DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6914#0049
causes of the decline of monachism. 17
imagined^ le^'°US zea^ nourish in our country, that a rich man would have
m, .j16 e ^ad lived in vain, if he had not left some monument of his pious
munificence "45 r» t
states) ] -Inett attributes these effects to the crusades i44 " Some men (he
break th ^ ma^e ras^ vows °f gomE to H°ly Land, and had a mind to
who Wei6"1' Were tau&n* to commute with the building of monasteries. Others
gave them^0m^ t^^^ler' being uncertain of their return to their estates, profusely
delivera aWa^ *° build or enrich monasteries. Others, in memory of their
°f their ^ ^r0In *ne hazards that war had exposed them to ; or in commemoration
And ' • 10nS aU<^ friencis wno bad perished therein, followed their example.
upon ' ^un(^re<^ years after, a.d. 1092, when the holy war was agreed
jlo m ^e Council of Clermont, there were about three hundred religious
which8 ^°UnC^ anc^ endowed in this kingdom. Of the change in public sentiment
• °ccasioned the cessation of raising such buildings, the following account is
the^el -the edit°F °f Tanner s " Notitia Monastica." " The very great wealth of
igious houses rendered them obnoxious both to the crown and to the no-
bility •__.+n +v.
beca ' crown, because it enervated the military force of the nation ;
whic^Se ^ ^"^"^bed its revenues as often as the ecclesiastics sheltered themselves,
they frequently endeavoured to do, under papal authority in the denial of
es ' and, more especially, because, in the contests with the see of Rome, the
bee" ^ Clergy illvariably adhered to the interests of the latter.—To the nobility,
Use tbe heads of those houses were become their rivals in opulence; because
tney stiff] • • .
sions ^ maintained the many regalities and immunities annexed to their posses-
°* the Were 0^ten at snit w^ tnem on tbis subject. The monks lost the favour
adhered ^ ran^S °^ society because they were austere masters, and seem to have
Tbe par m^re Pertinaciously than the laity to the rigid customs of ancient days.
gradual] °^er^ must have viewed them with a jealous eye, as they were
though fre SUr^ln^ *be best part of their possessions ; and the bishops themselves,
than they ^U6nt^ taken from the cloister, were no sooner invested with the mitre
extensive interest to be distinct from that of the regulars : and that the
eccles' e.^UV1'e£es and exemptions claimed by the latter were as inimical to
celeratedb^ ^ ^ °ivil authority- The °Peration of tliese causes was much ac-
e y the introduction of the mendicant orders, who held forth to the pub-
"chm" Malmes- de Pontif-lib-iiL
ui'ch Hist. vol. ii. p. 220. See Mills's " History of the Crusades," 2 vols. 8vo.
d
imagined^ le^'°US zea^ nourish in our country, that a rich man would have
m, .j16 e ^ad lived in vain, if he had not left some monument of his pious
munificence "45 r» t
states) ] -Inett attributes these effects to the crusades i44 " Some men (he
break th ^ ma^e ras^ vows °f gomE to H°ly Land, and had a mind to
who Wei6"1' Were tau&n* to commute with the building of monasteries. Others
gave them^0m^ t^^^ler' being uncertain of their return to their estates, profusely
delivera aWa^ *° build or enrich monasteries. Others, in memory of their
°f their ^ ^r0In *ne hazards that war had exposed them to ; or in commemoration
And ' • 10nS aU<^ friencis wno bad perished therein, followed their example.
upon ' ^un(^re<^ years after, a.d. 1092, when the holy war was agreed
jlo m ^e Council of Clermont, there were about three hundred religious
which8 ^°UnC^ anc^ endowed in this kingdom. Of the change in public sentiment
• °ccasioned the cessation of raising such buildings, the following account is
the^el -the edit°F °f Tanner s " Notitia Monastica." " The very great wealth of
igious houses rendered them obnoxious both to the crown and to the no-
bility •__.+n +v.
beca ' crown, because it enervated the military force of the nation ;
whic^Se ^ ^"^"^bed its revenues as often as the ecclesiastics sheltered themselves,
they frequently endeavoured to do, under papal authority in the denial of
es ' and, more especially, because, in the contests with the see of Rome, the
bee" ^ Clergy illvariably adhered to the interests of the latter.—To the nobility,
Use tbe heads of those houses were become their rivals in opulence; because
tney stiff] • • .
sions ^ maintained the many regalities and immunities annexed to their posses-
°* the Were 0^ten at snit w^ tnem on tbis subject. The monks lost the favour
adhered ^ ran^S °^ society because they were austere masters, and seem to have
Tbe par m^re Pertinaciously than the laity to the rigid customs of ancient days.
gradual] °^er^ must have viewed them with a jealous eye, as they were
though fre SUr^ln^ *be best part of their possessions ; and the bishops themselves,
than they ^U6nt^ taken from the cloister, were no sooner invested with the mitre
extensive interest to be distinct from that of the regulars : and that the
eccles' e.^UV1'e£es and exemptions claimed by the latter were as inimical to
celeratedb^ ^ ^ °ivil authority- The °Peration of tliese causes was much ac-
e y the introduction of the mendicant orders, who held forth to the pub-
"chm" Malmes- de Pontif-lib-iiL
ui'ch Hist. vol. ii. p. 220. See Mills's " History of the Crusades," 2 vols. 8vo.
d