as worship service and as thanksgiving is probably the most noble task of the Church and therefore also the first purpose of the Church's financial wealth.[78]

(17) The purpose of ‘appropriate support of the clergy and other church servants’ is materially regulated in Can. 281, Can. 231 § 2 and Can. 1286 CIC/83. The training and further education of the clergy and laypersons in ecclesial service should also be subsumed under this purpose.[79] In this context, appropriate spiritual, cultural and scientific training must also be provided for the clergy.[80]

(18) With regard to the purpose of the apostolate, - in addition to the ministry of sanctification - it includes the entire ministry of the Church's preachings,  which the third book of the CIC/83 is dedicated to.[81] It would, at any rate, be difficult - in light of the conciliar definition of the apostolate as any activity of the Church dedicated to focusing the entire world on Christ (art. 2 of the Decree Apostolicam Actuositatem of November 18, 1965) - to imagine any ecclesial purpose that is not included in the ‘works of the Holy Apostolate’.[82] Finally, the purpose ‘caritas’ encompasses the salvation of the whole person, especially in his religious dimension, and thus extends beyond the earthly well-being. It hereby overlaps with the apostolate without merging with it.[83] The execution of apostolic and charitable works, especially for the poor, is a very broad field that requires appropriate means.[84]

(19) There are also complex purposes. Education, for instance,  can be seen as another ecclesial purpose mentioned outside Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 but it is also included in the goals of the apostolate (preaching ministry) and charity as caring for the whole person. Not only religious instruction but the Catholic education system as a whole, including university education, is therefore within the scope of the Church's purposes. Possession and use of social means of communication are also to be included here.[85] Institutions of ecclesiastical administration and the judiciary are to be assigned to one or more of the aforementioned purposes according to their proprietary rights, as the personnel working for them require adequate support. The material needs serve the apostolate  directly or indirectly as the overall goal of the Church or caritas. In addition, they are owned by a legal person who keeps track of these goals in general – such as the diocese – or by a legal person chosen specifically for one of these goals.[86]

(20) The scope and content of each of these purposes are to be broadly interpreted so that they can be fully achieved.[87]

9. Ranking of these Purposes

(21) In a certain sense, the weighting of the purposes is also relevant for determining the nature of the Church's property.[88] Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 mentions as its first purpose the orderly conduct of the worship services, followed by ensuring the appropriate support of the clergy and other church servants and finally the execution of the works of the apostolate and charity, especially towards the poor. In Can. 1007 CCEO, however, the worship service does not take the first place as in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83. It mentions the works of the Apostolate and Caritas, and only then talks of the appropriate support of church servants.[89] The Nuntia did not justify this change in Can. 1022 of the Codex Iuris Canonici Orientalis (CICO) scheme until November 1988, but not in 1986[90].[91] The question of whether there is a ranking order among the purposes listed in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83, the teachings answer this differently.[92] Some comments represent the opinion that in the event of conflict, worship services take precedence over ensuring the proper support of clergy and church employees and that they take precedence over the execution of the works of the apostolate and charity. Others disagree.[93] A negative answer seems to result from the different order of the same purposes in Can. 222 § 1 CIC/83 and the parallel Can. 1007 CCEO.[94] The list in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 of the ecclesial goals to be pursued with the temporal goods (organization of the cult, fair support of the clergy, apostolic and charitable activities, above all to help the needy) is only indicative[95].[96] It is obvious that the order outlined in it is not binding as far as the characteristics of the individual goals are concerned. This is a general classification which allows a list of many specific contributions that can be traced back to the purposes described.[97] The sequence does not prefer any of the purposes but rather depends on the concrete circumstances of the time and place (also comp. Cann. 114, 215 and 222 § 1 CIC/83).[98] The sequence is therefore not very important.[99]  Thus, with regard to the question of ranking, Federico R. Aznar Gil should be followed who denies once and for all a predetermined weighting of church purposes, highlighting the elasticity necessary for the Church's assets to be able to be used at any time according to the needs of the Church's mission[100].[101] Even the Directory of Apostolorum Successores of 22 February 2004 also juxtaposes the purposes mentioned in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 (para. 188) without any weighting.[102] By the way, the CIC/83 also does not determine any particular ranking but includes a clear opening for Caritas, which is now explicitly mentioned among the purposes for the Church's property (in contrast to Can. 1493 § 2 CIC/17) and constitutes a recognized reason for disposals (Can. 1293 n. 1 CIC/83 in contrast to Can. 1530 § 1 n. 2 CIC/17) or donations from the freely available assets (Can. 1285 CIC/83).[103] It is thus not to be assumed that the sequence of the listing in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 is binding and fulfils all purposes and that none of the specific purposes may be affected, but rather that the more urgent needs must be considered.[104] Moreover, the trilogy of purposes of this canon marks the chronological order in which these three purposes developed  in the Church.[105] In practice, the ecclesiastical stewards must ensure that none of the purposes becomes so dominant that it excludes the fulfilment of the others, even though circumstances may lead to one purpose or another being given priority at a certain time.[106]

