RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Annie65115 on Thursday 14 April 16 14:34 BST (UK)

Title: "A papist"
Post by: Annie65115 on Thursday 14 April 16 14:34 BST (UK)
"A papist". I saw this comment next to a burial in a 17th century church record.

I didn't keep a note of the name and exact date but this was Baslow, Derbyshire and of note is the fact that in 1588, just a few miles away at Padley, a landed family lost their home for concealing two catholic priests, and the priests were hung drawn and quartered. This wouldn't have been within the lifetime of the "papist" being buried but I'm sure would have been known of.

Anyway, I just wondered if anyone had found similar entries in old PRs, and also how covert Catholics usually buried their dead? I presume they would have stayed away from the local Anglican church normally and if so, were there then issues when they needed to be married or buried? Or would they have taken part in the Anglican services normally then held private covert Catholic services separately?
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Lilym on Thursday 14 April 16 19:51 BST (UK)
I found several in a north of England burial register, after all they had to be buried in the parish churchyard. It was probably up to the vicar how they were entered in the register.
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: clayton bradley on Thursday 14 April 16 19:53 BST (UK)
Somewhat later than your reference, my ancestors were papists in Lancashire in the 17th and 18th centuries and they were buried at their local Anglican churches, Church Kirk or Altham, where they were labelled as papist in the registers, sometimes with the additional comment that no services were held, they being papists. Presumably a Catholic service was held, but there is no record, cb
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Blue70 on Thursday 14 April 16 20:22 BST (UK)
Liverpool 19th century burial registers have a lot of "Papist" or "Romanist" burials it just meant that the ceremonial aspect was not done by the C of E but by an RC priest. Restrictions against Catholics were relaxed over time. I have ancestors in Lancashire in the "Return of Papists" of 1767 a census of Catholics. They married and were buried in the C of E but baptised their children in RC chapels.


Blue
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Joney on Thursday 14 April 16 20:52 BST (UK)
An ancient Anglican church as a burial place would not be a problem for 'papists' because it would have been consecrated ground since the medieval period, ie.the church and its graveyard would have been consecrated by men who lived before the time of Henry VIII and therefore recognised the authority of the pope.

I read recently of a woman who died in Little Crosby, Lancashire in the early 1600s. The local vicar knew she was a 'recusant' who had never shown up at his church,  so when she was buried in the churchyard at night in secret,  he promptly ordered the body dug up again and left in the middle of the road ! At this point the Blundell family, also Catholics,  offered to let her be buried on their land on the site of what was believed to be a medieval chapel and therefore already regarded as consecrated ground. This was the origin of the 'Harkirk' chapel on the Blundell land.

However,  this tale was very much the exception. In general Catholics went on being buried in the local parish church
as has already been pointed out. The behaviour of the vicar in the case above may be down to the fact that his parish was in an area which remained so obstinately 'recusant' that he felt he needed to do something to make a stand
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: hurworth on Thursday 14 April 16 21:41 BST (UK)
One family of forebears were Catholic but it's not mentioned in the register.  The earliest records I have for them is the mid 1700s though. There is no mention in the registers that they were Catholic even though it was not a secret.  They married and are buried at local Church of England churches and are mentioned in a register for making a donation towards a church clock.

The local lord's family were always Catholic and have a vault in the same graveyard.
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Joney on Thursday 14 April 16 22:25 BST (UK)
Where was that then, hurworth ? That's quite interesting. The local bigwigs would expect to stump up the money for the clock, or similar items, so they do even though they are actually Catholics. I suspect those who weren't Catholics just regarded them as being a bit odd, with strange religious views but basically okay. By the eighteenth century things had settled down more or less, so whatever they choose to do in private isn't generally seen as a problem.

By the way, although they marry in the local parish church for legal reasons, that is they need their children to be regarded as legitimate and their heirs able to succeed to property etc, they would also have had a private Catholic ceremony. They wouldn't regard the C of E service as valid in relious terms. I don't think most people realise that.
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Annie65115 on Thursday 14 April 16 22:35 BST (UK)
That's what I thought, Joney. In particular, in earlier, more dangerous (for Catholic) times, I imagine that they showed their face at the CofE church because you wouldn't want to be spotted as a dissenter, would you?

But to maintain their Catholic faith they must also have been involved in Catholic ceremonies ----
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: hurworth on Thursday 14 April 16 22:42 BST (UK)
Joney - it's Ingatestone, Essex.   

The Petre family have a vault there (that's not us)

I wonder whether their denomination isn't mentioned because it was assumed everyone knew.

I've come across other family members at Stock and Buttsbury.  Some of the families they intermarried with were not Catholic.   I don't get a sense that this caused huge family divisions (from wills it appears no one was disinherited) but I could be incorrect.  I wonder whether it is because these are fairly small villages and everyone knew everyone and some families had lived in the area for a long time.
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Blue70 on Thursday 14 April 16 22:42 BST (UK)
A lot of Catholics only ever went through the C of E marriage service. Long after marriages in RC churches were first registered Catholics continued to use C of E churches to marry. They would baptise their children though as RC. This was a common practice amongst Liverpool's Catholics.


