In reference to making canons at synodical meetings, it was both
profitable and pleasant work for ecclesiastics. The laymen who had to pay
were not permitted to be present to express an opinion in the matter.
The tithe system was a very elastic band. It was stretched as population
and agriculture increased. We have the principle of development exhibited
in a remarkable degree in the tithe question. As the power and influence
of the bishops of Rome increased in the dark and middle ages, so did
tithes. Yet we are unblushingly told that tithes were the free voluntary
offerings of private individuals. I admit this to a limited extent. The
question is, Did all the landowners freely and voluntarily grant tithes
of the produce of their lands to the rectors of parishes? The synodical
meetings to which I have referred, prove that they were not so given,
but were arbitrarily exacted by the anathemas of the Church, and by
ecclesiastical and civil courts.
Things became tithable by the canons of 1295 and 1343, which were not
thought of in the days of Kings Offa and Ethelwulf. Provincial synodical
canons of the dark and middle ages had a pretending binding force upon
the people. But those ecclesiastics had put the last straw upon the
donkey’s (people’s) back in their synod of 1343. The young British House
of Commons, then only seventy-eight years old, was roused to opposition.
In 1343, 1344, 1347, and 1351, the House petitioned Edward III. against
the canon of 1343, but the petitions led to no satisfactory result.[248]
The Commons succeeded, however, in 1371, in limiting the power of the
canon. It was enacted[249] that trees of twenty years’ growth and
upward should not be tithable, and that if a suit should be commenced
in any spiritual court for the payment of such tithes, a prohibition
should issue. This was the first victory gained by the House of Commons
as regards tithes. The failures in the above years were caused by
ecclesiastical influence exercised over the King. There had been previous
Acts on Church questions, such as the Mortmain Act of 1297, which was a
much bolder step than that of 1372, but it was rather the production of
King Edward I. himself than any action of the House of Commons, owing
to the nervous state of feeling among the lay nobility to check the
extensive alienation of property to the monasteries which deprived the
King of help towards the defence of the country. The nobility were also
becoming extremely jealous of the growing power and luxurious living of
the monastic bodies, and also of the Church dignitaries.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account