An entry in a MS. Book of Ecclesiastical Causes reveals the possible complications which might arise out of these marriages. Marriages of the clergy were not null and void, they were only voidable by proceedings which must be taken in the lifetime of the parties. So that it was always possible that the children of such a marriage might after their father's death claim as heirs to his estate, and might have the means of proving their parents' marriage; in which case they would inherit to the exclusion of those who had thought themselves the heirs. For example, Sir John de Sudley, knight, and Elizabeth, wife of Sir Baldwyn de Frevyle, knight, relatives and heirs of Peter, the uncle of the said Sir John, a sub-deacon, alleged that marriage had been contracted by the said sub-deacon, to their exclusion from the heirship, and prayed that the marriage might be p.r.o.nounced null, lest the children of the said sub-deacon should claim his heirship. Sir Peter de Montford seems to be the name of the sub-deacon aforesaid, and Margaret Furnivale that of his wife.[261]

Chaucer, in "The Miller's Tale," seems incidentally to show what was the popular view of the children of a cleric. The Miller, a Yeoman, a man of comparative wealth and consideration in his village, had married a parson's daughter:--

A wife he hadde commen of n.o.ble kin, The parson of the town her father was.

Her "n.o.ble kin" points perhaps to the fact that the parson of the town was of the family of the lord of the manor. She had received the education of a lady--

She was yfostered in a nonnerie.

As to her personal character--

She was proud and pert as is a pie.

Next the poet puts upon his stage the daughter of this worthy pair--

A daughter hadden they betwixt them two;

and it is what he says about this young lady which proves most clearly that neither mother nor daughter suffered in the estimation of society from the condition of their birth:

The parson of the town, for she was faire, In purpose was to maken her his heire Both of his catel and of his messuage, And strange he made it of her marriage; His purpose was for to bestow her hie Into some worthie blood of ancestrie.

Geoffrey of Childewick, a knight, married Clarissa, the daughter of a country priest, but she was the sister of the famous John Mansell, the minister of Henry III.

A man was called priest's son, not as a nickname, but as a surname recognized in formal legal doc.u.ments, as in the "Pleas of the Crown," c.

1220, Hugo Clark appeals _Paga.n.u.s filius Sacerdotis_ and others of having beaten him and broken his teeth, etc.[262]

The subject is rather fully ill.u.s.trated in the MS. _Omne Bonum_ (Royal 6 E. VI.) of the fourteenth century in the British Museum. At f. 295, under the t.i.tle _Clericorum et mulierum cohabitatio_, is a quaint picture of a bishop parting a group of clergy from a group of women. At f. 296 _verso_, under the t.i.tle _De clericis conjugatio_, is represented a group of clergy on the left, a group of women on the right, and a cradle containing a baby between the two groups; the text is on the penalties against clerical marriages, but it calls the women _uxores_--wives. Again, in the second volume of the work (Royal 6 E. VII.), at f. 138, under the t.i.tle _Filii Presbyterum_, the picture shows three priests on the left, and women on the right, with three children kneeling between them; the text is on the disabilities of sons of priests.

Another branch of the same subject is the determination of the rulers of the Church that the sons of clerics should not be allowed to succeed to their fathers' benefices. The hereditary succession of the semi-secular Saxon monasteries afforded a venerable precedent for doing so. The tendency of the feudal system was to make all offices hereditary, and the practice was growing up of making church benefices hereditary, and treating them like lay fiefs; _e.g._ dividing them between two or more sons, as if they were an ordinary estate; demanding a fine from a new rector as the lord of the manor did from a new tenant; making the condition that the presentee should give up this or that ancient possession of the benefice, or should pay an annual pension to the patron.

The end of this would have been that the benefices of the church would have become hereditary, impaired, and secularized.

How far the mischief had already gone is ill.u.s.trated by two or three examples which we are able to quote.[263] In York, immediately after the Conquest, there was something very like a succession to the archbishopric. The provostship of Hexham descended from father to son, all of them being priests. The Deans of Whalley and Kettelwell, ecclesiastics of great jurisdiction and influence, were married, and their offices descended from father to son for generations. In the episcopal registers we find from time to time sons succeeding their fathers well on in the thirteenth century, notwithstanding the canons and synods which prohibited it.