Blue
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Blue70 on Thursday 14 April 16 22:55 BST (UK)
Perhaps it was cheaper and easier to get married at a C of E church. At a Catholic church you would have to obtain a 'certificate' (instead of banns) and then pay both the priest and the registrar. At a C of E church three readings of the banns would suffice plus the vicar acted as the registrar.

Catholic couples marrying elsewhere was considered to be such a problem that the church introduced a new marriage law in 1908 making only marriages at Catholic churches valid. It is after this date that the practice of adding the information about subsequent marriages to the baptism entries were introduced. When the marriage parties applied for their baptism details the priest was meant to add the new information but some of them were more efficient than others. The absence of marriage information doesn't mean any particular child didn't marry.


Blue
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: hurworth on Friday 15 April 16 08:04 BST (UK)
I may be mistaken about the Petre vault.   The burials were recorded in the Ingatestone parish register, but perhaps the vault is at Ingatestone Hall.
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Joney on Friday 15 April 16 13:39 BST (UK)
Thanks, hurworth. I've never yet succeeded in getting to see Ingatestone Hall. I have dim memories of a TV program about it many years ago.

Hi Blue, I agree that by the nineteenth century there are quite a few Catholics married in C of E churches with no Catholic ceremony and I have always suspected it's because it's cheaper. However, in the 1700s, when there are fines for not attending the parish church,  a lot of Catholics turn up enough to avoid the fines, but still attend a Catholic mass when they can get there.  They may have had to travel quite some distance to do so. Attending a C of E service was declared to be sinful by the Catholic hierarchy  but I think we can all understand  why this was  disregarded by some Catholics. As a marriage ceremony is a once-only event, a Catholic service could take place on the quiet at some point when the priest was available. The public wedding could follow later
Probably worth noting that there was no relaxation of any of the penal laws until the 'Papists'Act' of 1778 and then things only changed gradually. I think Byron introduced one of the later acts.






tandards of the time
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: Joney on Friday 15 April 16 13:56 BST (UK)
Accidentally lost some of my text above when revising what I'd written - Sorry !
I intended to add that the Council of Trent of 1545  (part of the Catholic internal church reformation in response to the Protestant reformation) ruled that you had to have a priest present for a valid Catholic marriage, so the 1908 ruling was only really re-stating what was already supposed to be the case - because it hadn't been fully understood and implemented/accepted.

The original teaching of the very early church -hazy on dates here - was that the man and woman married each other and so didn't need a priest present to do this. However, once we reach medieval times, the church gets involved to regularise things. It became apparent that without independent witnesses, sometimes one of a couple married in this way would claim no marriage took place and it was all a figment of the other's imagination. That left an ecclesiatical and legal problem which was sorted out by ruling that there had to be a witness or the marriage wasn't valid. The priest, who would ensure a proper form of words was used  was the ideal witness.

Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: clayton bradley on Friday 15 April 16 19:12 BST (UK)
For anyone who wants more details, there are a number of articles in back copies of the Catholic Ancestor and Rebecca Probert has written on this topic.
I was pleased to see Ingatestone mentioned as my ancestor, Abraham Broadley, was a carter at Dunkenhalgh Hall over the period when Lady Catherine married Lord Petre and was widowed. The accounts at Lancashire Archives gave me his life story. I'm grateful to the Petres for depositing these accounts, cb
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: hurworth on Friday 15 April 16 22:56 BST (UK)
Thank you Clayton.

I would like to be able to read Volume 6 of Essex Recusant
https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/Essex_Recusant.html?id=tXIKAQAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

It says it was digitised in 2010, but I need to work out how I would get a digital copy.  This volume has an article about Essex Catholic graves.

I was delighted to discover about 20 editions of Catholic Ancestor on the shelf at our library recently.
Title: Re: "A papist"
Post by: sallyyorks on Monday 18 April 16 22:23 BST (UK)
That's what I thought, Joney. In particular, in earlier, more dangerous (for Catholic) times, I imagine that they showed their face at the CofE church because you wouldn't want to be spotted as a dissenter, would you?

But to maintain their Catholic faith they must also have been involved in Catholic ceremonies ----

I am not sure that Catholics would have been seen as "odd" or as having "strange religious views" (as a previous poster suggests). Some parts of England had quite high recusancy rates and the C of E is technically a Catholic church, though reformed.
The early threat to the state did not come from the everyday ordinary Catholics but from the landed gentry/wealthy Catholics. This was because they had the means to conspire (treason) with a Catholic enemy, like Spain for example.

I think everyday English Catholics just kept a low profile and probably saw themselves as related to the "new" C of E and understood that if they behaved as a loyal citizen, and most were, and did not make a big fuss about it, they would be left alone. Many might have seen the C of E service/rights as a good second best or at least good enough as a compromise. Adaptable, if you like.

I have three entirely separate branches of Catholics, from Yorkshire, Lancashire and Warwickshire. They all seem to intermarry on and off with C of E. They mostly seem to be buried C of E. Some have Catholic notations in the register, some don't. Some baptisms I cannot find at all. The Warwickshire bunch convert to C of E at around 1870. The children are all baptised C of E on the same day, around the time of this conversion. The others remained Catholic