THE PARISH PULPIT
The influence on parochial life of the Sunday sermon and what went
with it can hardly be exaggerated. It was not only that it was at this
time that the priest instructed his people in their faith and in the
practice of their religion; but the pulpit was the means, and in those
days the sole means, by which the official or quasi-official business
of the place was announced to the inhabitants of a district. The great
variety of matters that had necessarily to be brought to the notice of
the parishioners would have all tended to make the pulpit utterances
on the Sunday, in a pre-Reformation parish, both interesting and
instructive. In this chapter it is proposed to illustrate some of the
many features presented at the time of the Sunday sermon; and first as
to the regular religious teaching of faith and morals.
The first duty of the Church, after seeing to the administration of
the Sacraments and the offering of the Sacrifice of the Altar, was
obviously to teach and direct its children in all matters of belief and
practice. This was done from the pulpit, which was in all probability
an unpretentious wooden erection, perhaps in the screen, or at the
chancel arch. In one case there is given the cost of the erection of a
pulpit of wood; another churchwardens’ account speaks of “clasps for”
the pulpit (?), possibly hinges for the door; a third tells of “a green
silk veil for the pulpit”; and a fourth of “cloth and a pillow” for it.
The chief interest, however, is not in the thing itself, but in its use.
[Illustration: PULPIT, 1475, ST. PAUL’S, TRURO]
It is impossible to think that Chaucer’s typical priest was a mere
creation of his imagination. The picture must have had its counterpart
in numberless parishes in England in the fourteenth century. This is
how the poet’s priest is described:--
“A good man was ther of religioun,
And was a poure parsoun of a town;
But riche he was of holy thought and werk.
He was also a lerned man, a clerk,
That Christe’s Gospel trewely wolde preche,
His parischens devoutly wolde he teche.
* * * * *
But Christe’s lore and His Apostles twelve
He taughte, but first he folwede it himselve.”
It will be remembered, too, that the story Chaucer makes his priest
contribute to the _Canterbury Tales_ is nothing else than an excellent
and complete tract, almost certainly a translation of a Latin
theological treatise, upon the Sacrament of Penance.
As a sample, however, of what is popularly believed on this subject
at the present day, it is well to take the opinion of by no means
an extreme party writer, Bishop Hobhouse. “Preaching,” he says,
“was not a regular part of the Sunday observances as now. It was
rare, but we must not conclude from the silence of our MSS. (_i.e._
churchwardens’ accounts) that it was never practised.” In another
place he states, upon what he thinks sufficient evidence, “that there
was a total absence of any system of clerical training, and that the
cultivation of the conscience as the directing power of man’s soul,
and the implanting of holy affections in the heart seem to have been
no part of the Church’s system of guidance.” That this is certainly
not a correct view as to the way in which the pastors of the parochial
churches in pre-Reformation days discharged--or rather neglected--their
duties, in view of the facts, appears to be certain. The grounds for
this opinion are the following: for practical purposes we may divide
the religious teaching, given by the clergy, into the two classes of
_sermons_ and _instructions_. The distinction is obvious. By the first
are meant those set discourses to prove some definite theme, or expound
some definite passage of Holy Scripture, or deduce the lessons to be
learnt from the life of some saint. In other words, putting aside
the controversial aspect, which, of course, was rare in those days,
a sermon in mediæval times was much what a sermon is to-day. There
was this difference, however, that in pre-Reformation days the sermon
was not probably so frequent as in these modern times. Now, whatever
instruction is given to the people at large is conveyed to them almost
entirely in the form of set sermons, which, however admirable in
themselves, seldom convey to their hearers consecutive and systematic,
dogmatic and moral teaching. Mediæval methods of imparting religious
knowledge were different. For the most part the priest fulfilled
the duty of instructing his flock by plain, unadorned, and familiar
instructions upon matters of faith and practice. These must have much
more resembled our present catechetical instructions than our modern
pulpit discourses. To the subject of set sermons I shall have occasion
to return presently, but as vastly more important, at any rate in the
opinion of our Catholic forefathers, let us first consider the question
of familiar instructions. For the sake of clearness we will confine our
attention to the two centuries (the fourteenth and fifteenth) previous
to the great religious revolution under Henry VIII.
Before the close of the thirteenth century, namely, in A.D. 1281,
Archbishop Peckham issued the celebrated Constitutions of the Synod of
Oxford which are called by his name. There we find the instruction of
the people legislated for minutely.