The great act of defence against this danger which threatened was the canon which forbade the son of a parson to succeed to his father's benefice. The canon was re-enacted from time to time, but not without occasional instances of strenuous resistance. Thus, in 1235, Alexander, Bishop of Coventry, complained to Pope Gregory IX., that certain rectors, sons of priests, presumed to occupy their fathers' benefices by force of arms; and in some cases where fit inc.u.mbents had been placed, the priest's sons had threatened them with injury to members and life, so that they feared to dwell there; and he asks the pope's protection.[264] The pope tells him to deprive them of all their benefices.[265]

Some of the results of the state of things above described appear very frequently in the bishops' registers. Illegitimacy, we have seen, was one of the defects which stood in the way of a man's ordination, and the son of a priest was regarded by the canons as illegitimate; but the bishop could, if he pleased, give a dispensation which removed the barrier, and there are many records of such dispensations.[266] Sometimes the dispensation only admits the grantee to take minor orders, sometimes "to take all the sacred orders, and to hold ecclesiastical benefices even with cure of souls." In the Register of Bishop Quivil, of Exeter, 1282, is a record of a _Dispensatio super defectu natalium_ granted to J. de Axemuthe, the defect being that he was _de presbytero genitus et soluta_.

So, in the Exeter Register of Bishop Stapledon, J. de Hurbestone, clerk, in 1308, had a dispensation, being _de presbytero genitus et soluta_.

_Soluta_ means single woman, but in the eye of the canon law and of the bishop, the wife of a priest would be _soluta_, so that these may be cases not of immorality, but of married priests. In the Register of Montacute, Bishop of Ely, is a record of a dispensation (1338) to the son of Ada Bray, of Canterbury, _qui patre de presbytero genitus_, to be promoted to all minor orders.[267] In a great number of cases the nature of the illegitimacy is _soluto genitus et soluta_--born of a single man and single woman; it is very possible that a number of sons of the clergy may be included in this formal legal description also.

Sometimes a man, refused perhaps by his own bishop, went to Rome for a dispensation, and obtained it.[268] Sometimes the Papal Court gave a priest's son license to be promoted to any dignity _short of a bishopric_.[269]

If a man, being thus disqualified, neglected to obtain a proper dispensation, he might find the neglect a serious difficulty in after-life, or if he failed to have at hand the proof of his dispensation; thus, in 1234, it was objected to Thomas de Melsonby, prior of Durham, that he was the son of a rector of Melsonby, and born while his father was in holy orders.[270] Similarly on Feb. 20, 1308-9, Stapledon, bishop of Exeter, in the chapter-house of Launceston Priory, admonished the prior on pain of deprivation to exhibit, within two years, to himself or his successors, his "_Privilegium_" by virtue of which he retained the dignity, being illegitimate. He appeared within the term and satisfied the bishop, and was discharged.[271]

It appears that those who were thrust out on this ground were treated with some consideration. In 1126, Wm. de Ruley was deprived of the Church of Ruley, on the ground that he was the son of the last minister; but the archbishop a.s.signed to him the t.i.thes of a chapelry in the parish for his support during his life.[272] The mandate for the removal of Peter of Wivertorp from the Church of Wivertorp, for the same reason, concludes with the note, _salva pensione_, from which we infer that all inc.u.mbents removed for this cause were ent.i.tled to, or at least were usually granted, a pension. But Peter of Wivertorp did not rest content with his deprivation. He made friends at the Court of Rome, representing that his father was married when in minor orders, and that he himself had held the benefice for ten years; and obtained a letter from Pope Honorius interceding for him, that he should be allowed to retain Wivertorp till the archbishop gave him some other competent living.[273]

The curt, formal entries in these musty records sometimes seem to give us a glimpse into men's hearts and lives: John Curteys, Vicar of Hobeche, in his will, made in 1418, leaves all his lands in Holbeach and Quappelode, to William Curteys for life, on condition that he shall become a priest as soon as possible after obtaining his legitimation, to celebrate for the souls of his parents; the remainder for pious uses.[274] We venture to conjecture that John Curteys, the vicar, in view of his approaching end, was uneasy in his conscience about the uncanonical marriage of which William was the offspring; therefore he thus appeals to his son to obtain as rapidly as may be a dispensation, and ordination to the priesthood; and then to use continually during his future life his priestly office in praying for the souls of his erring parents.

The author of "Piers Plowman's Vision" includes these dispensations to priests' sons, and sons of serfs, among the abuses of his time, in lines which are worth quoting--

For should no clerk be crowned,[275] But if he come were Of franklins and freemen, And of folk wedded.

Bondmen[276] and b.a.s.t.a.r.ds, And beggars' children,[276]

These belong to labour, And lord's children should serve Both G.o.d and good men As their degree askith.

Some to sing ma.s.ses, Others to sit and write, Reade and receive, What Reason ought to spend.

And since bondmen's bairns Have been made bishops, And b.a.s.t.a.r.d bairns Have been archdeacons, And cobblers and their sons For silver have been knights, And monks and monials, That mendicants should feed,[277]

Have made their kin knights, And knights' fees purchased, Popes and Patrons Poor gentle blood refuse, And take Simond's son, Sanctuary to keep.

