ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 



The bishops doubtless did their best, and it is of interest to note that of 

 the four Hertfordshire incumbents collated by Bishop Hugh of Wells *' two 

 were described as ' clerks,' while the others were graduates and presumably 

 in full orders. The view of Edward I may be judged from rather later 

 examples : John de Sandale, sub-deacon, held the living of North Mimms 

 in 1309," he was afterwards Lord Chancellor ; Robert de St. Albans, deacon 

 and king's clerk, was presented by Edward I to the living of Essendon, but 

 made no attempt to take further orders." It was only to be expected that 

 the less important patrons should follow the royal example." In 1297 

 Archbishop Peckham issued constitutions by which a rector in minor orders 

 was forbidden to retain his benefice," but a dispensing power had been 

 reserved to the bishops *' by the Council of Lyons, and what could only be 

 obtained with difficulty in England was much more easily acquired at the 

 Papal Court. In 1 309 William de Langley was a notable pluralist with 

 livings in East Anglia, Yorkshire and at Eastwick. He was ' molested ' by 

 the Archbishop of York for neglecting to take holy orders, applied to the 

 pope and received dispensation to retain his benefices.*' 



One cause for dispensation from taking orders admitted by the bishops 

 in the 1 3th century was the desire to study theology. The Council of 

 Rouen in 1231 gave the beneficed clerk the alternative of ordination or study. 

 The necessity for this provision and the vigilance required of a bishop may 

 be judged from the difficulty of Bishop Hugh of Wells in obtaining an 

 efficient parish priest for Shenley. The patroness, Joan le Blunt, had sent 

 her son Richard into the church. Richard in 1221 was described as a clerk, 

 but his learning made no favourable impression on Bishop Hugh, who 

 thought, however, that ' there was hope of him.' So the young man was 

 instituted, but ordered to the university under pain of deprivation, while the 

 cure was placed in the hands of Hugh de Rof, chaplain.^" Richard 

 evidently failed to reach the required standard, and the bishop perhaps carried 

 out his threat, for in the following year Joan was again presenting to the 

 living. This time her nominee was Matthew son of Waleran, clerk, but 

 the bishop seems to have made inquiries and to have been suspicious of his 

 acquirements, for, though Matthew was instituted, the bishop insisted on an 

 oath being taken in his presence that he would attend the university for 

 study. A note was added, somewhat grimly, to the record of these doings 

 that ' if, as is said, he do not attend the schools, his benefice shall be 

 sequestered into the hands of the bishop.'" Bishop Hugh was evidently 

 well informed, for another rector was instituted a year later. '^ That the 

 bishop's requirements were not excessively high may be judged from the 

 constitutions of Grossteste. According to these '^ ' each shepherd of souls and 

 every parish priest ' was required to know the commandments, the nature of 

 the seven deadly sins and of the seven sacraments. Those who were priests 



*^ Rot. Hugonis de Welles, i, 126, 127. " Newcourt, Repert. i, 40. 



*' Line. Epis. Reg. Sutton, Memo. fol. 56. 



*' cf. Rot. Hugonis de Welles (Cant, and York Soc), iii, 45, 47. 



*' Lyndewode, Provinciale (ed. 1679), 22, 24. 



*8 For Hertfordshire examples see Line. Epis. Reg. Sutton, Memo. fol. 55, 56. 



*' Cal. Papal Letters, ii, 51. 



«° Rot. Hugonis de Welles (Cant, and York Soc), iii, 37. 



" Ibid. 39. «2 Ibid. 41. ^^ Epistolae (Rolls Ser.), 155. 



299 



