The allusions to Mellifont during the remainder of this century are very
few and uninteresting. Whether, or not, it shared the fate of many other
Irish monasteries at that time and had no regular Abbot, but one who was
called Abbot _in commendam_, is not known; but the presumption is that it
had not a regular Abbot. These Abbots _in commendam_ were not monks, or
members of any Religious Order; but secular clerics, not necessarily in
Holy Orders. Sometimes, especially when the abuse had reached its greatest
height in the fifteenth century, they were even laymen; nevertheless, they
enjoyed the revenues of the abbeys committed to them, with the style and
title of Abbots, but exercised no spiritual jurisdiction in their abbeys.
This latter was confided to regular Priors who were selected by their own
Religious superiors. When laymen held the abbeys _in commendam_ they
commonly resided in them with their wives, families, retinues, servants,
etc., to the distraction and interference with the monks in their regular
observances, and finally, to the complete subversion of discipline. At
that very time this pernicious practice had brought the whole Order to the
brink of ruin; for we find the General Chapter on several occasions
deploring the injuries inflicted on religion, and lamenting the havoc
wrought by it, and they decided to send three of their number to Rome to
implore the Pope's protection against the growing evil. Still, it
survived, more or less, in these countries till the Reformation. Scotland
suffered more from it, apparently, than Ireland did, as can be seen from
the lists furnished by Brady in his _Episcopal Succession_.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account