Page:VCH London 1.djvu/403

 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY minister served the cure himself and resided in his parish, and whether he said divine service in the church and administered the tw^o sacraments, and if not, who did it for him."^ The clergy at this time were divided into preach- ing and non-preaching ministers, and the sermon and lecture were yearly becoming a more prominent feature in the church services. There can be little doubt that the diversity of religious opinions which prevailed in London at the beginning of the 17th century was in no small part due to this latter fact. As has been shown, the clergy of the day held widely differing views on subjects of great importance, and they readily availed themselves of the opportunities afforded them of instructing their parishioners, each accord- ing to his own ideas. In 1567 so many persons were found to be preaching without any licence from the bishop that an order was issued by the lord mayor in the queen's name for their arrest and imprisonment,"* while the bishop charged his clergy to allow no one to preach in their churches who could not produce a written licence."^ An account of an interview between the bishop and Mr. Pattenson, a suspended minister who had been arrested for preaching without permission, throws some light upon the preacher's point of view. When asked by the bishop who had licensed him to preach, Mr. Pattenson replied that he regarded the charge given him at his ordination as a sufficient licence ; and that as to preaching elsewhere than in his own cure, he con- sidered that his cure was wherever he met with a congregation willing to hear him."* There were many different opinions as to the advantages and disadvantages of ' preaching ministers.' Thomas Sampson,"^ prebendary of St. Paul's, wrote to Burghley in 1 574 lamenting that there were ' many congregations or parishes which have certain reading priests as ministers, but are utterly destitute of pastors, preachers, and such as are both able and diligent to instruct them.' He regretted that so many ' most painful and profitable ministers ' were ' molested and hindered by the severe exacting of the law ' regarding the Book of Common Prayer."* On the other hand the Privy Council in January 1579-80 wrote to the bishop in strong condemna- tion of the way in which certain preachers ' do only apply themselves to the office of preaching, and . . . separate themselves from the executing of the one part of the office of a priest, which is as well to minister the Sacraments as to preach the Gospel . . . Some are . . . termed reading and ministering ministers, and some preachers and no-Sacrament ministers.' "' A week later the articles of inquiry above alluded to were issued, and London churchwar- dens were required to state whether their minister himself preached or lectured in his church, or whether he employed a substitute, and if so, whether the latter not only preached, but also administered the two sacra- ments in his own or any other church.^'" In 1581 a great effort was made to supply London with good and learned preachers, and the lord mayor was directed to raise contributions for the purpose from the different City parishes. ^-^ A committee was ultimately appointed to arrange the matter,^-^ but not until after considerable delay, the lord mayor having objected to '" Strype, Jy/mer,csip. iv. '" Corp. Rec. Letter Rk. V, fol. 105^ ; Journ. xix, fol. 48. '" GrindaPs Rem. (Parker Soc), 293. "" S.P. Dom. Eliz. xliv, 20. '" Rector of Allhallows Bread Street, temp. Edward VI. "' Cecil MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.), ii, 73. '" Jets ofP.C. xi, 367. "" Strype, Aylmer, cap. iv. "' Anal. Rememb. 364-5 (i, 248-9). ''' Corp. Rec. Letter Bk. Z, fol. 194^ ; see St. Stephen Walbrook Chwdns.' Accts. 158 1-2.