In reference to the one-third to the priest of the manorial church,
Bishop Kennett says: “Another fair pretext of the religious to regain
appropriations, was to desire no more than two parts of the tithe and
profits, leaving a third to the free and quiet enjoyment of the parish
priest, whom at the same time _they eased from the burthen of repairing
the church and relieving the poor, and took that charge upon themselves_.
This again was a colour that looked well, for it was but a _returning
to the old institution of dividing the profits of a parish into three
parts_: one to the priest, one to the church, and a third to the poor.
The one-third was called the church’s part, and was expressly excepted
as belonging to the priest, and was frequently described as a portion
separate from the share of the monks and pertaining to the parish church.
It was on this account that the patron’s charter of consenting to an
appropriation, did sometimes expressly reserve a third part to the
bishop, and for the same reason the bishops of Man had their _Tertiana_,
or third part of all churches, in that island. The bishops provided
perpetual vicars, who enjoyed a full third of the tithes, and in addition
he had oblations and perquisites, which all made his portion often equal
to, if not exceeding that of the convent.”[165] These are the words of a
bishop of the Church of England. He fully admits the existence of “the
old institution of dividing the profits of a parish into three parts,”
etc. This old division was not questioned until fifty-eight years ago
by Archdeacon Hale, of London, and recently revived by Lord Selborne. I
shall presently deal with the opinions of these two writers.
Bishop Kennett further adds, that although there was a threefold division
of tithes and oblations in England, yet the whole product of tithes and
offerings was the _bank of each parish church_, and the minister was
the _sole trustee_ and _dispenser_ of them according to the stated rules
of piety and charity. This is a most remarkable and vital observation,
because in course of time this sole trustee kept all the tithes and
oblations to his own personal use, in the same manner as the monks acted
in respect to all the profits of the churches appropriated to them after
the Norman Conquest.
It may be observed that at one time lay patrons had kept to themselves
the two parts for the poor and repairs of the churches, and gave the
priest the remaining one-third. This arrangement led to great disorders,
because they kept the two parts to their own use and had them infeoffed
in them and their heirs, leaving the altarage or small tithes to the
parish priest. By conscientious scruples, however, they restored in
course of time the two parts to the parochial priests, or religious
houses, for distribution to the poor and for repairing the churches.
CANONS ENACTED UNDER KING EDGAR.[166]
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