The Elizabethan Parish in its Ecclesiastical and Financial Aspects by Sedley Lynch Ware

S >> Sedley Lynch Ware >> The Elizabethan Parish in its Ecclesiastical and Financial Aspects

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

By virtue of searching articles of inquiry administered to them,[69]
such as, Is your vicar a double-beneficed man, and, if so, is he
lawfully dispensated? Does he keep hospitality?

If non-resident does he give the fortieth part to the poor? Does your
minister wear a surplice at the appointed times, yea or no? Does he
use the cross in baptism and the ring in marriage?[70] Does your
schoolmaster teach without licence of his ordinary under seal, or no?
Do you know any person excommunicate in your parish who repairs to
church? Do you know anyone ordered by law to do penance, or
excommunicate for not doing the same, who still continues
unreformed?--by virtue of this strict questioning by the ordinary put
to them in written articles before each visitation, church wardens,
and their coadjutors, the sworn men or sidemen, were compelled to
exercise a continual supervision over their minister's conduct as well
as over that of the parishioners generally. This fact, coupled with
the circumstance that they were themselves liable to be reported to
the court and punished if they failed to indict, accounts for the
cautious presentments made by these Elizabethan wardens.

Those of Great Witchingham, Norfolk, for instance, inform the
chancellor that their parson "holdeth two benefices, but whether
lawfully dispensated they know not," and they add that a schoolmaster
in their parish "teacheth publicly, but whether licenced or not they
know not."[71] The wardens of Ellerburn, Yorkshire, present Jane Gryme
for fornication, and add "but whether the curate did churche hir or no
they cannot say."[72] And the following year they bring to the court's
knowledge "that their vicar ... is not resident upon his vicaredg, but
what he bestoweth upon the poore they know not."[73] Lastly, the very
prudent wardens of Pickering in the same peculiar bring in their
presentment in this fashion: "_Qui dicunt et presentant_ there vicar
for that he for the moste parte, but not alwaies dothe weare a
surplesse in tyme of dyvyne service. They present there vicar for that
they ar vncerteyne whether his wif[e] was commended vnto him by
justices of peace, nor whether he was licenced to marrye hir according
to hir Maiestie's iniuncions."[74] The almost unseemly interest here
displayed by the wardens in their vicar's matrimonial relations is
explained by the provisions of article xxix of the Queen's Injunctions
of 1559, which ordain that no priest or deacon shall wed any woman
without the bishop's licence and the advice and allowance of two
neighboring justices of the peace first obtained.

Other parish obligations enforced by the courts Christian through the
churchwardens were the keeping of annual perambulations (or, as we
should say today, beating the bounds of the parish) by parson, wardens
and certain of the substantial men of the parish, in the second week
before Whit-Sunday ("Rogation Week");[75] the exhibiting to the
official of the parish register, or the putting in of copies of it
once a year at Easter;[76] the choosing in conjunction with the parson
of collectors for the poor up to 1597, in most parishes at any
rate;[77] the levying of the 12d. fine on all those who absented
themselves from service;[78] the putting down of all "superstitious"
rites in the parish, such as the carrying of banners in perambulation
week or the wearing of surplices on such occasions;[79] the ringing of
the church bells on Hallowe'en, or on the eve of All Souls; excessive
tolling of bells at funerals,[80] etc.

From the point of view of their fellow-parishioners, no doubt, the
most important function of the wardens was that of administering the
parish finances. This subject will be considered at length in the
chapter which follows, but the fact that the spiritual courts enforced
the levying of rates for church repair, etc., through the wardens, as
well as an accounting to the parish of all monies received or
disbursed, concerns us here. When the Ealing wardens were "detected"
to the chancellor of the bishop of London because they had no
pulpit-cloth, no poor-box, nor the Paraphrases of Erasmus, they
appeared and declared in court that they had not provided these things
"nor can do it, for that there is no churche stock wherewith to do
it." Hereupon they were admonished that the judge's pleasure was that
they should procure Mr. Fleetwood and Mr. Knight (evidently two
prominent parishioners) to make an assessment on the parish in order
to purchase these articles, and further that they (the wardens) should
certify to the court at a later day fixed that the rate had been laid
and the missing requisites bought, unless, indeed, some refused to
pay, in which case their names should be handed into court.[81] So,
again, when rector and wardens of Sutton were presented in the same
court for letting their church go to ruin, they protested that the
reason was that L40 "will skant repayre it, and that so mutch cannot
be levied of all the land in the p[ar]ishe." But this excuse was not
for a moment admitted, and they were warned to appear in the next
consistory court to take out a warrant for the assessment of the
lands.[82]

