In response to Christopher Crocektt's comments:
Elizabethan/e. Stuart congregations were, as a rule, mostly illiterate,
although this would obviously vary depending on the location of the
parish and other factors. For example, in London by the late 1640s, it
is estimated that perhaps as much as 70% of the adult male population
was able to read and write in English, but elsewhere it was much more
likely to be around 30%. (For more information, see David Cressy's
"Levels of Illiteracy in England, 1530-1730," _The Historical Journal_,
1977.)
The question about comparing religion in Elizabethan/e. Stuart England
to medieval times vs. the 19th century is an interesting one, especially
concerning worship. *Which* 19th century CofE service should we compare
it to? A determinedly low-church service or one in which the
Anglo-Catholic revival was going full-tilt? The low-church service
would probably have been closer to the early modern one and the
Anglo-Catholic one was at least trying to recapture the medieval worship
experience. While in general I would agree that the early modern period
was much closer to the medieval world than the 19th century, I would
also like to suggest that, in both of those 19th-century services there
were, perhaps, individuals for whom religion was as important as it had
been for their ancestors, and who perhaps even believed that their
worship service was a "continuation" or a "revival" of the worship of
their forebears, however profoundly different the world in which those
services were taking place was.
Sharon
>
> Question:
>
> around what sort of date may we say that this was indeed the case, in
> even a simple majority of parishes?
>
> and, *how* do we know that it was?
>
> I have a failing memory of reading some accounts of late medieval episcopal
> visitations from Northern France and being struck by the truly wretched
> material ("there is no chalice nor paten" was a familiar
> refrain) and moral (I cannot elaborate on a family list) state of things in a
> *great* many parishes.
>
> Of course, that was France.....
>
> Sharon Arnoult wrote:
>
> >....having completed a dissertation on the Prayer Book in the *16*th and
> *17*th centuries [emphasis mine]....
>
> Sharon, I take it that you would agree that extrapolation from Early Modern
> data back into the Dark Ages, to the extent that it can be done at all, is a
> potentially hazardous and ventursome exercise (?)
>
> Or, is it?
>
> Do you see cc. 16 &17 as being much closer to the medieval than to, say the
> 19th c.?
>
> And:
>
> >...changes in worship services between Elizabethan/early Stuart times
> and today, as well as the differences between serving *mostly illiterate* and
> virtually totally literate congregations [e.m. ditto].
>
> My perverse reading of this makes me want to think that your research leads
> you to believe that congregations were *mostly illiterate* in Elizabethan/e.
> Stuart times.
>
> Is this indeed what you meant to say?
>
> Best from here,
>
> Christopher
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|