Theywereweary,besides,ofhumouringthepeople,andofdependingupontheircapriceforasubsistence。Inmakingthisdemand,therefore,theyconsultedtheirowneaseandcomfort,withouttroublingthemselvesabouttheeffectwhichitmighthaveinfuturetimesupontheinfluenceandauthorityoftheirorder。
Thecivilmagistrate,whocouldcomplywiththisdemandonlybygivingthemsomethingwhichhewouldhavechosenmuchrathertotake,ortokeeptohimself,wasseldomveryforwardtograntit。
Necessity,however,alwaysforcedhimtosubmitatlast,thoughfrequentlynottillaftermanydelays,evasions,andaffectedexcuses。
Butifpoliticshadnevercalledintheaidofreligion,hadtheconqueringpartyneveradoptedthetenetsofonesectmorethanthoseofanotherwhenithadgainedthevictory,itwouldprobablyhavedealtequallyandimpartiallywithallthedifferentsects,andhaveallowedeverymantochoosehisownpriestandhisownreligionashethoughtproper。Therewouldinthiscase,nodoubt’havebeenagreatmultitudeofreligioussects。Almosteverydifferentcongregationmightprobablyhavemadealittlesectbyitself,orhaveentertainedsomepeculiartenetsofitsown。Eachteacherwouldnodoubthavefelthimselfunderthenecessityofmakingtheutmostexertionandofusingeveryartbothtopreserveandtoincreasethenumberofhisdisciples。Butaseveryotherteacherwouldhavefelthimselfunderthesamenecessity,thesuccessofnooneteacher,orsectofteachers,couldhavebeenverygreat。Theinterestedandactivezealofreligiousteacherscanbedangerousandtroublesomeonlywherethereiseitherbutonesecttoleratedinthesociety,orwherethewholeofalargesocietyisdividedintotwoorthreegreatsects;theteachersofeachactingbyconcert,andunderaregulardisciplineandsubordination。Butthatzealmustbealtogetherinnocentwherethesocietyisdividedintotwoorthreehundred,orperhapsintoasmanythousandsmallsects,ofwhichnoonecouldbeconsiderableenoughtodisturbthepublictranquility。Theteachersofeachsect,seeingthemselvessurroundedonallsideswithmoreadversariesthanfriends,wouldbeobligedtolearnthatcandourandmoderationwhichissoseldomtobefoundamongtheteachersofthosegreatsectswhosetenets,beingsupportedbythecivilmagistrate,areheldinvenerationbyalmostalltheinhabitantsofextensivekingdomsandempires,andwhothereforeseenothingroundthembutfollowers,disciples,andhumbleadmirers。Theteachersofeachlittlesect,findingthemselvesalmostalone,wouldbeobligedtorespectthoseofalmosteveryothersect,andtheconcessionswhichtheywouldmutuallyfinditbothconvenientandagreeabletomaketooneanother,mightintimeprobablyreducethedoctrineofthegreaterpartofthemtothatpureandrationalreligion,freefromeverymixtureofabsurdity,imposture,orfanaticism,suchaswisemenhaveinallagesoftheworldwishedtoseeestablished;butsuchaspositivelawhasperhapsneveryetestablished,andprobablyneverwillestablish,inanycountry:because,withregardtoreligion,positivelawalwayshasbeen,andprobablyalwayswillbe,moreorlessinfluencedbypopularsuperstitionandenthusiasm。Thisplanofecclesiasticalgovernment,ormoreproperlyofnoecclesiasticalgovernment,waswhatthesectcalledIndependents,asectnodoubtofverywildenthusiasts,proposedtoestablishinEnglandtowardstheendofthecivilwar。Ifithadbeenestablished,thoughofaveryunphilosophicalorigin,itwouldprobablybythistimehavebeenproductiveofthemostphilosophicalgoodtemperandmoderationwithregardtoeverysortofreligiousprinciple。IthasbeenestablishedinPennsylvania,where,thoughtheQuakershappentobethemostnumerous,thelawinrealityfavoursnoonesectmorethananother,anditistheresaidtohavebeenproductiveofthisphilosophicalgoodtemperandmoderation。
Butthoughthisequalityoftreatmentshouldnotbeproductiveofthisgoodtemperandmoderationinall,oreveninthegreaterpartofthereligioussectsofaparticularcountry,yetprovidedthosesectsweresufficientlynumerous,andeachofthemconsequentlytoosmalltodisturbthepublictranquillity,theexcessivezealofeachforitsparticulartenetscouldnotwellbeproductiveofanyveryharmfuleffects,but,onthecontrary,ofseveralgoodones:andifthegovernmentwasperfectlydecidedbothtoletthemallalone,andtoobligethemalltoletaloneoneanother,thereislittledangerthattheywouldnotoftheirownaccordsubdividethemselvesfastenoughsoassoontobecomesufficientlynumerous。
