No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2011
The calibre of the early Elizabethan clergy left much to be desired and much criticism was levelled by contemporaries and near contemporaries at the bishops for their failure to check the flow of insufficient ministers into benefices. While historians have acknowledged the existence of legal obstacles in the way of a firm episcopal policy in this regard, and have come gradually to realise some of the profound implications of the patronage system, no one has charted in detail the law of patronage which so hampered hierarchical attempts to raise the standard of the parochial clergy.
page 247 note 1 Phillimore, R. J., Ecclesiastical Law, London 1873Google Scholar.
page 247 note 2 W. Prynne, Jus Patronatus, London 1654.
page 248 note 1 See O'Day, M. R., ‘Clerical Patronage and Recruitment in England in the Elizabethan and Early Stuart Periods’, unpublished University of London Ph.D. thesis, 1972, 23–71Google Scholar et passim.
page 249 note 1 Statutes of the Realm, 13 Henry VII c. 14; 14 Henry VIII, c. 2.
page 249 note 2 Lichfield Joint Record Office, B/A/1/15, fol. 13.
page 249 note 3 E.g. L.J.R.O., B/A/4/17, Godfrey Platts ordained deacon, 13 June 1615; instituted to Alfreton vicarage, 14 June 1615; ordained priest, 11 February 1615/16.
page 249 note 4 S.R., 14 Car. II, c. 4.
page 249 note 5 S.R., 13 Eliz., c. 12; reinforced by Constitutions of 1575: Cardwell, E., Synodalia, Oxford 1842, I. 135–6Google Scholar.
page 249 note 6 Cambridge University Library, Ee.2.34, Correspondence of bishop Parkhurst, doc. 117.
page 250 note 1 Phillimore, op. cit., 412.
page 250 note 2 S.R., 13 Eliz., C.12.
page 250 note 3 P.R.O., E101/521/8.
page 250 note 4 Cardwell, Synodalia, ii. 503; i, 128, 145, 150, 271–3.
page 250 note 5 Calendar of State Papers Domestic, Elizabeth, 1547–78, vol. lxxvi, 1570, Register Book of Grants of Dispensations for Plurality of Benefices, 1559–70.
page 251 note 1 Barratt, D. M., ‘Condition of the Parish Clergy from the Reformation to 1660 in the Diocesses of Oxford, Worcester and Gloucester’, unpublished Oxford University D.Phil, thesis, 1950, 148Google Scholar.
page 251 note 2 E.g. P.R.O., E101/523/8, William Savage clerk paid £4 10s to hold two livings in 1571; at a time when he was already expected to surrender first fruits to the crown this was an added burden.
page 251 note 3 S.R., 5 Eliz., c.28; see also 1585, 27 Eliz. Case of Albany v. bishop of St. Asaph, quoted in Phillimore, op. cit., 435.
page 251 note 4 Cardwell, Synodalia, i. 132 ff.
page 251 note 5 C.U.L., Ee.2.34, doc. 111.
page 251 note 6 Phillimore, op. cit., 437.
page 252 note 1 I owe this point to Professor Collinson, who criticised an early draft of this article.
page 252 note 2 Owen, H. G., ‘The London Parish Clergy in the Reign of Elizabeth’, unpublished University of London Ph.D. thesis, 1957, 252Google Scholar.
page 253 note 1 C.U.L., Ee.2.34, doc. 37.
page 254 note 1 Cf. R. O'Day, ‘The Ecclesiastical Patronage of the Lord Keeper, 1558–1642’, T.R.H.S., 1973Google Scholar.
page 255 note 1 Foster, C. W. (ed.), Lincoln Episcopal Records in the Time of Thomas Cooper, Lincoln Record Society Publications, II (Lincoln 1912), 138Google Scholar.
page 255 note 2 Lincoln Record Office, COR/R/2.6.6, 30 November 1601.
page 255 note 3 R. Baxter, Reliquiae Baxterianae, London 1696, 176.
page 255 note 4 C.U.L., Ee.2.34, doc.36.
page 256 note 1 W. H. Frere (ed.), Registrum Matthei Parker, Canterbury and York Society, iii, 1117–1123.
page 257 note 1 L.J.R.O., B/V/1/13.
page 257 note 2 Ibid.
page 257 note 3 Ibid.
page 257 note 4 Ibid.
page 258 note 1 Guildhall Library, London, MS. 9531/13, Sandys, fols. 181r–183v.
page 259 note 1 C.U.L., Ee.2.34., doc.88.
page 260 note 1 Phillimore, op. cit., 456–7.
page 260 note 2 As the living in question would by this time presumably have been in lapse, this is a moot point.
page 260 note 3 B.M. Harleian MS. 385, fol. 75.