Читать книгу The Clergyman's Hand-book of Law: The Law of Church and Grave - Charles Martin Scanlan - Страница 12

Table of Contents

89. Priesthood, Discipline.—The inferior authority in the Church may be said to be in the priesthood, whose rights and duties are fixed by the canon law, but who are still further subject to the reasonable diocesan rules made by the bishop. The disciplinary relation of a priest to his bishop is substantially the same as that of a captain to his colonel, and implicit obedience in accordance with the discipline of the Church may be strictly enforced by the bishop in so far as it relates to ecclesiastical matters, including doctrine and discipline, in which the priest can not resort to the courts of the State, but must submit to the tribunals of the church.168

90. Congregation, Insubordinate, Discipline.—The male members of a congregation are invested with no visitorial or controling power, but only such authority as is given under the laws of incorporation.169 [pg 065] Where an inferior organization, as a congregation, refuses to receive a clergyman appointed by the bishop, it is an act of insubordination to the ecclesiastical authority of the Church and in violation of its discipline, which authorizes the issuing of a peremptory mandamus commanding them to admit the clergyman.170

91. Pastor, Parish, Relation.—When a clergyman's connection with a church had been duly dissolved, he ceased to be pastor of the church and an arrangement with the parish to retain his relation as pastor of such church was nugatory and void.171

92. Clergymen, Citizens.—Clergymen residing in an incorporated town are not exempt from the performance of any duties required of citizens, unless such exemption is given by statute.172

93. Doctrine and Discipline, Authority.—In all matters concerning doctrine and discipline of the Church, the inferior authority, such as ministers, priests, and deacons, as well as the congregation, must submit to the decision of the higher authority, whether bishop, synod, or council.173

[pg 066]

94. Sect, Suit, Property.—A number of people formed a congregation and became incorporated in 1810, the members being mostly of Presbyterian extraction. This independent congregation bought and paid for property, the title vesting in the corporation. In 1811 the congregation passed resolutions unanimously that it “would be imprudent and unscriptural” to establish a new religious sect, and voted to join the First Reformed Dutch Church, which had an organization of inferior and superior authority. The congregation was received into and became a part of the general organization, and remained so until 1860, when a majority of the congregation voted to employ a Methodist minister, and when his name was submitted to the superior authority, the “classis,” he was rejected as not belonging to the church. Then by a majority vote, the congregation seceded and assumed its first name, and thereafter brought suit for the church property. The court held that by joining the First Reformed Dutch Church, the title of the property vested in the congregation of that church as represented by its corporation, and that when the majority seceded and left the church, they had no right nor title to any of the property. And the court laid [pg 067] down the general rule that a majority of a church congregation may direct and control any church matters consistently with the particular and general laws of the organization or denomination to which it belongs, but not in violation of them.174

95. Priest, Salary.—The fact that a bishop who holds the title to all the diocesan property in his own name in trust appoints a priest to the parish or as chaplain to a hospital, does not give the priest a right of action against the bishop personally for his salary. The relation of bishop and priest is not that of employer and employe, but is that of ecclesiastical superior and inferior.175

96. Curate, Induction, Rector.—The jus patronatus of the Spanish law has been abrogated in Louisiana. The wardens of the church can not compel a bishop to institute a curate of their appointment, nor is he in any sense subordinate in his clerical functions to the wardens of any church within his diocese.176 In the absence of a positive rule of the ecclesiastical body, no ceremony of induction is necessary for the rector of a parish.177 A clergyman appointed “permanently” to a rectorship holds it for an indefinite [pg 068] period during the pleasure of the contracting parties, and either of the contracting parties may give the other notice of termination, and with the concurrence of the higher ecclesiastical authority of the diocese, a change may be made.178 It is doubtful, however, whether in most States a permanent appointment would not be construed as a contract for life, determinable only for good cause.179

97. Controversy, Tribunal, Decision.—When the clergyman and his parishioners submit a controversy to an ecclesiastical tribunal, the decision, if not impeached for good cause, is justification in the party conforming to it.180 And a minister who submits to a church tribunal and is ousted after fair hearing and trial, can not obtain a writ of mandamus from the civil court to compel his reinstatement.181 Also, after a minister has been dismissed in due manner by the tribunal of his denomination, the civil court will enjoin him from usurping his office.182

