HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

  ( PT.  19 ) - In the days when might was right the privileges of sanctuary served a useful purpose. That in later times they occasioned serious abuses could not be denied, and on the accession of Henry VII. the Pope restricted the rights of sanctuary very considerably, thereby setting an example which it was to be expected would have been followed by his successors. The / privilegium fori/, by which clerics were exempted from punishment by a secular tribunal was another cause of considerable friction. In 1512 Parliament passed a law abolishing this privilege in case of clerics accused of murder, etc., and though it was to have force only for two years it excited the apprehension of the clergy more on account of what it heralded than of what it actually enacted. When it came up again for discussion in 1515 even those of the clergy who were most remarkable for their subservience to the king protested vehemently against it. In a discussion that took place in the presence of Hen...

  ( CHAPTER  1 )  -  { PT.  18 }                                    For this reason some of the religious houses, imitating the example of the landowners generally, began to form grazing enclosures [ 10 ] out of their estates which had been hitherto under cultivation, a step that led in some cases to eviction and in all cases to a great reduction in the number of labourers employed. Others of them set up tanneries and such like industries that had been best left to the laymen. These measures led to ill-feeling and to a certain amount of hostility, but that the religious houses were not hated by the people is proved to demonstration by the rebellions which their suppression evoked in so many different parts of the country. It may be said in a general way that the relations between priests and people were neither particularly close nor particularly strained. The rights and pr...

    ( CHAPTER  1 )  -  { PT.  17 } - Unfortunately the accounts of the visitations have disappeared to a great extent except in case of the diocese of Norwich. In this diocese the visitations were carried out very strictly and very minutely, and although some abuse were detected the bishop could find   nothing of the wholesale corruption and immorality discovered a few years later by the minions of Cromwell. Similarly the commission appointed in 1536 to superintend the suppression decreed in that year, the members of which were drawn from the leading men in each country, report in the highest terms of houses which were spoken of as hot-beds of iniquity only a few moths before. Finally, if the monasteries and convents were really so bad as they are painted, it is a curious fact that although Leigh and Leyton were empowered by Cromwell to open the doors to many of the monks and nuns they could find in the thirteen counties which they visited only two nun...

  ( CHAPTER  1 )  -  { PT.  16 }                                  The king and Cromwell informed the Houses of the charges made by the commissioners, and demanded their consent to the bell of suppression. The whole measure was passed in a few days ( 11th to 18th March, 1536 ) and there is no proof that the /Comperta/ or a Black Book were presented to the members. On the contrary, it is clear from the preamble to the Act that in the larger monasteries religion was right well kept and observed, and that it was only in the smaller houses with less than twelve members that disorder and corruption existed, whereas in the reports of the commissioners no such distinction is observed, the charges being levelled just as strongly against the larger as against the smaller communities. Had Parliament been in possession of the reports or had there been any adequate discussion, it is difficul...

     ( CHAPTER  1 )  -  { PT.  15 }                              Indeed the charges which they make are so filthy and repulsive, and the delight with which they reveal in such abominations is so apparent, that one is forced to the conviction that they must have been men of depraved tastes quite capable of committing or of attempting to commit the crimes laid to their charge. Even if it had been otherwise, had the two commissioners been unprejudiced and fair in their proceedings, it is impossible to understand how they could have had an opportunity of making a really searching investigation into the condition of the monasteries and convents during the short time assigned for the work.   They began only in July 1535 and their work was completed in February 1536. In favour if the reliability of these reports the fact is urged that they were placed before Parliament, and that t...

  ( CHAPTER  1 )  -  { PT.  14 }                                  The main foundation for such an accusation is to be sought for in the letter and reports ( /Comperta/ ) of the commissioners sent out to examine into the condition of the monasteries and convents in 1535. Even if these documents could be relied upon as perfectly trustworthy they affect only a very small percentage of the religious houses, since not more than one-third of these establishments were visited by the commissioners during their hurried tour through the country, and as regards the houses visited serious crimes were perferred against at most two hundred and fifty monks and nuns. But there are many solid grounds for rejecting the reliability of these documents. The commissioners were appointed by Cromwell with the professed object of preparing the public mind for the suppression of the monasteries and conve...