This writ was probably not very often resorted to in practice, partly because of the great expense involved, and partly perhaps, too, because of the slack execution of the writ by certain undersheriffs or bailiffs, encouraged as they were by the rather hostile attitude sometimes assumed against the courts Christian by the Queen’s temporal judges.[171] The writ was, however, certainly no dead letter, and served also in terrorem to reduce stubborn offenders.[172] Indeed Archbishop Bancroft in 1605 called it “the chiefest temporal strength of ecclesiastical jurisdiction."[173]

In view of the fact that “standing excommunicate” was in itself a presentable offence before the ordinary, and an offence often presented,[174] and in view of the further fact that the excommunicate might, according to a contemporary who writes with authority, “be punished for absence from diuine praier, neither shall his excommunication excuse him, for it is in his owne default,"[175] it is queried whether such an involuntary absentee from church did not make himself just as liable to presentment at quarter sessions for recusancy[176] as any voluntary recusant.  Perhaps it is for this reason that grand juries are sometimes complained of for discriminating among the names sent in to them on the bishops’ certificates for indictment at quarter sessions, and for certifying some and throwing out others “at their pleasure."[177]

But be this as it may—­and it is conjecture unsupported by positive proof—­enough has been said, it is hoped, to show that ordinaries were quite capable of making their decrees obeyed, and that excommunication (contrary to the commonly received opinion) was a most effective means of coercion.  Many, indeed, were its uses.  It might (or its equivalent interdiction or suspension[178]), as has been seen,[179] be used to compel a parish officer to perform the duties of his office.  It might also be employed, when persuasion failed, to induce a parishioner to accept office when chosen by his fellows.[180] But, it would seem, one single definition would comprise all cases:  excommunication was employed against all those who disobeyed some order of the spiritual judge, express or implied—­it was a summary process for contempt of court, in fact, and was daily used as such.

To recapitulate:  a very large part of the parishioner’s life and activity fell under the surveillance and regulation of the ecclesiastical courts.  They compelled him to attend on specified days his parish church, and no other; to be married there; to have his children baptized and his wife churched there; to receive a certain number of times communion there; to contribute to the maintenance of church and churchyard, as well as to the finding of the requisites for service or the church ornaments or utensils.  In his parish church he and his children were catechized and instructed, and, if the latter were taught in a neighboring school-house, it was under the strict supervision of the ordinary