Though the wardens did not themselves in practice always make the rate
directed by the archdeacon, yet they were held responsible for its
making. So true was this that if, after a duly called parish meeting
for the purpose of laying the rate in obedience to the archdeacon's
orders, no parishioners appear, then, in the words of the archdeacon's
official to the wardens of Ramsden Bellhouse (Essex): "if the
inhabitants of the said p[ar]ish will not join with the said church
wardens &c., that then the said churchwardens shall themselves make a
rate for the leveinge of the said charges [etc.] ..."[83]

Finally, the archdeacons or their officials always stood ready to
enforce an accounting by the outgoing wardens to the parishioners or
their representatives. If the accounting was delayed too long, or if
the surplus was not promptly handed over to the incoming (or newly
elected) wardens, then the delinquent officers were cited before the
court. Numerous instances are found in the court records of the
enforcing of this duty. [84]

A permanent parish officer and one over whose appointment the
parishioners had usually no control [85] was the parish minister,
whether officiating rector, vicar or curate. [86] Elizabethan statutes
and canons sought to increase the dignity of the incumbents of cures,
[87] but royal greed did yet more to lower it. [88]

The minister was usually addressed by his parishioners as "Sir" John,
or "Sir" George, etc., quite irrespective of his actual rank,[89] and
this in an age of punctilious distinctions in forms of address. In the
small country parishes the incumbent was often the only, or almost the
only, educated man in the community. His advice had naturally
considerable weight in parish affairs, and his pen was often required
in the drawing up of official or legal documents, certifications or
testimonials, the casting up of parish accounts and the like.[90]

We find in the act-books officiating rectors or vicars presented for
non-residence upon their cures;[91] while rectors and other recipients
of great tithes are "detected" at visitations for not repairing the
chancels in their churches; or not maintaining their vicarage
buildings with barns and dove-cotes;[92] or for not providing quarter
sermons where the clergyman serving the cure was not himself licenced
to preach;[93] beneficed men not resident are arraigned for not giving
the fortieth part of their revenue to the parish poor;[94] resident
ministers indicted for not keeping hospitality,[95] or for not
visiting the sick.[96]

Just as the wardens were to look after the conduct of their minister,
so the minister was required to fill the office of a censor upon the
behavior of the wardens and to report to the ordinary their
delinquencies--as, indeed, the trespasses of any among his
congregation, though the latter task was more particularly assigned to
the wardens and sidemen.[97] Furthermore the minister was the vehicle
through which the commands of the authorities, lay or ecclesiastical,
were conveyed to the parishioners. He was compelled to read these
commands or injunctions at stated times and exhort his hearers to obey
them. For failure to comply with this duty, he might be cited before
the official,[98] and punished by that officer.[99]

The curate of East Hanningfield, Essex, is presented in 1587 for "that
he hathe not geven warninge to the church-wardens to looke to there
dutie in service tyme, for such as are absent from service."[100] The
curate of Monkton, Kent, is brought before the court in 1569 for that
he "doth not call upon fathers and mothers and masters of youths to
bring them up in the fear of God."[101] When the archdeacon sent down
an excommunication against any one of the parish, it was delivered to
the minister to be solemnly proclaimed by him from the pulpit,[102]
and thereafter he had to see that the excommunicate person remained
away from service until absolution was granted[103] by the ordinary,
which absolution was then publicly pronounced from the pulpit.[104]
When penance had to be done in church by an offender, it was the duty
of the parson to superintend the performance; to say, if necessary,
before the congregation the formula of confession prescribed for the
offence, in order that the guilty person might repeat it after
him;[105] to exhort the persons present to refrain from similar
transgressions; to read, on occasion, some homily bearing upon the
subject;[106] and finally to make out a certificate (together with the
wardens, if necessary) that the penance had been carried out as
enjoined by the judge.

Besides the celebration of the rites pertaining to his priestly
office, which need not detain us here, there were many other duties
which the ecclesiastical courts enjoined on the parish incumbent. Some
of these have already been referred to.[107] Others will appear as we
view the discipline of the courts Christian when exercised over the
parishioners at large, to which subject we shall now address
ourselves.