10. Direct or Indirect  Use of Assets for their Intended Purpose

(22) An asset can serve the Church's purpose directly, such as a church building for worship services, or only indirectly, by generating income as economic assets, which, in turn, serve the Church's purpose directly, such as property to cover the Church's construction costs. In both cases the criterion in Can. 1254 § 1 CIC/83 ‘for the realisation of its own purposes’ is fulfilled.[107]

11. Limiting Function of Asset Purposes

(23) At the same time, however, the purposes of the Church's property define the framework within which the existence, acquisition and use of the Church's property in line with the essence of the Church and by virtue of the canon law is legitimate. Can. 1254 CIC/83 shows this intrinsic limit to the Church's property as well as the self-commitment of the canonical legislator eminating from it, without Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 being a lex irritans, however (cf. Can. 10 CIC/83). The statements of the Second Vatican Council on the Church's temporal goods (Art. 17 PO; Art. 76 GS) also point to a limitation by the purpose. By their very nature, ecclesiastical legal persons pursue ecclesiastical purposes. They are therefore essentially tied to them in their legal capacity as well. To determine this limitation in concrete terms and to urge compliance, is a matter for the ecclesiastical authority in the execution of its supervision of asset management.[108]

(24) The realization of the Church's purposes is certainly not a reserve of the Church's property in the narrower sense or of ecclesiastical legal persons, respectively. Rather, such purposes can also be realized by private ecclesiastical legal persons (Can. 114 § 1; Can. 299 § 1 CIC/83), by church associations without any ecclesiastical legal entity or even by private persons. The ecclesiastical authority is authorized to determine this purpose even in the case of assets in non-ecclesiastical sponsorship.[109]

(25) The appropriation of temporal goods in the Church, which the CIC/17 knew only with regard to tax law (cf. Can. 1496 CIC/17), is generalized in CIC/83 and thus constitutive for the Church's property as such.[110] The spiritual purpose of the Church's property is not defined, however; it is defined by the owner, not by the purpose (Can. 1257 CIC/83).[111]

12. Appropriated Legal Unity of Ecclesiastical Goods

(26) The attachment to the Church's own purposes (cf. Can. 1254 §§ 1 and 2 CIC/83), the common participation of the Church's legal persons in their 'innate and independent right' - according to Can. 1254 § 1 CIC/83 -, and the subordination of all of the Church's temporal goods under the supreme authority of the Pope (cf. Can. 1256 CIC/83) make the Church's property appear as a unity despite its many carriers.[112] The purposes have a unifying effect. Since the Church's property is owned by a large number of different legal entities, it is not only its carriers but especially its purposes that justify speaking of the Church's property as a unity.[113] The purposes provide a fundamental moment of unity of all the Church's temporal goods, while preserving the independence of the legal entities. This unity of the Church's property is ultimately guaranteed at the institutional level by the papal leadership primacy, which includes the wealth and excellence of sovereign asset management (Can. 1256 CIC/83).[114] The Pope is a perpetual and visible principle as well as the foundation of the unity of faith and the Church's community (cf. Art. 18 LG). This turn of Art. 18 LG, however, merely substantiates the supreme authority - awarded  by the primacy status - in legislation, jurisdiction and administration for the entire area of the Church's temporal goods and its possible legal entities, so that these goods and their common purposes are constantly and effectively focused on the Church's unity and its mission.[115] The excellent and unique position of the Pope - also with regard to temporal goods - allows him to intervene in this area, especially to protect the ecclesiastical purposes of these goods, to enact general laws on their administration and to reserve the most severe cases for his judgment, possibly even invoking the administration of certain ecclesiastical goods.[116] That means that the limitation of property rights in Can. 1256 CIC/83 is the supreme responsibility of the Pope in order to preserve the strict appropriation of ecclesiastical property but also to have a unifying function in light of the multitude of ecclesiastical property holders.[117]

