Posted By DrTank09 at 05:20 AM - Sun Feb 05 2017
I have a feeling that the organization can not become a title holder. Even with the monastic land rights of the Tudor era, there was a general hierarchy with who held the title for the land.
We know that the Mayor can be Mayor without owning the land, so It would be my thought that if an organization owns a large portion of the land, they would still require having a person run it, otherwise we get into the issue of one member setting things one way while another simultaneously attempt to do it the other way.
Thank you for your informative response. I've been binge reading and watching all the DJ's and Q&As for the last two days and know that I've likely missed stuff. :D
Whether SBS implements anything similar for CoE is anybody's guess, but historically some organisations did kind of have a title similar/comparable to ones that nobles/aristrocrats had.
Monastic orders often ran village-like communes with Abbots/Abbesses at the head, with off-shoot satellite communities ran by a Prior/Prioress under the Abbot of the main community. Over time these religious communities even took on "lay brothers and sisters" (un-ordained residents) to take on the menial tasks to free the ordained monks and nuns to pursue more higher and/or scholastic pursuits. These lay-persons were free to marry and raise families there. As such Abbots pretty much acted as a Mayor of sorts, or even a Lord of the Manor.
Bishops often held so much sway that they were often granted charge of the civil matters of the region under their purview on top of their ecclesial duties. These bishops were known as Prince-Bishops (see Markof's link above), and are very comparable to Counts or perhaps even Dukes in some cases.