Foremost among the requirements exacted by the ordinaries from all
alike was the duty of attending church. Every one had to frequent
service on Sundays and on feast-days, and to be present at evening as
well as at morning prayer.[108] Nor might a man repair to a church in
another parish because it was nearer than his own.[109] Should his own
minister be unlicenced to preach--and only about one incumbent out of
four or five was licenced[110]--he was not permitted, except under
special authorization,[111] to hear a sermon in another church while
service was going on in his own.[112] If, however, a man were able to
pay the statutory[113] fine of 12d. for each absence on holy days he
could, it would seem, in practice resort to his parish church only on
occasions, say once a month, and yet not get himself written down as a
recusant.[114]

Heads of families were made responsible for the attendance of their
children and servants; innkeepers or victuallers for their
guests.[115]

If it was not permissible to frequent service in another place of
worship, neither was it optional with a parishioner to get married
elsewhere than in his own church.[116] There, too, his marriage banns
had to be published--and it was a presentable offence to marry without
banns;[117] there he had to have his children christened[118] and his
wife churched;[119] there he was compelled to send sons, daughters or
apprentices to be catechized,[120] and there himself learn the
principles of religion (if he were ignorant of them), for without a
knowledge of the Catechism and the Ten Commandments he could not
receive communion.[121]

All persons over fourteen had to receive communion at Easter, and at
least on two other occasions during the year.[122] In fact readiness
to receive according to the Anglican rites became the test of a loyal
subject.[123]

The strict requirement to report all non-communicants to the official
resulted in the keeping of books in which were written the names of
the parish communicants.[124]

Next in importance to church attendance and the observance of the
sacraments came the duty of all parishioners to contribute to the
parish expenses. We have viewed church courts at work, compelling
wardens to levy church rates; we have now to see how the judges forced
recalcitrant ratepayers to pay the sums assessed upon them to the
wardens or other collectors.

Among the earliest vestry minutes of the parish of St.
Christopher-le-Stocks, London, is one which, after ordering that an
assessment be made for the clerk's wages and for pews, decreed that
any rebellious persons should be summoned before themselves, the
vestry, to be reformed. But if the rebel would not appear, or, on
appearance, remain stubborn to reason, then the churchwardens should
sue him before the ordinary at the parish costs "vntill suche tyme as
he be reduced vnto a good order, and hath paid bothe the costys of the
sute and the chargs that he owith vnto the church...."[125] Fifty
years later we find this vestry ordaining the same procedure to be
followed against parish debtors, and referring to its former
order.[126]

It seems, in fact, to have been the well-understood thing that just as
parish rates to defray the costs of those matters of parish
administration, falling within the province of the ecclesiastical
courts, were to be assessed by the authority, and under the direction,
of those courts, so, too, the recovery of these rates was to be had
before the same tribunals. It is not denied that recourse may
occasionally have been made in these matters to the courts of common
law, but it is believed that the proper remedy was at ecclesiastical
law.[127] Furthermore, we believe that the means at the disposal of
the ecclesiastical courts for putting their judgments into effect were
quite sufficient and in practice effective.

What these means were will be taken up and discussed a little further
on. Returning to the matter of suing parish debtors in courts
Christian, it is interesting to find that in the language of the
period a suit "at law" did not always mean at common law. An order of
the vestry of Stepney, London, in February, 1605-6, after determining
the manner in which L50 should be raised to pay off parish debts due
to the bell founder, adds that persons refusing to pay their shares,
or neglecting to do so, should not find themselves aggrieved "if the
same be recouered against them by Lawe." And the meaning of this term
is fully explained by these subsequent words in the same order, that
the churchwardens shall "at the chardg of the p[ar]ish appointe and
entertayne one doctor and a proctor to sue and recouer the same by
lawe of any p[er]son [etc.]."[128] Now doctors and proctors practiced
before ecclesiastical tribunals only.[129]

