Note 35 — The Camacho Ecclesiastical Controversy, 1697–1700

And since the lands of the nuns of Santa Clara retain their immunity and are ranked as spiritual goods, on account of the extreme poverty of those servants of God, does the reverend archbishop regard that only as a physical lack of riches on their part, and no more? or as evangelical poverty which springs from the vow, institute, and profession of the life which they have chosen for Christ, and which the Apostolic See has approved? If the former, the religious frankly state that it is very alien to the ecclesiastical rules, by which the exemption and immunity ought to be measured. Otherwise, innumerable poor people, of those who are commonly called beggars35 through the streets, would secure, on account of being equally destitute of goods with the said nuns of Santa Clara, or perhaps even more so, ecclesiastical exemption from secular judges for their furniture and petty possessions. If the reverend archbishop answers, “the second,” the religious also say, with entire confidence: “What authority is that of this prelate, that he should decide in an official utterance that there is evangelical poverty in the convent of Santa Clara, and not in the other mendicant religious orders? and that the lands of the said convent of Santa Clara enjoy exemption on account of their evangelical poverty and religious institute, while it may not be enjoyed for the same reason by the lands of the other religious orders, which are so distinguished, and are approved by the Church?”