 |
| Part ofa series on the |
| Canon law of the Catholic Church |
|---|
|
Liturgical law |
|
Supreme authority,particular churches, and canonical structures
|
|
Temporal goods (property) |
Procedural law
|
Legal practice and scholarship
|
 Catholicism portal |
Simony (/ˈsɪməni/) is the act of selling church offices and roles or sacred things. It is named afterSimon Magus,[1] who is described in theActs of the Apostles as having offered two disciples ofJesus payment in exchange for their empowering him to impart the power of theHoly Spirit to anyone on whom he wouldplace his hands.[2] The term extends to other forms of trafficking for money in "spiritual things".[3][4]
The earliest church legislation against simony may be that of the forty-eighth canon of theSynod of Elvira (c. 305), against the practice of making a donation following a baptism.[5]: 60
Following theEdict of Milan (313), the increased power and wealth of the church hierarchy attracted simony.[5]: 30 There are several accusations of simony (not by that name) againstArians, fromAthanasius of Alexandria,Hilary of Poitiers,Pope Liberius andGregory of Nazianzus.[5]: 34–36 Many Church Fathers, such asAmbrose, spoke out against the selling of ministries.[5]: 56
Anti-simony provisions inChurch Council canons (andpapal bulls) became common: the First Council of Nicaea (325), theSynod of Antioch (341), and the Councils ofSerdica (343–344),Chalcedon (451), and theCouncil of Orléans in 533.[5]: 62, 66, 121
The purchase or sale of ecclesiastical office was associated with the figure ofSimon Magus in theActs of the Apostles and his name came into use as a term.[2] Important in popularizing the word 'Simony' wasPope Gregory I (590–604), who called such exchanges the "simoniac heresy".[6]
Although considered a serious offense againstcanon law, simony is thought to have become widespread in theCatholic Church during the 9th and 10th centuries.[7] In the eleventh century, it was the focus of a great deal of debate.[8] Central to this debate was the validity of simoniacal orders: that is, whether a cleric who had obtained their office through simony was validly ordained.[9]
TheCorpus Juris Canonici, theDecretum[10] and theDecretals of Gregory IX[11] all dealt with the subject. The offender, whethersimoniacus (the perpetrator of a simoniacal transaction) orsimoniace promotus (the beneficiary of a simoniacal transaction), was liable to deprivation of his benefice and deposition from orders if asecular priest, or to confinement in a strictermonastery if aregular. No distinction seems to have been drawn between the sale of an immediate and of a reversionary interest. The innocentsimoniace promotus was, apart from dispensation, liable to the same penalties as though he were guilty.[12][clarification needed]
In 1494, a member of theCarmelite order, Adam of Genoa, was found murdered in his bed with twenty wounds after preaching against the practice of simony.[13]
In the 14th century,Dante Alighieri depicted the punishment of many "clergymen, and popes and cardinals" in hell for beingavaricious or miserly.[14]
He also criticised certain popes and other simoniacs:[15]
Rapacious ones, who take the things of God,
that ought to be the brides of Righteousness,
and make them fornicate for gold and silver!
The time has come to let the trumpet sound
for you; ...
Simony remains prohibited in Roman Catholic canon law. In the Code of Canon Law, Canon 149.3 notes that "Provision of an office made as a result of simony is invalid by the law itself."[16]
TheChurch of England struggled with the practice after its separation from Rome. For the purposes ofEnglish law, simony is defined byWilliam Blackstone as "obtain[ing] orders, or a licence to preach, by money or corrupt practices"[17] or, more narrowly, "the corrupt presentation of any one to an ecclesiasticalbenefice for gift or reward".[18] While English law recognized simony as an offence,[19] it treated it as merely an ecclesiastical matter, rather than a crime, for which the punishment was forfeiture of the office or any advantage from the offence and severance of any patronage relationship with the person who bestowed the office. BothEdward VI andElizabeth I promulgated statutes against simony, in the latter case through theSimony Act 1588 (31 Eliz. 1. c. 6) andSimony Act 1688. The cases ofBishop of St. David'sThomas Watson in 1699[20] and ofDean of YorkWilliam Cockburn in 1841 were particularly notable.[21]
By theBenefices Act 1892,[which?] a person guilty of simony is guilty of an offence for which he may be proceeded against under theClergy Discipline Act 1892 (55 & 56 Vict. c. 32). An innocent clerk is under no disability, as he might be by the canon law. Simony may be committed in three ways – in promotion to orders, in presentation to a benefice, and in resignation of a benefice. Thecommon law (with which thecanon law is incorporated, as far as it is not contrary to the common or statute law or the prerogative ofthe Crown) has been considerably modified by statute. Where no statute applies to the case, the doctrines of the canon law may still be of authority.[12]
As of 2011[update], simony remains an offence.[22][better source needed] An unlawfully bestowed office can be declared void by the Crown, and the offender can be disabled from making future appointments and fined up to £1,000.[23] Clergy are no longer required to make a declaration as to simony onordination, but offences are now likely to be dealt with under theClergy Discipline Measure 2003 (No. 3).[24][full citation needed][25]
Attribution:
This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Simony".Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 25 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 133–134.
| National | |
|---|---|
| Other | |
| People | |
|---|---|
| Documents and events | |
| Concepts | |
| See also | |
