10. Austin Friars for 1st period 13
2nd „ 13
3rd „ for masses 2
11. St. Bartholomew’s for 1st period 14
2nd „ 13
3rd „ 2
12. Haliwell for 1st period 12
2nd „ 20
3rd „ 2
13. Minoresses for 1st period 9
2nd „ 18
3rd „ 3
These figures show most unmistakably that the monastic life was no
longer regarded as it had been by the people of London. By the friars
especially, _i.e._ by those who could read the signs of the time, it
must have been understood that the end was very near. Not the alleged
immorality of the Religious, but the decay of their numbers, the
wasting of their property, the withdrawal of support by the laity,
might have warned those under vows that a change was nigh at hand. I do
not suppose that many of them heard this warning. Who could believe,
standing in the great church, glittering with lights, with gold and
silver, rich with colour, splendid with carved work, that the axe was
already laid to the root?
The people of London were not, it is true, consulted. Henry was not
the kind of man to consult the illiterate on points of Theology or
Spiritual Government. They were, however, filled with a vague unrest
of new ideas; we know not what survivals of the old Lollardry lingered
and were whispered about, or spoken openly; we know not how widely the
ballads and satirical verses against monks and friars were repeated
and sung and made the subject of merriment in the taverns. We do know,
however, that the King ordered and that the people of London obeyed.
I think it incredible that even the most masterful of English kings
should have dared to force changes so radical upon an unwilling city.
London was never remarkable for meekness, and in matters religious was
never uncertain. The King must have known that the people of London,
at least, would be with him. London, therefore, obeyed; the people
looked on while the Pope of Rome vanished; they made no protest when
they saw Monks, Nuns, and Friars turned out of doors and their Houses
closed; they looked on without a murmur even when the Carthusians
were dragged to a horrible doom. Was this callousness? Was it fear?
Was it acquiescence in the Revolution, with the hope of larger things
to follow? For my own part, looking at the attitude of the citizens
during the successive reigns of Henry, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, I
think there can be no doubt as to the general opinion at the time, and
that it was from the outset in favour of the Dissolution of the Houses
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