[115c] Mr. Kemble thinks every mark had its religious establishment, its “fanum” or “hearth;” “that the priest or priests attached to these heathen churches had lands, perhaps free-will offerings too, for their support;” and further, “that the Christian Missionaries, acted on a well grounded plan of turning the religio loci to account;” and that “whenever a substantial building was found in existence, it was taken possession of for the behoof of the new religion.”—Saxons in England, vol. ii. p. 424.
[118] Commentaries, Book i. chap. 11.
[119a] See Report on Church Rates, page 461. H. C. 1851. 541.
[119b] Minster and Monastery, were names anciently applied to all parish-churches. Sed et universim ecclesiæ omnes monasteræ dictæ. Du Cagne’s Glossary.
[120] Anglo-Saxon History, vol. ii. pages 422, 501, 546.
[121] Dr. Cove’s Essay on the Revenues of the Church of England, p. 72; and Wilkins’s Anglo-Saxon Laws, p. 71.
The extracts from Mr. Kemble’s work shew how this encouragement to church buildings was abused; and how little the parvenu aristocracy, thus made, knew of moral obligation.
[122a] Commentaries, book 1. cap. 11, p. 387, tenth edition.
[122b] The statute against this “new heresy,” which “had been surreptitiously obtained by the clergy;” the citation of Wickliffe before Courtney, bishop of London, and rousing the populace against the Duke of Lancaster and Lord Piercy who protected him, were all of no avail; the truth which Wickliffe advocated advanced, and when he was cited before the Lambeth Synod, even the people of London saw their previous error, and protected him.—Vide Hume. “Miscellaneous Transactions during Richard the Second’s reign.”
[123] Sir H. Spelman says impropriations are so called “as being improperly in the hands of laymen;” others say, impropriation is a corruption of in-appropriation.