“We order,” runs the Constitution, “that every priest having the
charge of a flock do, four times in each year (that is, once each
quarter), on one or more solemn feast days, either himself or by
some one else, instruct the people in the vulgar language, simply
and without any fantastical admixture of subtle distinctions, in the
articles of the Creed, the Ten Commandments, the Evangelical Precepts,
the seven works of mercy, the seven deadly sins with their offshoots,
the seven principal virtues, and the Seven Sacraments.”
The Synod then proceeded to set out in considerable detail each of the
points upon which the people must be instructed. Now, it is obvious
that if four times a year this law was complied with in the spirit in
which it was given, the people were very thoroughly instructed indeed
in their faith. But was this law faithfully carried out by the clergy,
and rigorously enforced by the bishops in the succeeding centuries?
That is the real question. I think that there is ample evidence that it
was. In the first place, the Constitutions of Peckham are referred to
constantly in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries as the foundation
of the existing practices in the English Church. Thus, to take a few
specific instances in the middle of the fourteenth century, the decree
of a diocesan Synod orders--
“That all rectors, vicars, or chaplains holding ecclesiastical offices
shall expound clearly and plainly to their people, on all Sundays and
feast days, the Word of God and the Catholic faith of the Apostles;
and that they shall diligently instruct their subjects in the articles
of faith, and teach them in their native language the Apostles’
Creed, and urge them to expound it and teach the same faith to their
children.”
[Illustration: STONE PULPIT BRACKET, WALPOLE ST. ANDREW, NORFOLK]
Again, in A.D. 1357, Archbishop Thoresby, of York, anxious for the
better instruction of his people, commissioned a monk of St. Mary’s,
York, named Gatryke, to draw out in English an exposition of the
Creed, the Commandments, the seven deadly sins, etc. This tract the
archbishop, as he says in his preface, through the counsel of his
clergy, sent to all his priests--
“So that each and every one, who under him had the charge of souls,
do openly in English, upon Sundays teach and preach them, that they
have cure of the law and the way to know God Almighty. And he commands
and bids, in all that he may, that all who have keeping or cure under
him, enjoin their parishioners and their subjects, that they hear and
learn all these things, and oft, either rehearse them till they know
them, and so teach them to their children, if they any have, when
they are old enough to learn them; and that parsons and vicars and
all parish priests inquire diligently of their subjects at Lent-time,
when they come to shrift, whether they know these things, and if it be
found that they know them not, that they enjoin them upon his behalf,
and on pain of penance, to know them. And so there be none to excuse
themselves through ignorance of them, our father, the Archbishop, of
his goodness has ordained and bidden that they be showed openly in
English amongst the flock.”
To take another example: the Acts of the Synod, held by Simon Langham
at Ely in A.D. 1364, order that every parish priest frequently preach
and expound the Ten Commandments, etc., in English (_in idiomate
communi_), and all priests are urged to devote themselves to the study
of the Sacred Scriptures, so as to be ready “to give an account of the
hope and faith” that are in them. Further, they are to see that the
children are taught their prayers; and even adults, when coming to
confession, are to be examined as to their religious knowledge.
Even when the rise of the Lollard heretics rendered it important that
some check should be given to general and unauthorized preaching, this
did not interfere with the ordinary work of instruction. The orders
of Archbishop Arundel in A.D. 1408, forbidding all preaching without an
episcopal licence, set forth in distinct terms, that this prohibition
did not apply “to the parish priests,” etc., who by the Constitutions
of Archbishop Peckham were bound to instruct their people, in simple
language, on all matters concerning their faith and observance. And
further, in order to check the practice of treating people to such
formal and set discourses, these simple and practical instructions were
ordered to be adopted without delay in all parish churches.
[Illustration: ARCHIDIACONAL VISITATION]
[Illustration: SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY]
To this testimony of the English Church as to the value attached to
popular instruction may be added the authority of the Provincial
Council of York, held in A.D. 1466 by Archbishop Nevill. By its
decrees not only is the order as to systematic quarterly and simple
instructions reiterated, but the points of the teaching are again set
out by the Synod in great detail.
There is, moreover, ample evidence to convince any one who may desire
to study the subject, that this duty of giving plain instructions to
the people was not neglected up to the era of the Reformation itself.
