Ministers who refused to comply with the Act were replaced by young men called 'curates.' They were forbidden from exercising their ministry and living within twenty miles of their former parishes. Additionally, they faced heavy fines for non-attendance at parish churches, and soldiers were sent to their homes if they refused to pay.

The Act required ministers elected between 1649 and 1660 to seek presentation from the lawful patron and collation from the bishop. Those who refused to comply, numbering around two to three hundred, were replaced by young men derogatorily referred to as 'curates.' These non-compliant ministers were prohibited from exercising their ministry and were not allowed to live within twenty miles of their former parishes. Furthermore, another Act mandated attendance at the parish church, imposing heavy fines on those who refused. If these fines were not paid, soldiers were billeted in the homes of the defaulters. These oppressive measures contributed to armed insurrections, although some ministers accepted indulgences and were reinstated.

Key points

Ministers had to seek presentation from a lawful patron and collation from a bishop.
Two to three hundred ministers refused to comply and were replaced by 'curates.'
Non-compliant ministers were banned from ministry and living near former parishes.
Mandatory church attendance was enforced with heavy fines for non-compliance.
Soldiers were quartered in homes of those who refused to pay fines.
These measures led to armed insurrections.
Some ministers accepted indulgences and were reinstated.

What were the consequences for ministers who refused to comply with the Act requiring presentation from the lawful patron and collation from the bishop?

Related questions