Posted by John W on July 22, 1998 at 04:29:23:
In response to Doctors and livings, written by Constanza on July 21, 1998 at 09:36:30
The patron of a living did not own it, but only the right of presenting a candidate for it--appointing him in effect. The patron had no right to the revenues of the parish as such, though who knows what happened in the period of greatest corruption up until the 1840's. The living belonged to the incumbent, under what was known as 'Parsons Freehold' , or, if he was a Vicar he was paid a stipend by the body which owned the freehold of the living, maybe a college or a cathedral chapter. The reasons for all this are complex, and are dealt with in earlier submissions, but they have to do with the curious English habit of revolutionising institutions without changing the details of their administration. When the Fat Thief abolished the monasteries and monastic cathedral chapters, the relationships between them and the parishes were left in place, and the Novi Homines of the glorious Church of England turned them into a form of tradable property. What old-fashioned Christians used to call Simony.
- LOL! Lesley 00:54:44 7/27/98 (0)
- So, when the always honourable Sir Thomas disposed of the living Constanza 08:39:50 7/23/98 (0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.