The Elizabethan Parish in its Ecclesiastical and Financial Aspects

by Sedley Lynch Ware

Next in importance to church attendance and the observance of the sacraments came the duty of all parishioners to contribute to the parish expenses. We have viewed church courts at work, compelling wardens to levy church rates; we have now to see how the judges forced recalcitrant ratepayers to pay the sums assessed upon them to the wardens or other collectors.

Among the earliest vestry minutes of the parish of St. Christopher-le-Stocks, London, is one which, after ordering that an assessment be made for the clerk's wages and for pews, decreed that any rebellious persons should be summoned before themselves, the vestry, to be reformed. But if the rebel would not appear, or, on appearance, remain stubborn to reason, then the churchwardens should sue him before the ordinary at the parish costs "vntill suche tyme as he be reduced vnto a good order, and hath paid bothe the costys of the sute and the chargs that he owith vnto the church…."[125] Fifty years later we find this vestry ordaining the same procedure to be followed against parish debtors, and referring to its former order.[126]

It seems, in fact, to have been the well-understood thing that just as parish rates to defray the costs of those matters of parish administration, falling within the province of the ecclesiastical courts, were to be assessed by the authority, and under the direction, of those courts, so, too, the recovery of these rates was to be had before the same tribunals. It is not denied that recourse may occasionally have been made in these matters to the courts of common law, but it is believed that the proper remedy was at ecclesiastical law.[127] Furthermore, we believe that the means at the disposal of the ecclesiastical courts for putting their judgments into effect were quite sufficient and in practice effective.

What these means were will be taken up and discussed a little further on. Returning to the matter of suing parish debtors in courts Christian, it is interesting to find that in the language of the period a suit "at law" did not always mean at common law. An order of the vestry of Stepney, London, in February, 1605-6, after determining the manner in which £50 should be raised to pay off parish debts due to the bell founder, adds that persons refusing to pay their shares, or neglecting to do so, should not find themselves aggrieved "if the same be recouered against them by Lawe." And the meaning of this term is fully explained by these subsequent words in the same order, that the churchwardens shall "at the chardg of the p[ar]ish appointe and entertayne one doctor and a proctor to sue and recouer the same by lawe of any p[er]son [etc.]."[128] Now doctors and proctors practiced before ecclesiastical tribunals only.[129]

That presentment to the ordinary was the common and usual way, not only of recovering church rates, but any thing of value that belonged to the parish and was unjustly detained, the act-books and other documents of the time plentifully show. Thus in Archbishop Parker's Visitation Articles for the diocese of Canterbury in the year 1569, he requires all churchwardens to report to their ordinaries "whether there be any money or stoke, appertaininge to any paryshe churche, in anye manne's handes, that refuse or differeth to paye the same [etc.]."[130] The wardens of Melton Mowbray record under the year 1602 an item for charges at the court at Leicester against a parishioner "for not payinge his levi for the churche."[131] Those of Ashburton, Devon, itemize in 1568-1569 two shillings "for a zytation to those that wold nott pay to the power."[132] As the wardens of East Tilbury were going about among the parishioners demanding money of each one according to the rating inscribed on an assessment roll which they carried with them, one Garrett, a constable, discontented that he himself should be rated as high as four shillings, seized the roll and refused to produce it. This, of course, put an end to further collections. For this he was presented by the vicar before the consistory court at Stratford Bow Chapel. Here he alleged that the rating "was very unequally made." But the judge warned Garrett to appear in court the following Tuesday to answer for his contempt. Further he was to pay his four shillings to the wardens and bring to the judge the wardens' certificate that he had done so. On the day appointed Garrett was present in court with the vicar and wardens. The decree of the court is headed: "Negotiu[m] reparaco[n]is eccl[esi]e de East Tilburie," and is so characteristic of the thoroughgoing and searching manner in which ordinaries supervised the administration of parish affairs that we cannot forbear to quote a large part of it in full. "Touchinge the same Wm Garrett," the registrar inscribes in the act-book, "the churchwardens do here testifie that he hathe payd his iiij s. w[hi]ch he was rated at…& they saye they have receyved it. Towching the churchwardens & the repayre [of] the church," the scribe continues, "the Judge doth order that the minister, Mr Howdsworth, [and seven others named, including wardens, sidemen and constables]…p[ro]cure workmen of all trad[es], & then sett downe under their hand in writing what chardg it will be to repayer the church sufficiently in all thing wharein it is decayd, as namely, tyling, paving, masonns worke, carpenters worke & glasing…and when they have under the workmens hand founde what will repayer the churche in every p[ar]ticuler, then shall they all nyne assemple themselves in the church [on a day named]…and make a rate to that proportion w[hi]ch shall remayne above the rate already allowed of…and they shall certify in Stratford bowe Chappell bothe of the vew making by the workmen, of the gathering of the rate already made, of their making a new rate…and of the gathering thereof; and likewise how farr they have p[ro]ceeded in the repayer of the church the ixth of Aprill next: and for the punish[men]t of him, the said Wm Garrett, for his contemptuous taking away of the rate, as is complayned of, it is respited untill this p[resent] order be p[er]formed; & he is now monished to appeare in the Consistorie the first court day [etc]…."[133] So, too, when Richard Fynsett of Clayton, Sussex, was "detected" to the official for not paying his rate for church repairs, November, 1595, he appeared and claimed that not only was his rating excessive, but that the assessment had not been according to custom, to wit, made by the majority of the parishioners. He was summoned by the judge to prove his allegation at the next court day, and to pay his court and other fees. He was probably unable to prove his point, for under the 9th December following the record simply states "Comparuit et solvit feoda debita."[134]