That presentment to the ordinary was the common and usual way, not
only of recovering church rates, but any thing of value that belonged
to the parish and was unjustly detained, the act-books and other
documents of the time plentifully show. Thus in Archbishop Parker's
Visitation Articles for the diocese of Canterbury in the year 1569, he
requires all churchwardens to report to their ordinaries "whether
there be any money or stoke, appertaininge to any paryshe churche, in
anye manne's handes, that refuse or differeth to paye the same
[etc.]."[130] The wardens of Melton Mowbray record under the year 1602
an item for charges at the court at Leicester against a parishioner
"for not payinge his levi for the churche."[131] Those of Ashburton,
Devon, itemize in 1568-1569 two shillings "for a zytation to those
that wold nott pay to the power."[132] As the wardens of East Tilbury
were going about among the parishioners demanding money of each one
according to the rating inscribed on an assessment roll which they
carried with them, one Garrett, a constable, discontented that he
himself should be rated as high as four shillings, seized the roll and
refused to produce it. This, of course, put an end to further
collections. For this he was presented by the vicar before the
consistory court at Stratford Bow Chapel. Here he alleged that the
rating "was very unequally made." But the judge warned Garrett to
appear in court the following Tuesday to answer for his contempt.
Further he was to pay his four shillings to the wardens and bring to
the judge the wardens' certificate that he had done so. On the day
appointed Garrett was present in court with the vicar and wardens. The
decree of the court is headed: "_Negotiu[m] reparac[i]o[n]is
eccl[esi]e de_ East Tilburie," and is so characteristic of the
thoroughgoing and searching manner in which ordinaries supervised the
administration of parish affairs that we cannot forbear to quote a
large part of it in full. "Touchinge the same Wm Garrett," the
registrar inscribes in the act-book, "the churchwardens do here
testifie that he hathe payd his iiij s. w[hi]ch he was rated at...&
they saye they have receyved it. Towching the churchwardens & the
repayre [of] the church," the scribe continues, "the Judge doth order
that the minister, Mr Howdsworth, [and seven others named, including
wardens, sidemen and constables]...p[ro]cure workmen of all trad[es],
& then sett downe under their hand in writing what chardg it will be
to repayer the church sufficiently in all thing[s] wharein it is
decayd, as namely, tyling, paving, masonns worke, carpenters worke &
glasing...and when they have under the workmens hand founde what will
repayer the churche in every p[ar]ticuler, then shall they all nyne
assemple themselves in the church [on a day named]...and make a rate
to that proportion w[hi]ch shall remayne above the rate already
allowed of...and they shall certify in Stratford bowe Chappell bothe
of the vew making by the workmen, of the gathering of the rate already
made, of their making a new rate...and of the gathering thereof; and
likewise how farr they have p[ro]ceeded in the repayer of the church
the ixth of Aprill next: and for the punish[men]t of him, the said Wm
Garrett, for his contemptuous taking away of the rate, as is
complayned of, it is respited untill this p[resent] order be
p[er]formed; & he is now monished to appeare in the Consistorie the
first court day [etc]...."[133] So, too, when Richard Fynsett of
Clayton, Sussex, was "detected" to the official for not paying his
rate for church repairs, November, 1595, he appeared and claimed that
not only was his rating excessive, but that the assessment had not
been according to custom, to wit, made by the majority of the
parishioners. He was summoned by the judge to prove his allegation at
the next court day, and to pay his court and other fees. He was
probably unable to prove his point, for under the 9th December
following the record simply states "_Comparuit et solvit feoda
debita_."[134]

The wardens of Swalecliffe, Kent, complain to the archdeacon of
Canterbury in 1565 that their church is near utter decay, but the
parish is so poor that they cannot repair it unless an assessment be
made on the lands within the parish, for the making of which
assessment they ask for an authorization.[135] Two years later they
appear and say in court that their church still lacks windows, "and
the parish is not able to mend the same, without it may please you
that the rest of the cess that was made may be levied, which we cannot
get unless we have your aid."[136]

