During the chaos and violence we call the German Peasants' War (1524-25), it was fairly common for local groups to draft and ratify grievance lists. Many of them applied specifically to the problems townspeople and villagers had with their lord; others, like the famous Twelve Articles, were more generic and adoptable by multiple groups. The set of articles invoked here, which you can read in Janos Bok's English translation on Google Books, comes from Rettenberg in Allgäu (in Bavaria, in the Prince-Bishopric of Augsburg), one of the early hotbeds of rebellion. This particular set of grievances is noted by Siegfried Hoyer and Peter Blickle for its strong and "interesting" anticlericalism. (Looking to a religious lord--the bishop of Augsburg--instead of a secular one may have had something to do with that, but this was absolutely not a prerequisite for expressions of anticlericalism in the 1520s.) It was so strong, in fact, that the Rettenberger rebels actually walked it back in May and adopted a more generic grievance resolution.

And it was strong and interesting enough to attract attention far from Germany. Somehow or other--I am really curious about the textual history here--a copy ended up in England, where it was translated and published as the "Articles of Almayne." You can read them online here. The relevant point to OP's question is worded:

That there be no service done for little children.

This makes it clear that the evil being denounced is charging excessive fees for burial of children in the churchyard or church. In fact, the English phrasing seems even stronger than the German, a pattern that appears with several of the other articles as well.

To provide a little context for this claim, two points are helpful. First, for medieval Christians burial in consecrated ground was critical. The geography of the dead represented belonging in the Christian community in heaven as well as on earth. Preacher/theologian John Mirk's views on the burial of women who died while pregnant show just how strongly medieval people could feel about consecrated versus unconsecrated ground. Mirk argued that pregnant women who died before delivery should be denied burial until their lifeless fetus could be cut out of their stomach--because the baby was unbaptized, already in hell, and no Christian at all. Mirk's view was not universal, but it was common. (Unsurprisingly, shrines had sprung up that specialized in temporary revival of stillborn children...just long enough for baptism to occur.) In late medieval England, parish guilds were known to raise money to pay for the burial of a member fallen on hard times--burial fees were indeed a burden.

(Death dues, banned by article #12, were more like an estate tax on property upon someone's death, if they had any, rather than a service fee for burial.)

Second, over the course of the fifteenth century, scholars have noticed a pattern in burial fees. Even where the fees themselves stayed flat, from the point of view of the deceased person's family, the percentage of the fee filling the personal coffer of the graveyard church's clerical overseer increased a little or a lot. Priests and deacons were benefiting as people, rather than (from medieval people's view) the Church receiving a donation for prayers and souls.