The wardens of Swalecliffe, Kent, complain to the archdeacon of Canterbury in 1565 that their church is near utter decay, but the parish is so poor that they cannot repair it unless an assessment be made on the lands within the parish, for the making of which assessment they ask for an authorization.[135] Two years later they appear and say in court that their church still lacks windows, "and the parish is not able to mend the same, without it may please you that the rest of the cess that was made may be levied, which we cannot get unless we have your aid."[136]

In the same way the wardens of St. Alban's "implored the aid of the judge," because they wished divers persons who refused to pay their rates "co[m]pelled therunto by aucthoritye of this court," otherwise the unpaid workmen on their ruinous church would leave, and the half-finished structure sustain damage by winter weather.[137] The act-books teem with such presentments as the following: one Holaway refuses to give to the poor-box, "and is found able by the parish."[138] Thomas Arter will give but a half-penny to the poor. Arter appears and "saithe that he is not of the wealthe that men takithe him to be." The judge commands him to pay a half-penny every week, and dismisses him.[139] "John Wilson haithe not paide his clerke wages by the report of the clerke."[140] "Here follow the names of such, as being able, refuse notwithstanding to pay to the poor man's box [eight names follow]";[141] or "The presentment made by the churchwardens and sidemen…of all such as are behind for a cess made for the Church and refuse to pay [five names]."[142] John Baldwin presented for that "the fame and report goeth" that he keeps back £10, a legacy given seven years previously for church repairs and the poor-box, "and the Church and the poor have wanted the same, having no benefit thereof, as we know."[143] One Consant received a cow belonging to the parish "and hath not made an account to the parish for her."[144] Jeremy Robson is cited "for detaining our Clerk's wages from the land which he occupieth in our parish after 6 s. 8 d. for a plough land of 140 acres."[145] Two lessees of the parish are presented "for withholding the farm of two acres and a half of church land one year and a half unpaid."[146] John Smithe presented for felling and selling a great oak which stood upon church land, "whereas now we stand in lack of the same to repair our Church."[147] A parishioner is cited before the ordinary because he withholds church goods and refuses both to enter into bond for them and to make an accounting.[148] So men are presented for not paying the parish fees due for the burial of members of their family, or for the ringing of knells;[149] for suffering a church tenement or a part of the church fence, which they are bound to repair, to fall into decay,[150] and so forth. In short, any one at all, whether in the capacity of parish officer; rate payer; trustee; administrator or executor; lessee of the parish cattle or its lands or tenements—any one, in fact, standing in the relation of debtor to the parish in a matter falling within the jurisdiction of the spiritual courts, could be, and was, compelled by these to pay or to account to the parishioners.

Not only did the Church regulate many acts of a parishioner's life, and preside over his moral conduct, making him pay in great measure the costs of this disciplinary administration, but it also was entrusted with his education, through which it sought to control his ideas and convictions, and to direct and form public opinion. The education and training of a nation depend, of course, in greatest measure on its primary schools and its press. As for its universities, these are but the apex on the educational pyramid, for a very select few only. Now the primary schools were represented in the times whereof we write by the parish schoolmaster, the familiar "ludimagister" of the canons and act-books, and by the incumbent himself. For the people at large the press was represented almost entirely by the licenced preacher, and, in the larger towns, the licenced lecturer.

The Canons of 1571 ordain that no one shall teach the humanities nor instruct boys, whether in school or in private families,[151] unless the diocesan licence him under his seal. Nor are schoolmasters to use other grammars or catechisms than those officially prescribed. Every year schoolmasters are to commend to the bishop of the diocese the best read among their pupils, and those that by their achievements give promise that they may usefully serve the State or the Church, so that their parents may be induced to educate them further to that end.[152] Bishop Barnes in his Injunctions of 1577 commands that all incumbents of cures in Durham diocese not licenced to preach shall "duly, paynefully and frely" teach the children of their several parishes to read and write. Furthermore, teachers shall exhort the parents of those boys who have proved themselves apt at learning and of "pregnant capacitie" to cause their sons to continue their studies and to acquire the good and liberal sciences. On the other hand they shall induce fathers of sons of little wit or capacity to put them to husbandry, or some other suitable craft, that they may grow to be useful members of the commonwealth.[153] In this diocese we find schoolmasters by profession ("ludimagistri") summoned at the visitations very regularly, and there seem to have been a considerable number of them in the towns, though not in the country parishes, where the curates doubtless officiated as instructors of the youth according to the bishop's monitions.[154] Everywhere in the proceedings of the ecclesiastical courts schoolmasters are "detected" to the judges from time to time for having no licence to teach.[155]

As for the pulpit, that great instrument of political guidance at a period when politics consisted chiefly of religious contentions,[156] it is well known that Elizabeth and her advisors grasped at once its paramount importance, and that she had been on the throne but little over a month when she issued her proclamation inhibiting all preaching and teaching for the time being. This command was followed by her Injunctions of the next year, forbidding any to preach unless licenced by herself, her two archbishops, the diocesan, or her visitors.[157] As is well known also, no command was more universally enforced. It is constantly mentioned in the metropolitan or diocesan injunctions or articles of the period,[158] and the proceedings before the ordinaries bear witness to its enforcement.[159]