Editing Dissolution of the monasteries (section)

===Reforms===
Pilgrimages to monastic [[shrine]]s continued until forcibly suppressed in England in 1538 by order of Henry VIII, but the dissolution resulted in few modifications to England's parish churches. The English religious reforms of the 1530s corresponded little with the movement by Protestant Reformers, and encountered much popular hostility when they did. In 1536, [[Convocations of Canterbury and York|Convocation]] adopted and Parliament enacted the [[Ten Articles]], containing some terminology and ideas drawn from [[Martin Luther|Luther]] and [[Melanchthon]]; but any momentum towards Protestantism stalled when Henry VIII expressed his support for the [[Six Articles (1539)|Six Articles of 1539]], which remained in effect until after his death.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Six Articles |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100509361 |access-date=2022-04-19 |website=Oxford Reference |language=en }}</ref>{{sfn|Marshall|2017}}{{pn|date=April 2022}}

[[Cardinal Wolsey]] had obtained a [[papal bull]] authorising some limited reforms in the English Church as early as 1518, but reformers (both conservative and radical) had become increasingly frustrated at their lack of progress. In November 1529, Parliament passed Acts reforming apparent abuses in the English Church. They set a cap on fees, both for the probate of wills and mortuary expenses for burial in hallowed ground; tightened regulations covering rights of [[sanctuary]] for criminals; and reduced to two the number of church benefices that could in the future be held by one man. These Acts were meant to demonstrate that royal jurisdiction over the Church would ensure progress in "religious reformation" where papal authority had been insufficient.{{citation needed|date= October 2019}}

The monasteries were next in line. [[Jack Scarisbrick|J. J. Scarisbrick]] remarked in his biography of Henry VIII:
{{quote|text=Suffice it to say that English monasticism was a huge and urgent problem; that radical action, though of precisely what kind was another matter, was both necessary and inevitable, and that a purge of the religious orders was probably regarded as the most obvious task of the new regime—as the first function of a Supreme Head empowered by statute "to visit, extirp and redress".{{sfn|Scarisbrick|1968|p=337}}
}}
[[File:Cromwell,Thomas(1EEssex)01.jpg|thumb|[[Thomas Cromwell]] by Hans Holbein: Chief Minister for Henry VIII and [[Vicegerent]] in Spirituals; created the administrative machinery for the dissolution]]

The stories of monastic impropriety, vice, and excess that were to be collected by [[Thomas Cromwell]]'s [[visitor]]s to the monasteries, including [[Richard Layton]] and [[Thomas Legh (lawyer)|Thomas Legh]],{{sfn|Borman|2014|pp=201−202}} may have been exaggerated but the religious houses of England and Wales—with the notable exceptions of those of the [[Carthusian]]s, the [[Observant Franciscan]]s, and the Bridgettine nuns and monks—had long ceased to play a leading role in the spiritual life of the country. Other than in these three orders, observance of strict monastic rules was partial at best.{{sfn|Dickens|1989|p=79}} The exceptional spiritual discipline of the Carthusian, Observant Franciscan and Bridgettine orders had, over the previous century, resulted in their being singled out for royal favour, in particular with houses benefitting from endowments confiscated by the Crown from the suppressed alien priories.{{citation needed|date= October 2019}}

Donations and legacies had tended to go instead towards parish churches, university colleges, grammar schools and collegiate churches, which suggests greater public approbation. Levels of monastic debt were increasing, and average numbers of [[professed religious]] were falling,{{sfn|Dickens|1989|p=74}} although the monasteries continued to attract recruits right up to the end. Only a few monks and nuns lived in conspicuous luxury, but most were comfortably fed and housed by the standards of the time, and few orders demanded ascetic piety or religious observance.{{sfn|Dickens|1989|p=77}} Only a minority of houses could now support the twelve or thirteen professed religious usually regarded as the minimum necessary to maintain the full [[canonical hours]] of the Divine Office. Even in houses with adequate numbers, the regular obligations of communal eating and shared living had not been fully enforced for centuries, as communities tended to sub-divide into a number of distinct ''familiae''. In most larger houses, the full observance of the Canonical Hours had become the task of a sub-group of 'Cloister Monks', such that the majority of inhabitants were freed to conduct their business and live much of their lives in the secular world. Extensive monastic complexes dominated English towns of any size, but most were less than half full.{{citation needed|date=October 2019}}

From 1534 onwards, Cromwell and King Henry wanted to redirect ecclesiastical income to the Crown—they justified this by contending that they were reclaiming what was theirs. Renaissance princes throughout Europe were facing severe financial difficulties due to sharply rising expenditures, especially to pay for armies, ships and fortifications. Many had already resorted to plundering monastic wealth. Protestant princes would justify this by claiming divine authority; Catholic princes would obtain the agreement of the papacy. Monastic wealth, regarded everywhere as excessive, offered a standing temptation for cash-strapped authorities.{{citation needed|date= October 2019}}

Almost all official action in the English dissolution was directed at the monasteries. The closing of the monasteries aroused popular opposition, but resistors became the targets of royal hostility. The surrender of the friaries, from an official perspective, arose almost as an afterthought, once it had been determined that all religious houses would have to go. In terms of popular esteem, the balance tilted the other way. Almost all monasteries supported themselves from their endowments; in late medieval terms 'they lived off their own'. Unless they were notably bad landlords, they tended to enjoy widespread local support; they also commonly appointed local notables to fee-bearing offices. The friars were by contrast much more likely to have been the objects of local hostility, especially since their practice of soliciting income through legacies appears to have been perceived as diminishing family inheritances.{{citation needed|date= October 2019}}