During the fifteenth century, manuals to assist the clergy in the
performance of this obligation were multiplied in considerable numbers;
which would not have been the case had the practice of frequently
giving these familiar expositions fallen into abeyance. To some of
these manuals it will be necessary to refer presently, but here should
be noted specially the fact that one of the earliest books ever issued
from an English press by Caxton, probably at the same time (A.D. 1483)
as the _Liber Festivalis_ (or book of sermons for Sundays and feast
days), was a set of four lengthy discourses, published, as they
expressly declare, to enable priests to fulfil the obligation imposed
on them by the Constitutions of Peckham. As these were intended to
take at least four Sundays, and as the whole set of instructions had
to be given four times each year, it follows that at least sixteen
Sundays, or a quarter of the year, were devoted to this simple and
straightforward teaching of what every Christian was bound to believe
and to do.
That the parish priests really did their duty in instructing their
people there is evidence of another, and that an official character.
The Episcopal, or Chapter Registers fortunately in some few cases
contain documents recording the results of the regular Visitations
of parishes. It is almost by chance, of course, that papers of this
kind have been preserved. Most of them would have been destroyed as
possessing little importance in the opinion of those who ransacked the
archives at the time of the change of religion. The testimony of these
Visitation papers as to the performance of this duty of instruction on
the part of the clergy is most valuable. Hardly less important is the
proof they afford of the intelligent interest taken by the lay-folk
of the parish in the work, and of their capability of rationally and
religiously appreciating these instructions given them by their clergy.
The process of these Visitations must be understood to fully appreciate
the significance of their testimony. First of all, certain of the
parishioners were chosen and were examined upon oath as to the state
of the parish, and as to the way in which the pastor performed his
duties. As samples of these sworn depositions, what are to be found in
a “Visitation of Capitular manors and estates of the Exeter diocese”
may be taken; extracts from these have been printed not long ago by
Prebendary Hingeston Randolph, in the Register of Bishop Stapeldon.
The record of these Visitations comprises the first fifteen years of
the fourteenth century; at one place, Colaton, we find the _jurati_
depose that their parson preaches in his own way, and on the Sundays
expounds the Gospels, as well as he can (_quatenus novit_)! He does not
give them much instruction (_non multum eos informat_), they think, in
“the articles of faith, the Ten Commandments, and the deadly sins.”
At another place, the priest, one Robert Blond, “preaches, but,” as
appears to the witnesses, “not sufficiently clearly;” but they add, as
if conscious of some hypercriticism, that they had long been accustomed
to pastors who instructed them most carefully in all that pertained
to the salvation of their souls. But these are perhaps the least
satisfactory cases. In most instances the priest is said to instruct
his people “well” (_bene_), and “excellently” (_optime_), and the truth
of the testimony appears more clearly in places where, in other things,
the parish-folk do not consider that their priest was quite perfection;
as, for instance, at Culmstock, where the vicar, Walter, is said to
be too long over the Matins and Mass on feasts; or still more at St.
Mary Church, where the people think that in looking after his worldly
interests, their priest was somewhat too hard on them in matters of
tithe.
The Register from which these details are taken is a mere accidental
survival, but the point which it is of importance to remember is this:
that during Catholic times, in the course of every few years the clergy
were thus personally reported upon, so to say, to the chief pastor
or his delegates, and the oaths of the witnesses is a proof of how
gravely this duty was regarded. And here may be noted, in passing, a
fact not realized nor even understood, namely, that one of the great
differences between ecclesiastical life in the Middle Ages and modern
times lies in the fact that then people had no chance “of going to
sleep.” There was a regular system of periodical Visitations, and
everything was brought to the test of inquiry of a most elaborate and
searching kind, in which every corner, so to speak, was swept out.
In this special instance, before passing on, attention may be
called to the manifest intelligence, in spiritual things, shown by
these jurors--peasants and farmers--in out-of-the-way parishes of
clod-hopping Devon, in the early years of the fourteenth century.
To assist priests in the preparation of these familiar discourses,
manuals of all kinds were drawn up in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries. It is impossible here to do more than give the names of
a few of the best known. They are (1) The _Pars Oculi Sacerdotis_,
by William Pagula, or Parker. (2) The _Papilla Oculi_, by John de
Burgo, Rector of Collingham in A.D. 1385. (3) The _Regimen Animarum_,
compiled about 1343. (4) The _Speculum Christiani_, by John Walton. (5)
The _Flos Florum_, etc. All these, and many others like them, may be
called popular books of instruction. Besides these, of course, there
are a multitude of theological text-books, all calculated to aid the
clergy in what the great Grosseteste calls “as much a part of the _cura
pastoralis_ as the administration of the Sacraments.”