13. Conclusion

Even though Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 is formulated openly and without prioritizing a purpose, it is intended to ensure that the Church's temporal goods  are used exclusively for purposes which serve the Church's mission. These purposes must therefore particularly correspond to the Church's mission received from Jesus Christ and be interpreted according to his Gospel. The ecclesiastical goods must have no purpose which cannot be justified by the Church's mission. In this sense, the legislature aims with § 2 at a poor church which, in material terms, credibly fulfils its mission but just barely fulfils it. With the emphasis on the fact that the goods should also be used for the welfare of the poor, a poor church is targeted not only for itself  but particularly because of the poor it serves. The purposes mentioned in Can. 1254 § 2 CIC/83 are therefore programmatic for the entire ecclesiastical property law. The limitation to these purposes also serves the Church's unity. The common view described in the beginning does not significantly differ from the view implemented in § 2.

Footnotes

[1]Hans Heimerl/Helmuth Pree with the assistance of Bruno Primetshofer, Handbuch des Vermögensrechts der katholischen Kirche unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Rechtsverhältnisse in Bayern und Österreich, Regensburg 1993, marginal no. 1/21.

[2]José M. Piñero: cc. 1254-1289, in: António Benlloch Poveda (ed.), Código de Derecho Canónico. Edición bilingüe, fuentes y comentarios de todos los cánones, 16th edition, Valencia 2016, p. 559-570, 559-560.

[3] Cf. Robert T. Kennedy, Book V. The Temporal Goods of the Church [cc. 1254-13010], in: John P. Beal/James A. Coriden/Thomas J. Green (ed.), New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law. An Entirely New and Comprehensive Commentary by Canonists from North America and Europe, with a Revised English Translation of the Code. Commissioned by The Canon Law Society of America, New York/Mahwah 2000, p. 1449-1525, 1455.

[4] Cf. Decretum Gratiani, C. 12 q. 1 c. 23.

[5]WinfriedSchulz, in: Klaus Lüdicke (ed.), Münsterischer Kommentar zum Codex Iuris Canonici (loose-leaf binder, Status: April 2018), Essen since 1984, Can. 1254 marginal no. 5.

[6]Piñero, loc.cit., 560.

[7]Schulz, loc.cit., Can. 1254 marginal no. 5.

[8]Gerhard Fahrnberger: Das Zweite Vatikanische Konzil und die Revision des kirchlichen Vermögensrechts, in: Hans Paarhammer (ed.), Vermögensverwaltung in der Kirche. Administrator bonorum Oeconomus tamquam paterfamilias, 2nd edition, Thaur 1988, p. 137-161, 141.

[9]Dieter Maximilian Haschke: Über die Zwecke der Zeitlichen Güter der Katholischen Kirche. Eine Studie zur theologischen Grundlegung des kirchlichen Vermögensrechts, diploma thesis Vienna 2013 (unter: <http://othes.univie.ac.at/30400/> [visited on 28 April 2018]), p. 44.

[10]Heimerl/Pree, loc.cit., marginal no. 1/23.

[11]Haschke, loc.cit., p. 44.

[12]Fahrnberger, loc.cit., 142.

[13]Luigi Chiappetta: I beni temporali della Chiesa, in: derselbe, Il Codice di Diritto Canonico. Commento giuridico-pastorale, ed. by Francesco Catozella/Arianna Catta/Claudia Izzi/Luigi Sabbarese, vol. 2: Libri III-IV-V-VI, 3rd edition, Bologna 2011, p. 529-615, 532 footnote 2.

[14]Haschke, loc.cit., p. 46; cf. Fahrnberger, loc.cit., 141-142.

[15]Fahrnberger, loc.cit., 142 and 160 note 14.

[16]Schulz, loc.cit., Can. 1254 marginal no. 6.