"No priest, during the reign of Catholicity, was buried or enshrined without his ring."—P. 81.
I have seen a similar statement elsewhere, and wish to ask, 1st, Were priests formerly buried with the ring? 2ndly, If so, was it a mere custom, or was it ordered or authorised by any rubric or canon of our old English Church?
I am very strongly of opinion that such never was the custom, and that the statement above quoted has its origin in the confounding priests with bishops. Martene says, when speaking of the manner of burying bishops,—
"Episcopus debet habere annulum, quia sponsus est. Cæteri sacerdotes non, quia sponsi non sunt, sed amici sponsi vel vicarii."—De Antiquis Ecclesiæ Ritibus, lib. III. cap. xii. n. 11.
Ceyrep.
Butler's "Lives of the Saints."—Can any of your correspondents supply a correct list of the various editions of this popular work? The notices in Watt and Lowndes are very unsatisfactory.
J. Yeowell.
Marriage of Cousins.—It was asserted to me the other day that marriage with a second cousin is, by the laws of England, illegal, and that succession to property has been lately barred to the issue of such marriage, though the union of first cousins entails no such consequences. Is there any foundation for this statement?
J. P.
Castle Thorpe[[4]], Bucks.—A traditional rhyme is current at this place which says that—