You whom the origin of all light has placed in the great firmament of the Church as a divine star, whose duty it is to illuminate the world, have, together with the reverend bishops, often informed Us of your uncertainty with reference to the question whether monks ought to be permitted, or forbidden to dispose of the ownership of property acquired by them after having embraced a monastic life. You have, as We already stated, frequently urged Us on account of your uncertainty to investigate with you this perplexing point, as the doubts to which it has given rise obscure as with a cloud the light of reason, without which no satisfactory conclusion can be reached. Therefore, always deeply impressed with veneration for Your sacerdotal dignity, We are about to take measures to comply with your request. In the first place, We shall mention what has been laid down by the ancient authorities concerning those who desire to embrace a monastic life, that is, that before entering the one which they desire to live, they must first dispose of all their property by will, and when it has not been done they will be deprived of this privilege, and everything they have will pass to the church in which they have assumed the tonsure. This was decided with reference to such as had already adopted a monastic life (with the exception of those who had surviving children entitled to inheritance), and it was held that this was the best thing that anyone could do, and that nothing ought to be added to or taken from this provision. For he who, having been able to dispose of his property before his change of status, does not make use of his privilege, can then very properly be deprived of it, because he himself is responsible for his disability, and he is, to some extent, considered to have renounced it, and the strictest construction of the law is no longer opposed to its being taken from him. Again, since he has wished to release himself from the anxieties of this world, would it not be absurd for him any longer to support its burdens and submit to its annoyances? Therefore, when anyone has embraced a monastic life, as We have already stated, this decree shall not be supplanted by another, when the person in question has no children. But when there are any children (as it would not be right for them to suffer from the silence of their father), the monastic habit should not altogether deprive them of the right of testation, but it is clear that he can make a will in their favor disposing of the shares to which they are entitled by a just and legal distribution, but so far as the share of the father is concerned, he has no right to dispose of it by will, as all of it belongs to the monastery. But if death, as frequently happens in the course of human affairs, should suddenly prevent the distribution of his property, any provision which he may have made for his children shall, by all means, take effect; but this shall be done in the manner aforesaid, where what belongs to them by law must be set apart for their benefit, and the remainder will go to the monastery. This is the method of disposition of property which anyone may employ before adopting a monastic life. But with reference to property acquired by the father subsequently, and concerning which Your Holiness has applied to Us for a decision, We have thought that a distinction should be made. For anything which a monk was not entitled to leave by will before entering a monastery he cannot dispose of in this way afterwards; as he is then deprived of the right of testation, because, while he was in the world, and the property was in his possession, and he could dispose of it but did not do so, he himself is to blame for his own legal disability; but after he has embraced a religious life, there is no reason why anyone should be prevented from disposing of what is his, either in person or by someone else. If, however, it should be said that for the sole reason that he was a monk, the monastery should be entitled to his entire estate, I do not know whether a decision of this kind is in accordance with monastic regulations or not. For, in the first place, is it proper for those who have professed contempt for the affairs of the world and its riches, to desire to hold them under any excuse whatsoever? Then a monk may have poor relatives, who are in need of a helping hand, and why should he then display a spirit so foreign to humanity as not to relieve their distress by giving them his estate; but should not only repulse his friends and kinsmen as strangers, and retain everything himself for the benefit of the monks; just as We see voracious and greedy men, while eating, manifest reluctance to leave anything for their companions? Nor can a slave be freed from the bonds of servitude; nor anyone entitled to commiseration obtain it; nor a person destitute of the necessities of life hope for relief, when all the property of the monk is transferred to his monastery. Hence We have very properly decided that if anyone, at the time when he embraced the monastic life, consecrated anything to the Church, whatever he may have acquired thereafter he shall be at liberty to dispose of in any way that he wishes; but any property that he brought into the monastery in the beginning must be divided into three parts, two of which he can make such disposition as he pleases, and the third will belong to the monastery. This is what We have decided with reference to the point which you have submitted to Us. Your Holiness will communicate these matters which have been decreed to all the metropolitans, and direct them to notify the bishops under their jurisdiction, in order that the latter may inform the churches in their dioceses; so that in this way, both now and hereafter, these provisions may become familiar to all persons and be carried into effect.