In the same way that the work of instruction proper took a fixed
form, so that of preaching was fashioned on a well-understood and
well-recognized model. A short exordium, following upon the chosen text
of Scripture, led almost invariably to a prayer for Divine guidance and
assistance, which concluded with the _Pater_ and _Ave_, and only then
did the preacher address himself to the development of his subject. For
the most part, until comparatively recent times, which have introduced
somewhat strange themes into the sacred pulpit, the sermon was based
almost entirely upon the Bible, and generally upon the Gospel or other
Scripture proper for the day. This practice, whilst it imbued the minds
of those who listened with a thorough knowledge of the sacred writings,
gives the sermons, as we read them now, so great a similarity that we
are apt to regard them as generally dull and uninteresting. With rare
exceptions it is clear that, in England at least, brilliant, startling,
and sensational sermonizing was not regarded with favour, but, on the
contrary, was looked on with suspicion, as savouring of the “treatise”
or method of the schools, and founded on the practice of heretics.
Surveying the ground of parochial preaching, one or two facts seem
to stand out from the background of much that is still vague and
uncertain. First, it is certain that popular and vernacular teaching
was by no means neglected by the parish priests in pre-Reformation
pulpits. Next to this is the prominence given to homely and familiar
instruction, as distinct from formal sermons, and the importance which
in those days was attached to the constant reiteration of the same old,
yet ever new, lessons of faith and practice. On the part of the people
hearing of sermons was taught as a duty, and they had to examine their
consciences as to whether they had tried to shirk the obligation. As
Myrc puts it--
“Has thou wythowte devocyone
I-herde any predicacyon?
Hast thou gon or setten else where
When thou myghtest have ben there?”
Besides the sermon, which followed upon the reading or singing of the
Gospel in the Mass, there were several other Sunday practices connected
with the pulpit. First may be mentioned the reading of the _Bede-roll_.
This was of two kinds, general and particular, and Dr. Rock has
printed an interesting specimen of the first and several examples of
the second. From the first a few quotations will make the nature and
intention of the Church in the “Bidding of Bedes” quite clear. It
begins--
“Masters and frendes, as for holy dayes and fasting days ye shall have
none thys weke” (of course, when there were any they were named), “but
ye maye doe all manner of good workes, that shall bee to the honoure
of God and the profyt of your own soules. And therefore, after a
laudable consuetude and lawfull custome of our mother holy Churche, ye
shall knele down movyng your heartes unto Almightye God, and makyng
your speciall prayers for the three estates, concerning all christian
people, that is to say for the spiritualtye and temporaltie and the
soules being in the paynes of purgatory.”
Then after mentioning the Pope, the metropolitan, the bishop, and
parish priests “having cure of mannes soule,” and in the “temporalty”
the king, queen, and royal family, with the lords, etc., the priest
from the pulpit recommended to the people’s prayers all those “that
have honoured the church wyth light, lamp, vestment, or bell, or any
ornaments, by the whyche the service of Almighty God is the better
maintained and kept.”
[Illustration: SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION]
[Illustration: YOUTHS RECEIVING HOLY COMMUNION]
After this, prayers were asked for all workers and tillers of the
earth; for the fruits and for proper weather for them; for those in
“debt or deadly sin,” that God may free them; for the sick and for all
pilgrims; and “for women that be in our ladyes bondes, that Almighty
God may send them grace, the child to receive the sacrament of baptism,
and the mother purification. Also ye shall praye for the good man or
woman, that this daye geveth bread to make the holy lofe, and for all
those that fyrste began it, and them that longest continue.”
The priest then turned towards the altar for the _Pater_ and _Ave_ with
the psalm _Deus misereatur_, etc., and these being finished, he turned
once more towards the people and said--
“Thirdly, ye shall pray for your frends’ soules, as your father’s
soule, your mother’s soule, your brethren’s soule, your sister’s soul,
your godfather’s soule, your godmother’s soul, and for all those souls
whose bones rest in this church and churchyard, ... and above all, for
those soules whose names be accustomed to be rehearsed in the bederoll
as I shall rehearse them unto you by the grace of God.”
