[977]. Conc. Matiscon. 585. can. 5. “Omnes igitur reliquas fidei causas, quas temporis longitudine cognovimus deterioratas fuisse, oportet nos ad statum pristinum revocare, ne nobis simus adversarii, dum ea quae cognoscimus ad nostri ordinis qualitatem pertinere, aut non corrigimus, aut, quod nefas est, silentio praeterimus. Leges itaque divinae, consulentes sacerdotibus ac ministris aecclesiarum, pro haereditatis portione omni populo praeceperunt decimas fructuum suorum locis sacris praestare, ut nullo labore impediti, horis legitimis spiritualibus possent vacare ministeriis. Quas leges Christianorum congeries longis temporibus custodivit intemeratas; nunc autem paulatim praevaricatores legum poene Christiani omnes ostenduntur, dum ea quae divinitus sancita sunt, adimplere negligunt. Unde statuimus et decernimus, ut mos antiquus a fidelibus reparetur, et decimas aecclesiasticis famulantibus caeremoniis populus omnis inferat, quas sacerdotes aut in pauperum usum, aut in captivorum redemptionem praerogantes, suis orationibus pacem populo et salutem impetrent. Si quis autem contumax nostris statutis saluberrimis fuerit, a membris aecclesiae omni tempore separetur.” It must be confessed that Selden has thrown very great doubts upon the authenticity of this canon of the Council of Macon, and that it is of very questionable authority. See his History of Tithes, cap. 5. p. 65. It is hardly consistent with what Agobard of Lyons, who shortly after was bishop of the see itself in which Macon lies, declares: “Iam vero de donandis rebus et ordinandis aecclesiis nihil unquam in Synodis constitutum est, nihil a sanctis patribus publice praedicatum. Nulla enim compulit necessitas, fervente ubique religiosa devotione, et amore illustrandi aecclesias ultro aestuante,” etc. Agob. Lugdun. de Dispensatione, etc. p. 276. (Ed. Masson. Parisiis.) But as Eichhorn, who has deeply investigated this subject, appears to differ here from Selden, I have cited this Council on his responsibility, and with the more readiness, that it rather opposes than confirms my own opinion.
[978]. “De decimis, ut unusquisque decimam donet, atque per iussionem pontificis dispensentur.” Capit. 779, cap. 7. Pertz, iii.
[979]. See Appendix to this volume.
[980]. “If any one withhold tithes, let him pay lahslít among the Danes, wíte among the English.” Eád. Gúð. §6. Thorpe, i. 170.
[981]. Brompton says that Offa granted it, as far as Mercia was concerned, p. 772. Certainly, in general, Brompton’s authority is not very great; but I think that in this case he has probability on his side, if we restrict the grant to Offa’s demesne lands, or to a release of a tenth of the dues payable to the king on Folcland. A general enactment, comprising the whole kingdom, would scarcely have been omitted in any subsequent collection of laws. The law of Offa is indeed lost, but some of its provisions probably survive in the legislation of later kings. See Ælfr. Proem. Thorpe, i. 58. The absence of all mention of tithe by Ælfred is not conclusive: he takes just as little notice of cyricsceat, leohtsceat, sáwlsceat, and other payments which were unquestionably claimed by the church. Eádweard’s treaty with Gúðorm, though it does not define the parties from whom tithe was demandable, treats subtraction of it as an offence punishable at law.
[982]. Capitula et Fragm. Theod. Thorpe, ii. 65.
[983]. Excerpt. Ecgberhti, No. 24. Thorpe, ii. 100.
[984]. Excerpt. Ecgberhti, Nos. 101, 102. Thorpe, ii. 111, 112.
[985]. Excerpt. Ecgberhti, Nos. 4, 5. Thorpe, ii. 98.
[986]. The custom of the Romish church, as is well known, divided every oblation, or gain that accrued to the church from the contributions of the faithful, into four parts,—one for the bishop, one for the poor, one for the clergy, and one for the repairs of the fabric. Othlon, who wrote the Life of St. Boniface in the twelfth century, thus appeals to the universal custom of the church: “Quando quidem iuxta sanctorum canonum decreta decimas in quatuor portiones dividentes, unam, sibi [i. e. the bishops], alteram clericis, tertiam pauperibus, quartam restaurandis aecclesiis tradiderunt? Numquid avaritiae suae tantummodo consulentes, in distributione decimarum obliti sunt pauperum, restaurationisque aecclesiarum, sicut modo, pro dolor! cernimus agi? Canones enim sancti, ex quorum auctoritate exiguntur decimae, non solum decimas dari, sed etiam inter varios aecclesiae usus distribui; ut in urbibus quibuslibet et vicis Xenodochia habeantur, ubi pauperes et peregrini alantur. Sed tam sanctum et tam necessarium praeceptum in pluribus locis non solum minime curatur, sed etiam poene ignoratur. Nam solummodo illud legitur, quod epicopis decimae sint tribuendae; quid vero exinde agendum sit, vel si quidquam aliud curandum sit circa monasteria, tam a clericis—miserabile dictu—quam a laicis destructa, citraque iudicia religionis Christianae subversa, oblivioni seu ignorantiae commendatur.” Pertz, ii. 358. In the commencement of the seventh century, Gregory, in his rules for the government of the newly-planted English church, directed Augustine to make not four but three portions, inasmuch as he being a monk could have no separate share of his own. He says: “Mos autem sedis apostolicae est ordinatis episcopis praecepta tradere, ut in omni stipendio, quod accedit, quatuor debeant fieri portiones: una videlicet episcopo et familiae propter hospitalitatem atque susceptionem, alia clero, tertia pauperibus, quarta aecclesiis reparandis. Sed quia tua fraternitas monasterii regulis erudita, seorsum fieri non debet a clericis suis in aecclesia Anglorum quae, auctore Deo, nuper adhuc ad fidem adducta est, hanc debet conversationem instituere, quae initio nascentis aecclesiae fuit patribus nostris; in quibus nullus eorum ex his, quae possidebant, aliquid suum esse dicebat, sed erant eis omnia communia.” Beda, H. E. i. 27. The original canon is in Gratian. Caus. 12. q. ii. c. 30. Ed. Pithæi. fol. Paris, 1687, i. 240. Hence the directions of the Anglosaxon prelates, and the regulation of Æðelred, as to a threefold division.