ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 



Ecclesiasticus '' was a preliminary ; and in September of the same year a band 

 of informers had been sent into his diocese to make an inquiry for the purpose 

 of procuring incriminating evidence against the monks, as some sort of pretext 

 for it. Their report or ' Compendium Compertorum ' for Norwich^ gives a 

 list of abominable crimes. But the very grossness of its exaggerations 

 makes it unbelievable. The visitors did their work hurriedly, they had a 

 distinct object in view, their reports to Cromwell were secret, and the very 

 houses which stood worst in them were afterwards declared to bear a fair 

 character by gentlemen of the neighbourhood.' Moreover, visitation had 

 always been systematically and thoroughly carried out, and though mis- 

 demeanours and mismanagement had been dealt with, no indications can 

 previously be discovered of such a state of affairs as this pretends to describe.* 

 The visitations of the fifteenth century point to a regrettable laxity and love 

 of luxurious living, but cases of grave immorahty are rare, and it must be 

 remembered that the social reputation of a convent had a marked effect on its 

 finances ; in the case of the nunneries especially an immaculate reputation was 

 of vital importance ; and whereas none escaped unsmirched in 1535, for the 

 forty previous years only one instance of immorality occurs in Norfolk, that 

 of Agnes Smyth at Crabhouse in 15 14. 



In no county can the universal confiscation and plunder have carried 

 more terror and dismay than in Norfolk. The very number of the founda- 

 tions by which the spiritual and bodily needs of the people were looked after 

 made their abolition the more universally felt. After the death of Bishop 

 Nix, Parliament by an Act of 4 February, 27 Hen. VIII, transferred the 

 ancient revenues of the bishopric to the king and his successors, and the 

 estates of the abbey of Hulme and of the priory of Hickling were handed 

 over instead as an endowment.* Bishop Rugge — who had been abbot of 

 St. Benet's, Hulme, since 1530, and under whose rule there, at a visitation 

 carried out 14 June, 1532, discipline had been found to be very lax and the 

 monastery heavily in debt — from the day of his appointment proved the king's 

 complaisant tool.* Such was his treatment of the bishopric, and so deeply 

 did he get into debt, that he was compelled to resign in 1549, receiving an 



' This is a most complete and valuable account of the church in the county and its property. It gives 

 the value of procurations in the archdeaconry of Norwich as 72/i. I3<J'.V, in that of Norfolk as 140//'. gs. jJ^ ; 

 of inductions in that of Norwich as 4/;., in that of Norfolk as 6/;'. 14J. ^ri. ; of all castles, lordships, manors, 

 and all other possessions spiritual and temporal belonging to the bishop as worth clearly per annum, 

 978/i. 19/. \d^. 



^ Cal. L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 143-4. ' Rep. of the Commissioners, Chant. Certif. Norf. No. 90 (P.R.O.). 



* The visitations for 1492-1532 for the diocese of Norwich have been published by the Camden Society. 



' Blomefield, op. cit. iv, 539. 



^ It is interesting, however, to find even Bishop Rugge, while sorrowfully defending himself against sinister 

 reports, as puzzled as many others must have been to know what the king's wishes in matters of doctrine 

 really were. ' If he knew the king's pleasure as to what he should speak in his sermons, and what he should 

 not touch, he would always conform himself thereto ' (Ca/. L. and P. Hen. Fill, Gairdner, vol. xiv, pt. i, 

 865). Cranmer writes to Cromwell (ibid. vol. 12, pt. i, 80, 13 Jan. 1537) that it is reported the bishop 

 will appoint none to preach that be of right judgment. This is in a letter asking him to grant the king's 

 licence to preach to Mr. Gounthrop, parson of Wecting, ' a man of singular judgment and sobriety,' who can- 

 not be allowed in the diocese, because the bishop's chaplain. Dale, a man without learning and discretion, 

 publishes no good doctrine himself and preaches against Gounthrop. On the other hand, the bishop seems to 

 have approved himself to the duke of Norfolk and Sir Roger Townshend, who describe his examination of the 

 Observant Friar, Anthony Brown, as very clerkly 'though some in these parts doubted if the bishop meant 

 well about Brown's opinions' (ibid, xiii, pt. ii, 34). On the question of the sacraments he sided with the 

 king against Cranmer ; in 1540 he was appointed one of the commissioners for dealing with charges of heresy, 

 and was accused of much harshness in that capacity. 



255 