Then followed the reading of the names from the bede-roll, one specimen
of which has been preserved by the antiquary Hearne, and which, he
says, is drawn up on a large octavo leaf of vellum, and contains merely
a series of names, at the end of which is the formula: “God have mercy
on these souls and of all Crystyn soules.”
This catalogue of names, sometimes called the “Dominical Roll,” was the
shortened form for ordinary occasions, but on certain days, such as
“All Saints’ day,” there was in the case of benefactors a longer form,
which set forth the individual reasons why the people should specially
remember these dead in their prayers. For entering the names on this
roll, a fee was paid to the parson by the parish; thus at Laverton,
in 1521, there is the entry in the churchwardens’ accounts: “Fee to
William Wright, the parish priest, for entering the names of Thomas
Greste, Agnes his wife, and John and William their children, on the
bede-roll.”
As examples of the longer form of proclamation may be given an entry
already cited on the bede-roll of St. Michael’s, Cornhill, which runs
thus--
“You must pray--for Richard Atfield, sometime parish parson of this
church, for he with the consent of the Bishop ordained and established
Matins, High Mass, and Even-song, to be sung daily in the year 1375.”
Or the following from the Laverton account--
“The suit of red purple velvet vestments were given by Sir John
Wright, parson, son of William Wright and Elizabeth, for the which you
shall specially pray for the souls” of the above, etc., “and for all
benefactors as well as them that be off lyve as be departed to the
mercy of God, for whose lives and soules is given heyr to the honour
of God, His most blessed mother our Lady Saynt Mare and all His saints
being in Heaven and the blessed matron Saynte Helene--and they to be
usyd at such principal feasts and times as it shall please ye curates,
as long as they shall last--for all these souls and all Christian
souls ye shall say one _Pater noster_.”
In many instances it was apparently the curate’s duty to read
the parish bede-roll, and the stipend he received for performing
this service was part of his benefice. In other cases, a fee was
paid to the parson on the day when the roll was read. Thus at St.
Mary-at-Hill, in 1490, there is a payment by the wardens, entered as
follows: “_Item._ To Mr. John Redy for rehersyng of the bederoll,
8_d._” One purpose served by thus keeping the memory of the good
deeds of parishioners who had passed away, before the memory of their
successors, was that it stimulated the latter to emulate the example of
these benefactors. Bishop Hobhouse is obviously right when he says that
popular bounty was undoubtedly elicited by hearing the names of the
doers of past generous deeds read out in church on great days. All, in
pre-Reformation days, appear to have been anxious, according to their
means, to find a place on this roll of honour.
Very similar to this bede-roll was what was known as the “Quethe-word,”
for which fees are recorded so often as having been paid. Apparently
this was the announcement of the death of a parishioner made for
the first time after his decease. The fee for the speaking of this
“Quethe-word” was usually paid by the wardens of the parish, but
possibly only when bequests had been made by the deceased to the
“common stock” of the parish.
Besides this kind of Sunday notice, the pulpit was the means by
which all manner of ecclesiastical or quasi-ecclesiastical business
was notified. In the first place, of course, the banns of intended
marriages were published on three successive Sundays and feast days.
Then such warnings to parents were given as reminding them of the
necessity of seeing that their children receive Confirmation, with the
information that the bishop would either be in the church or in the
neighbourhood at such a time. The Council of Oxford ordered that parish
priests were frequently to warn parents from the pulpit about this duty
of not delaying to bring up their children to the bishop.
Then there were constant appeals being made for assistance of some kind
or other, generally of a public or semi-public character, supported by
an indulgence, or grant of spiritual favours from the bishop. To take
an example: some time about 1270, Walter Langton, Bishop of Coventry
and Lichfield, wrote a letter on behalf of a work, for which one John
Perty was collecting. John Perty was the procurator and collector
of the bridge at or near Colwich, and he was trying to get money to
repair, or rather to rebuild, the bridge and its chapel, and at the
same time to gather sufficient endowment to maintain a priest. The
bishop asks all his priests to explain the matter from their pulpits,
to show that it was a work of charity, and to say that to all who
contribute in any way he grants forty days of indulgence under the
usual conditions.
