Folia Canonica 4. (2001)

STUDIES - George Nedungatt: Who is to Administer Church Property? - The Answer of the Ecumenical Councils

WHO IS TO ADMINISTER CHURCH PROPERTY?

119

of Church property (cura rerum). It is an a fortiori argument: one who is trustworthy in greater matters (spiritual care) is to be presumed trustworthy in smaller matters (temporal care) also (cf. Mt 25,21; Lk 16,11). The overriding concern is that the temporal possession of the Church be in safe hands. The bishop is “to administer them all of his own authority.” But he is not to do so all by himself but is to be helped by the presbyters and deacons, who thus not only prevent his being overburdened but ensure transparency. The Apostolic canons on church property reflect and transmit the legislation of the Synod of Antioch held in the year 341. This synod has two canons on the subject, canons 24 and 25, which complete each other. Note that concern for the poor is in the foreground of the institution of church temporalities as well as of the power of the bishop in this matter.

The bishop has the power over the goods of the Church so that he can distribute them to all the needy with the utmost discernment and fear of God. (c. 25). The goods of the Church are to be kept in good condition and guarded with all solicitude and a good conscience that is aware that God sees and judges everything. They are to be administered under the oversight and the authority of the bishop to whom are entrusted the souls of those who join the Church. The property of the Church must be transparent and known to the presbyters and deacons around the bishop, so that these know and are not ignorant of what belongs to the Church (c. 24). 5

The bishop may take what is needed for himself and for the brethren received as guests, but not for his comforts; in fact he is to administer the revenues of the Church “with the consent of the presbyters and deacons” and not entrust their administration to his brothers, sons or other relatives under pain of having to render an account to the provincial synod (c. 25). The presbyters and deacons must carefully distinguish the Church property from the personal property of the bishop so that neither suffers harm after his death (c. 24).

The provision that the bishop may also serve his own needs out of Church property is based on the Old Testament law (Deut 18,1-2), taken over by Jesus (Mt 10,10; Lk 10,7) and enforced by St. Paul as the Lord’s command (1 Cor 9,4,7,14). These biblical norms presuppose that like the priests of the Jerusalem temple the ministers of the gospel have no possessions of their own. That not being always the case after the apostolic age, the canons bring in more precision to prevent abuse as well as forestall unfounded suspicion. Apostolic canon 40 lays down that, if the bishop has any personal property, it should be clearly distinguished from Church property, which he is to administer as God’s economus (finance officer) avoiding all nepotism. In this there was the example of the Roman emperor himself, who had his private property called Patrimonium Caesaris (Caesar’s patrimony), which was a private chest different from the

5 JOANNOU, Les canons (nt. 2) 123 (my translation from the Greek).