My knowledge of Church of English clergy is almost entirely restricted to what I've learned from reading Jane Austen and Anthony Trollope - so not exactly in-depth then.
I'm transcribing a burial register from Cornwall and when the register starts in July 1813, the entries are written by Jacob Hawker, the curate. They continue that way, uninterrupted, until February 1833, and from then on Jacob describes himself as vicar. In June 1845 Jacob's own burial is registered, age 67 with the entry being made by Thomas Harper [the then curate]
Would it have been usual for someone to have been a curate for 20+ years? And to be as old as 55yo when promoted from curate to vicar?
I can see from the rest of the register that Thomas Harper didn't go on to become vicar of the parish, so it can't just have been a question of the curate sitting it out until the incumbent vicar shuffled off this mortal coil.
Can anyone point me to an article where the appointment, succession process is explained in sufficiently simple terms for me to understand it, please?
I'm transcribing a burial register from Cornwall and when the register starts in July 1813, the entries are written by Jacob Hawker, the curate. They continue that way, uninterrupted, until February 1833, and from then on Jacob describes himself as vicar. In June 1845 Jacob's own burial is registered, age 67 with the entry being made by Thomas Harper [the then curate]
Would it have been usual for someone to have been a curate for 20+ years? And to be as old as 55yo when promoted from curate to vicar?
I can see from the rest of the register that Thomas Harper didn't go on to become vicar of the parish, so it can't just have been a question of the curate sitting it out until the incumbent vicar shuffled off this mortal coil.
Can anyone point me to an article where the appointment, succession process is explained in sufficiently simple terms for me to understand it, please?
Comment