98. Priest, Dwelling, Servant.—A Catholic priest in charge of a congregation at the will of the bishop and occupying a dwelling-house [pg 069] belonging to the church, is a servant and not a tenant, and his right to occupancy ceases with his services.183 The law is different with regard to a Methodist minister who is in charge of his parish by an annual conference and can not be ejected by the congregation or bishop until the next conference, as he has possession of the church property without superior authority.184

99. Injunction, Bishop, Priest, Trial.—On application for an injunction to restrain the bishop from passing a sentence against a priest, the only ground on which a court can exercise jurisdiction is that the threatened action of the bishop will affect the civil rights of the priest.185 A bishop can not remove a priest without an accusation, hearing, or trial, and forbid him to exercise any priestly function where such removal would cut off the priest's income and destroy his means of living in his vocation.186 However, in the same case it was held that a complaint stating that the bishop failed and neglected to assign the plaintiff to the exercise of his office of priest in said diocese to the plaintiff's [pg 070] damage, etc., failed to show that any right of property or civil right was involved and the priest was non-suited, while in the former case an injunction was issued against the bishop.187

100. Confession, Privacy, Authority.—A Catholic priest, although about to administer an office of his religion to a sick person at the latter's request, has no legal authority, by virtue of his priestly character, to forcibly remove from the room a person lawfully there.188

101. Debts, Permission, Presumed.—Notwithstanding a rule or ecclesiastical law of the church that a pastor shall not contract debts in the name or for the sake of the church without the written permission of the bishop, such written permission is not evidence that debts contracted under it are the legal debts of the bishop. The authority which bishops delegate to priests is under the ecclesiastical law and prima facie ecclesiastical authority, and must be presumed to be so in the absence of all evidence to the contrary.189

102. Official Acts, Subscriptions.—The official acts of a minister coming in question incidentally, unless contrary to the statute, [pg 071] are as valid as the official acts of any other officer.190 A clergyman who was engaged to conduct dedication services and was requested by the officers of the local corporation to solicit subscriptions for paying off the indebtedness of the church, but was not appointed agent to receive such subscriptions, had no authority to accept a subscription for the corporation.191

103. Exemptions, Clergy.—The exemptions given ministers by the statutes of some States are liberally construed.192 Without any statutory exemption, the clergy are liable for all duties required of other citizens.193

104. Minister, Contributions, Deposed.—No religious teacher or minister can be enjoined from receiving voluntary contributions, although he has been deposed by some ecclesiastical tribunal.194

105. Fees, Usages, Excess.—The fees of a priest of the Catholic Church are regulated by the laws and usages of that Church, and where in this country the pew rent and collections go for the support of the priest and the current church expenses, a priest is [pg 072] not accountable for the excess of such collections over these expenditures.195

106. Salary, Fees.—Under the act of March, 1814, incorporating a congregation, the congregation, being the legal owners and temporal administrators of the property which it was authorized to hold, had the exclusive power to fix the salary of the parish priest or the tariff of fees for marriages, burial, etc. No such power could be exercised under that act by the Pope or any bishop.196

107. Clergyman, Salary.—Where a clergyman agreed with a congregation that the salary should be what could be raised by subscription, the congregation was bound to use due diligence in procuring subscriptions, and as it did so, that was all that the clergyman could recover.197

108. Curate, Services.—In an action by a curate against a religious corporation for personal services, the court will not inquire into the spiritual relations existing between the parties, but will examine their legal rights only.198

109. Minister, Dismissal, Money Advanced.—After a parish has voted to dismiss [pg 073] the minister, it is not competent to prove irregular conduct or immorality in answer to his claim for salary, without alleging it in the vote of dismissal.199 In Illinois it was held that a priest who advanced money from his private resources for improving church property, had an equitable lien upon the property for all the money advanced, with legal interest.200 But in Pennsylvania, where a priest under the direction of the bishop built a church in his parish for mission purposes, and in doing so expended some of his own money, it was held that in the absence of proof of any rule or custom of the Catholic Church making the payment of such expenses obligatory on the parish, that he could not recover the money so expended from his congregation.201

[pg 074]