The same bishop at another time orders all rectors and parish priests
to publish “at the time of their sermons and exhortations” his
indulgence to all who would visit the cathedral church of Lichfield
and contribute to the building of the spires of his cathedral. Other
episcopal letters, which were all to be read in the parish churches,
were of a more private character. One man, for instance, had suffered
great losses through a fire, which had destroyed his house; another had
had his barns burned; a third had been left almost destitute by having
his crops destroyed by floods; a fourth had been plundered by robbers;
a fifth had suffered the loss of an arm, etc. In all such cases, if
those who asked could prove that their needs were genuine, the bishop
had not apparently much hesitation in granting letters of indulgence to
those who would help in these Christian charities; and all such letters
became matter for the Sunday parish pulpit.
Then, it was in the church that all laws, civil as well as
ecclesiastical, were published. Here, too, notice of all manner of
civil proceedings was made. A, for instance, had died and been laid
to rest in the churchyard; it is from the pulpit of his parish church
that the fact is announced that he has left B and E the executors of
his will, and people are notified to send in their claims, or pay what
is owing to the estate to these two. Or it may be that A has died
intestate, or that those he has appointed to carry out his wishes will
not do so, in which cases people are to be warned that the bishop’s
official will administer the estate, and all claims are to be sent in
to him.
Then all questions of social order and well-being, as well as
infraction of law in the district, came before the people in some form
or other in the church and from the pulpit.
“When Agnes Paston,” for example, “built a wall (across a property to
which the people claimed access), it was thrown down before it was
half completed, and threats of heavy amercements (says Dr. Gairdner)
were addressed to her in church, and the men of Paston spoke of
showing their displeasure when they went in public procession on St.
Mark’s day.”
So, also, the parish priest of Standon, at the beginning of the
fifteenth century, was ordered to publish an excommunication under the
following circumstances: Margaret Basun, a parishioner, was charged
by some people with having stolen a silver ring belonging to Alice
Braymer, and with having sold it to Anne Boghley. Margaret Basun denied
the truth, and was called to make canonical purgation before the
bishop. She did so, and the bishop, having heard the case, declared her
innocent of the charge, and ordered her innocence to be proclaimed, and
an excommunication to be pronounced against those who had defamed her.
To take another sample case: a man spread false stories about the
apprentices of his father, saying that they had been the thieves of
some goods, etc., which had been stolen. An examination by the bishop
revealed the fact that it was the accuser who was in reality the
robber, and it was proved that he had made a false key, had opened his
father’s chest, and taken from it money and jewels. The bishop directed
that this should be told the people on the following Sunday.
Once more: a person has been much defamed in his parish by people
saying he had buried a child in his back garden. He denied this
charge utterly, and the denial was published to the people from the
pulpit, whilst his accusers were warned to come before the bishop and
oppose his purgation. Or, lastly: John Spencer, the official of the
Archdeacon of Lincoln, issued a letter to be read in the parish church,
in which he declares that he has had before him Alice B. and Matilda
S. The former had defamed the latter by calling her a _meretrix_. On
examination this was found to be untrue, and Matilda S. was declared
innocent. Alice B. is to be compelled to cease these injuries, and to
pay all the expenses.
Another set of proclamations which had to be made on the Sunday from
the parish pulpit were the excommunications pronounced by the bishop
or by some other authority. In the Register of Bishop Bronescombe
is a document, dated November 24, 1277, pronouncing two people of
good family excommunicated for living together without being rightly
married. The fact is notorious, and “the keys of the Church are vilely
despised,” and this contempt may be hurtful to ecclesiastical authority
if allowed to continue. For this reason the bishop’s sentence of
excommunication is ordered to be published in every church and chapel.
A second instance may be taken from Bishop Grandisson’s Register for
1335. It appears that one John Hayward, the bailiff of Plympton Priory,
for some reason not apparent, took sanctuary in the church of Sutton.
Despising the sanctity of the place, some people unknown broke down the
doors of the church, and, dragging the unfortunate man from his place
of safety, wounded him, and even broke both his thighs. The bishop
consequently orders the sentence of greater excommunication to be
pronounced upon the unknown criminals, “with bell and candle,” in all
churches.
Other instances of excommunications published from the church
pulpit are: (1) For detaining “charters, rolls, indentures, bills,
evidences, and other muniments,” which had to do with the right of
a man’s succession to the estate of his father. The persons holding
the documents are unknown, and so all who have them, or are assisting
in concealing them, are excommunicated after fifteen days. (2) For
stealing a trap to catch eels, set in a pool called in English “a
leap,” and throwing it into a pool in the town of C, belonging to the
Prior of O. (3) For laying violent hands on a priest, who was known
to be one by his dress and tonsure. (4) For breaking into the room of
Thomas, rector of a London parish. The room was, by the way, in the
Campanile, and the thieves took clothes, gold, and silver to the value
of 40_s._, etc.
