As regards the second case, they received churches, with the tithes
and glebe lands annexed thereto, as a free gift from the owners, and
had therefore the cure of souls. They purchased the advowsons of other
churches, and even built churches themselves, of which as owners
they possessed the advowsons. At first if the churches were near the
monasteries, they sent members of their community, who were in holy
orders, to perform the religious duties. But when the churches were
situated at a considerable distance, and became numerous, the monastic
bodies employed curates or vicars to perform the religious duties. These
at first received no part of the tithes as their salaries, but only a
small sum of money, just what the monks liked to give, and the miserable
sum they allowed varied from year to year as it suited the caprices of
the monks, who received all the tithes, offerings, and oblations. In
the king’s licence, permitting the appropriation, there was the usual
condition which the monks ignored, “that an adequate portion be allowed
the vicar out of the profits of the church.” The wretched salaries of the
curates or vicars produced great scandal and complaints. As the curate or
vicar was liable to be dismissed at any moment by the appropriator, he
was not likely to insist too rigidly on the sufficiency of his stipend,
and so the miserable salary was continued after the passing of Richard
II.’s Act. The bishops were much to blame in this matter. Some of them
had been monks themselves from their youth; others were anxious to be
buried among the monks, or their anniversaries kept by them. These
considerations induced some, but not all of the bishops, to favour the
appropriation of churches to monasteries. Again, the rich monasteries
were able to bribe the bishops, and even the papal curia, and they
did so; they allowed the bishops pensions out of the tithes, and even
appropriated some of their churches, _i.e._ the rectorial tithes of
their churches, to the bishop’s table, on condition that he, as bishop,
allowed them to receive churches with all their endowments from the lay
owners.[260]
The preaching friars and John Wickliffe opened the people’s eyes as
to the monastic luxuries, and the poverty of the vicars whom they
employed to do their work. The age of building monasteries and granting
extravagant endowments had passed, never again to be revived, but there
was a growing tendency to sweep all the monasteries away. The scandalous
manner in which the monastic bodies had paid the vicars induced
Parliament to pass the following Act in 1392.[261]
“IN APPROPRIATION OF BENEFICES THERE SHALL BE PROVISION MADE
FOR THE POOR AND THE VICAR.”
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