Life holiness and love Have been long hence, And will, till it be weared out Or otherwise ychanged.

CHAPTER XVIII.

VISITATION ARTICLES AND RETURNS.

The visitation of the parishes by the Ordinary--the ecclesiastical person who exercised spiritual jurisdiction over them[278]--was an important feature of ecclesiastical administration.[279] We have seen that a canon of the famous Council of Clovesho, in 747, directed bishops to make an annual visitation of their dioceses. As time went on the duty, burdensome alike to the bishops and clergy, fell into disuse, and seems to have been resumed again in the twelfth century.

The Lateran Council of 1179 made a canon to check the costs of visitations: it decreed that an archbishop visiting churches should be content with forty or fifty horses; a bishop with twenty or thirty; an archdeacon with five or seven; and a dean was not to exceed two.[280] The Pontificals contain the "Order of Visiting Parishes:"[281] the bishop is to be met by the clergy in procession outside the gates; Ma.s.s is to be said; the bishop is to tell the people the purpose of his coming, viz. (1) to absolve the souls of the departed; (2) to see how the Church is governed, the condition of its vestments, the lives of the clergy, etc.; (3) to inquire into the sins of the laity; (4) to take cognizance of matters which belong to the bishop; (5) to confirm children; also he is to preach a sermon on the sacraments, etc.[282]

From these visitations we obtain full and reliable information as to the personal character and conduct of the parish clergy and their fulfilment of their duties. Five or six of the parishioners, called _testes synodales_,[283] or questmen, were sworn to give, besides a return of the condition of the church and its furniture, a true answer to certain questions about their clergy, viz. the rector or vicar, the chaplains, and the clerk.

Hugh of Wells, Bishop of Lincoln (c. 1232), issued a paper of twenty-nine questions to his clergy, which is perhaps the earliest of Visitation Articles ("Lincoln," p. 134, S.P.C.K.). Grostete issued Articles of Inquiry about 1250; and similar articles were issued by Roger Weseham, Bishop of Lichfield, in 1252. In the year 1253 these following inquiries were made "in each and every diocese of the whole kingdom of England"

concerning the life and conversation of both clerks and laymen:--[284]

1, 2, 3, 4 are about sensual sins on the part of the laity. 5. Whether any laymen are drunkards, or habitually frequent taverns, or practise usury of any kind. 6. Receive the free land of any church to farm. 7.

Or receive in their fee the t.i.thes of any church. 8. Whether rents a.s.signed to lights or other specified uses of the church are converted to the use of the rector or vicar. 9. Whether any layman is compelled to communicate and offer after ma.s.s on Easter Day.[285] 10. Whether any layman or other of whatever condition or reputation (_famae_) _perierit conscio rectore vel vicario loci_. 11. Whether any layman is notably proud, or envious, or avaricious, or slothful, or malicious, or gluttonous, or luxurious [the seven deadly sins]. 12. Whether any layman causes markets, or plays or pleas (_placita peculiaria_) to be held in sacred places, and whether these things have been prohibited on the part of the bishop. 13. Whether any laymen have played at "Rams" (_elevaverint arietes_[286]), or caused scotales to be held, or have contended for precedence with their banners in their visitation of the mother church. 14. Whether any layman or woman entertain as a guest the concubine of any man of whatever condition, and keep a bad house. 15. Whether any sick person has lacked any sacrament from negligence of the priest lawfully called. 16. Whether any layman or other of whatever condition have died intestate, or without partaking of the sacraments, by the negligence of the priest or rector. 17. Whether any churches remain to be dedicated, or any have been destroyed without licence from the bishop, since the Council of London. 18. Whether Jews dwell anywhere where they have not been used to dwell. 19. Whether any laymen have clandestinely contracted marriage in cases forbidden by law or without banns. 20. Whether the laity insist upon (_sunt pertinaces ut stent_) standing in the chancel with the clergy. 21. Whether any layman causes Divine service to be celebrated in any chapel without licence from the bishop. 22. In what way lay servants and representatives of parsons, abbots, priors, prioresses, and other parsons and religious persons, behave in their granges, mansions, and possessions. 23. Let diligent inquiry be made concerning the taxation of every church, and how much the rector of every church has given to the subsidy of the Lord Pope. 24. Whether any rectors or vicars or priests are very illiterate (_enormiter illiterati_). 25. Whether the sacrament of the Eucharist is everywhere carried to the sick with due reverence, and is kept in a proper manner. 26. Whether any of the aforesaid or others in sacred orders are incontinent, and in what kind of incontinence. 27. Whether the incontinent have been corrected by the archdeacon of the place, and how often and in what manner. 28. Whether any convicted or confessing incontinence have bound themselves to resignation of their benefices or other canonical punishment if they relapse, and whether any after so binding themselves have relapsed. 29. Whether any men beneficed or in sacred orders are married (_uxorati_). 30. Whether any clerics frequent the churches of nuns without reasonable cause. 31. Whether any of the clerks in holy orders keep (_tenent_) any woman related to him, or any concerning whom evil suspicions may arise. 32. Whether any are drunken, frequenters of taverns, or traders, or usurers, or fighters or wrestlers, or notorious for any vice. 33. Whether any are farmers, giving and receiving churches or vicarages to farm without the licence of the bishop. 34. Whether any are viscounts (high sheriffs) or secular judges, or hold bailywicks (stewardships) for laymen, for which office they are obliged to give account (_unde obligentur eisdem ad ratiocinia_). 35. Whether any rectors make a bargain with their annual priests (_c.u.m sacerdotibus annuis_) that, besides the stipend received from the rector, they may receive annualia and tricennalia from others. 36. Whether any is guilty of simony, either in regard to ordination or preferment. 37. Whether any parish priest has not sufficient maintenance from the rector. 38.