As a final instance of this kind of denunciation, an incident recorded
in Bishop Grandisson’s Register for 1348 may be given. There had
been, the bishop says, much talk, and many complaints had reached his
ears about a woman named Margery Kytel, who exercised magic arts, and
was regarded as a witch. He (the bishop) had cited her to appear to
answer the charge; but she had not done so. The major excommunication
is ordered to be pronounced against her, and all people in every
church and chapel are to be warned, under the same penalty, not to
have anything to do with her, still less to consult this “phitonessa
demonica.”
A further class of parish notices were the citations of principles and
witnesses to ecclesiastical courts. For instance, on February 19, 1426,
an order was given to the chaplain who served the chapel of Baddesley
to cite those who had acted as executors of the wills of John Barkeby
and Juliana Power, for having done so without the leave of the Bishop
of Coventry. In answer to this, John West, Vicar of Pollesworth,
certifies that he has published the citation, and that Nicholas Power,
the son of the above-named Juliana, had acted as her executor and that
of John Barkeby. As a second example may be given the case of a rector
of a parish church in Staffordshire, who was ordered to cite two of
his parishioners, Thomas Grenegore and his wife, for keeping a bad
house in the parish, to appear at the prebendal church of Eccleshall on
August 10, 1426, “to receive correction for the good of their souls.”
Of much the same kind is the letter of William, Bishop of Coventry
and Lichfield, in 1441, which recites that Thomas, son of Richard
Tomlynson, of Marchington, in the county of Stafford, on September 6,
1420, broke into Sudbury church and stole three chalices, two vestments
worth £10, one breviary, a surplice, and two curtains, the property of
the churchwardens. The said Thomas, having been captured by the secular
power, had been handed over to the ecclesiastical authorities, and
this letter was to be published in the church of Sudbury, to summon
witnesses to appear at the bishop’s court.
Connected with this phase of parochial life were the public penances
which had to be performed in the parish churches. In the comparatively
rare instances of people convicted as heretics, the punishment was
so severe that, in these days, it must cause astonishment that
they were submitted to so quietly. For such a cause the penitent
had to walk barefooted and dressed only in underclothing, bearing
a bundle of faggots, in the Sunday procession for three successive
Sundays. During the course of the passage of the clergy and people
through the churchyard, the priest was to give certain disciplines
(_fustigaciones_), and the penitent was then to kneel at the entrance
of the chancel during Mass, with the faggot in front, and holding
a candle in one hand. Other public ecclesiastical punishments were
hardly less severe. I. de B., for example, in the fourteenth century,
was condemned to undergo six public whippings (_fustigaciones_)
on six Sundays before the procession in his parish church, for
having violently beaten a cleric. In the fifteenth century, for a
grave offence a person was enjoined to go round the market-place of
Marlborough on two market days _nudus usque ad camisiam et braccas_,
and to be whipped by a priest at each corner. This kind of penance,
however, was not confined to the laity. There are instances of clergy
being made to do public penances even in their own parish churches.
For instance, the rector of the church of O., being convicted before
the bishop of a crime, was sentenced to stand bareheaded at the font
for three Sundays during High Mass. He was to be vested in surplice
and stole, and to read his Psalter. He was then to go as a penitential
pilgrim to Lincoln, Canterbury, and Beverley, and at each to offer
a candle, and to bring back a testimonial letter that this had been
faithfully done.
To take one or two further examples of these public penances in church,
(1) A man convicted of the sin of incontinence, which has been a
scandal, is condemned to walk with bare feet and bareheaded before
his parish priest in the procession on two solemn feast days. (2) A
woman convicted of unchastity, publicly known, is sentenced to three
fustigacions round the parish church in the usual penitential way,
_sola camisia duntaxat induta_. She is to hold a wax candle of half a
pound in weight from the beginning of Mass till the Offertory, when it
is to be offered to the image in the chancel. This is to be done on
three Sundays, and if the condemned refuse to undergo the punishment,
she is then to be excommunicated, and is to be publicly proclaimed as
such on each feast day till she repent and undergo her penance.