In the same way the wardens of St. Alban's "implored the aid of the
judge," because they wished divers persons who refused to pay their
rates "co[m]pelled therunto by aucthoritye of this court," otherwise
the unpaid workmen on their ruinous church would leave, and the
half-finished structure sustain damage by winter weather.[137] The
act-books teem with such presentments as the following: one Holaway
refuses to give to the poor-box, "and is found able by the
parish."[138] Thomas Arter will give but a half-penny to the poor.
Arter appears and "saithe that he is not of the wealthe that men
takithe him to be." The judge commands him to pay a half-penny every
week, and dismisses him.[139] "John Wilson haithe not paide his clerke
wages by the report of the clerke."[140] "Here follow the names of
such, as being able, refuse notwithstanding to pay to the poor man's
box [eight names follow]";[141] or "The presentment made by the
churchwardens and sidemen...of all such as are behind for a cess made
for the Church and refuse to pay [five names]."[142] John Baldwin
presented for that "the fame and report goeth" that he keeps back L10,
a legacy given seven years previously for church repairs and the
poor-box, "and the Church and the poor have wanted the same, having no
benefit thereof, as we know."[143] One Consant received a cow
belonging to the parish "and hath not made an account to the parish
for her."[144] Jeremy Robson is cited "for detaining our Clerk's wages
from the land which he occupieth in our parish after 6 s. 8 d. for a
plough land of 140 acres."[145] Two lessees of the parish are
presented "for withholding the farm of two acres and a half of church
land one year and a half unpaid."[146] John Smithe presented for
felling and selling a great oak which stood upon church land, "whereas
now we stand in lack of the same to repair our Church."[147] A
parishioner is cited before the ordinary because he withholds church
goods and refuses both to enter into bond for them and to make an
accounting.[148] So men are presented for not paying the parish fees
due for the burial of members of their family, or for the ringing of
knells;[149] for suffering a church tenement or a part of the church
fence, which they are bound to repair, to fall into decay,[150] and so
forth. In short, any one at all, whether in the capacity of parish
officer; rate payer; trustee; administrator or executor; lessee of the
parish cattle or its lands or tenements--any one, in fact, standing in
the relation of debtor to the parish in a matter falling within the
jurisdiction of the spiritual courts, could be, and was, compelled by
these to pay or to account to the parishioners.

Not only did the Church regulate many acts of a parishioner's life,
and preside over his moral conduct, making him pay in great measure
the costs of this disciplinary administration, but it also was
entrusted with his education, through which it sought to control his
ideas and convictions, and to direct and form public opinion. The
education and training of a nation depend, of course, in greatest
measure on its primary schools and its press. As for its universities,
these are but the apex on the educational pyramid, for a very select
few only. Now the primary schools were represented in the times
whereof we write by the parish schoolmaster, the familiar
"_ludimagister_" of the canons and act-books, and by the incumbent
himself. For the people at large the press was represented almost
entirely by the licenced preacher, and, in the larger towns, the
licenced lecturer.

The Canons of 1571 ordain that no one shall teach the humanities nor
instruct boys, whether in school or in private families,[151] unless
the diocesan licence him under his seal. Nor are schoolmasters to use
other grammars or catechisms than those officially prescribed. Every
year schoolmasters are to commend to the bishop of the diocese the
best read among their pupils, and those that by their achievements
give promise that they may usefully serve the State or the Church, so
that their parents may be induced to educate them further to that
end.[152] Bishop Barnes in his Injunctions of 1577 commands that all
incumbents of cures in Durham diocese not licenced to preach shall
"duly, paynefully and frely" teach the children of their several
parishes to read and write. Furthermore, teachers shall exhort the
parents of those boys who have proved themselves apt at learning and
of "pregnant capacitie" to cause their sons to continue their studies
and to acquire the good and liberal sciences. On the other hand they
shall induce fathers of sons of little wit or capacity to put them to
husbandry, or some other suitable craft, that they may grow to be
useful members of the commonwealth.[153] In this diocese we find
schoolmasters by profession ("_ludimagistri_") summoned at the
visitations very regularly, and there seem to have been a considerable
number of them in the towns, though not in the country parishes, where
the curates doubtless officiated as instructors of the youth according
to the bishop's monitions.[154] Everywhere in the proceedings of the
ecclesiastical courts schoolmasters are "detected" to the judges from
time to time for having no licence to teach.[155]

As for the pulpit, that great instrument of political guidance at a
period when politics consisted chiefly of religious contentions,[156]
it is well known that Elizabeth and her advisors grasped at once its
paramount importance, and that she had been on the throne but little
over a month when she issued her proclamation inhibiting all preaching
and teaching for the time being. This command was followed by her
Injunctions of the next year, forbidding any to preach unless licenced
by herself, her two archbishops, the diocesan, or her visitors.[157]
As is well known also, no command was more universally enforced. It is
constantly mentioned in the metropolitan or diocesan injunctions or
articles of the period,[158] and the proceedings before the ordinaries
bear witness to its enforcement.[159]

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9