Whether any rector or vicar has built on a lay fee or cemetery out of the revenues of the Church, or has placed t.i.thes in a lay fee. 39.

Whether any carry weapons, or have not the tonsure, and fitting habit.

40. Whether any one has more than one cure of souls without dispensation. 41. Whether any rector or vicar is the son of the last inc.u.mbent. 42. Whether any priest extorts money for penance or other sacraments, or enjoins lucrative penances. 43. Whether deacons hear confessions or minister other sacraments committed to priests only.

44. Whether any rector or vicar does not reside on his benefice. 45.

Whether any church has not clerks or one honest clerk according to the means of the church. 46. Whether the cemeteries are everywhere enclosed, and the churches becomingly built and adorned, and the ornamenta and sacred vessels properly kept. 47. Whether any priest celebrates in sour wine (_aceto_). 48. Whether any beneficed men learn or teach secular laws.[287] 49. Whether cartings are done (_fiant cariagia_) on the Lord's days or festivals, and by whom. 50. Whether the canon of the ma.s.s is everywhere duly corrected. 51. Whether any layman or cleric keeps as a guest the concubine of a cleric, and where are there harbours of concubines. 52. Whether any priest celebrates twice a day except in the conceded cases, and except in his own church. 53. Whether any religious have appropriated to themselves any t.i.thes, or churches, or such like, or any additional pension or portion has been given to religious, without the consent of the bishop of the place. 54. Whether any vicars make themselves rectors, or the converse. 55. Whether any illegitimates who have not a dispensation hold ecclesiastical benefices, or are in sacred orders. 56. Whether any act as rectors or vicars who have not been inst.i.tuted by the bishop. 57. Whether the super altars are proper (_honesta_), and not used for grinding colours upon them. 58. Whether adulteries and public and notorious crimes of laymen are duly corrected by the archdeacon, and whether any one has celebrated marriage in a disallowed case. 59.

Whether in every deanery there have been appointed penitentiaries[288]

of rectors, vicars, and priests, and who they are. 60. What priests were ordained in Ireland or elsewhere outside this diocese, and whence did they come, and in what places have they ministered hitherto, and by whom are they licensed to celebrate. 61. Whether in every archdeaconry there are sufficient penitentiaries of the bishop (for cases reserved to the bishop?). 62. Concerning the life and proper conduct of archdeacons, deans, and clerics who minister in churches, and concerning the agents and servants of parsons and others. 63.

Whether any anchorite has been made without the a.s.sent of the bishop.

64. Whether any monks or religious dwell in their granges or possessions, and how the monks behave there in spiritual things, and what is their reputation. 65. Whether the dean and others have entered into a confederacy during the vacancy of the see to the prejudice of the incoming bishop. 66. Whether any archdeacons have received more for procuration than they ought to receive according to the new const.i.tution. 67. Enquiry is to be made concerning executors of wills, whether they have acted well and faithfully in the performance of their executorship, and if concerning the said executorship they have paid the computum to the bishop. 68. Whether markets are held by any one on the Lord's day.

The answers show that the _testes synodales_ did not scruple to find fault when they had cause, and perhaps sometimes when they had not much cause.

We gather a few of the returns from the diocese of Exeter at Bishop Stapledon's Visitation in 1301,[289] as examples--

_Sidbury._--Walter the Vicar, _optime se habet in omnibus, bene predicans, et officium sacrum sacerdotale laudabiliter exercens. Similiter et Clerici honeste se gerunt._