Ineverycivilisedsociety,ineverysocietywherethedistinctionofrankshasoncebeencompletelyestablished,therehavebeenalwaystwodifferentschemesorsystemsofmoralitycurrentatthesametime;ofwhichtheonemaybecalledthestrictoraustere;theothertheliberal,or,ifyouwill,theloosesystem。Theformerisgenerallyadmiredandreveredbythecommonpeople:thelatteriscommonlymoreesteemedandadoptedbywhatarecalledpeopleoffashion。Thedegreeofdisapprobationwithwhichweoughttomarkthevicesoflevity,theviceswhichareapttoarisefromgreatprosperity,andfromtheexcessofgaietyandgoodhumour,seemstoconstitutetheprincipaldistinctionbetweenthosetwooppositeschemesorsystems。Intheliberalorloosesystem,luxury,wantonandevendisorderlymirth,thepursuitofpleasuretosomedegreeofintemperance,thebreachofchastity,atleastinoneofthetwosexes,etc。,providedtheyarenotaccompaniedwithgrossindecency,anddonotleadtofalsehoodorinjustice,aregenerallytreatedwithagooddealofindulgence,andareeasilyeitherexcusedorpardonedaltogether。Intheausteresystem,onthecontrary,thoseexcessesareregardedwiththeutmostabhorrenceanddetestation。Thevicesoflevityarealwaysruinoustothecommonpeople,andasingleweek’sthoughtlessnessanddissipationisoftensufficienttoundoapoorworkmanforever,andtodrivehimthroughdespairuponcommittingthemostenormouscrimes。Thewiserandbettersortofthecommonpeople,therefore,havealwaystheutmostabhorrenceanddetestationofsuchexcesses,whichtheirexperiencetellsthemaresoimmediatelyfataltopeopleoftheircondition。Thedisorderandextravaganceofseveralyears,onthecontrary,willnotalwaysruinamanoffashion,andpeopleofthatrankareveryapttoconsiderthepowerofindulginginsomedegreeofexcessasoneoftheadvantagesoftheirfortune,andthelibertyofdoingsowithoutcensureorreproachasoneoftheprivilegeswhichbelongtotheirstation。Inpeopleoftheirownstation,therefore,theyregardsuchexcesseswithbutasmalldegreeofdisapprobation,andcensurethemeitherveryslightlyornotatall。
Almostallreligioussectshavebegunamongthecommonpeople,fromwhomtheyhavegenerallydrawntheirearliestaswellastheirmostnumerousproselytes。Theausteresystemofmoralityhas,accordingly,beenadoptedbythosesectsalmostconstantly,orwithveryfewexceptions;fortherehavebeensome。Itwasthesystembywhichtheycouldbestrecommendthemselvestothatorderofpeopletowhomtheyfirstproposedtheirplanofreformationuponwhathadbeenbeforeestablished。
Manyofthem,perhapsthegreaterpartofthem,haveevenendeavouredtogaincreditbyrefininguponthisausteresystem,andbycarryingittosomedegreeoffollyandextravagance;andthisexcessiverigourhasfrequentlyrecommendedthemmorethananythingelsetotherespectandvenerationofthecommonpeople。
Amanofrankandfortuneisbyhisstationthedistinguishedmemberofagreatsociety,whoattendtoeverypartofhisconduct,andwhotherebyobligehimtoattendtoeverypartofithimself。Hisauthorityandconsiderationdependverymuchupontherespectwhichthissocietybearstohim。Hedarenotdoanythingwhichwoulddisgraceordiscredithiminit,andheisobligedtoaverystrictobservationofthatspeciesofmorals,whetherliberaloraustere,whichthegeneralconsentofthissocietyprescribestopersonsofhisrankandfortune。Amanoflowcondition,onthecontrary,isfarfrombeingadistinguishedmemberofanygreatsociety。Whileheremainsinacountryvillagehisconductmaybeattendedto,andhemaybeobligedtoattendtoithimself。Inthissituation,andinthissituationonly,hemayhavewhatiscalledacharactertolose。
Butassoonashecomesintoagreatcityheissunkinobscurityanddarkness。Hisconductisobservedandattendedtobynobody,andheisthereforeverylikelytoneglectithimself,andtoabandonhimselftoeverysortoflowprofligacyandvice。Heneveremergessoeffectuallyfromthisobscurity,hisconductneverexcitessomuchtheattentionofanyrespectablesociety,asbyhisbecomingthememberofasmallreligioussect。Hefromthatmomentacquiresadegreeofconsiderationwhichheneverhadbefore。Allhisbrothersectariesare,forthecreditofthesect,interestedtoobservehisconduct,andifhegivesoccasiontoanyscandal,ifhedeviatesverymuchfromthoseausteremoralswhichtheyalmostalwaysrequireofoneanother,topunishhimbywhatisalwaysaveryseverepunishment,evenwherenocivileffectsattendit,expulsionorexcommunicationfromthesect。Inlittlereligioussects,accordingly,themoralsofthecommonpeoplehavebeenalmostalwaysremarkablyregularandorderly;generallymuchmoresothanintheestablishedchurch。
Themoralsofthoselittlesects,indeed,havefrequentlybeenratherdisagreeablyrigorousandunsocial。
Therearetwoveryeasyandeffectualremedies,however,bywhosejointoperationthestatemight,withoutviolence,correctwhateverwasunsocialordisagreeablyrigorousinthemoralsofallthelittlesectsintowhichthecountrywasdivided。
Thefirstofthoseremediesisthestudyofscienceandphilosophy,whichthestatemightrenderalmostuniversalamongallpeopleofmiddlingormorethanmiddlingrankandfortune;
notbygivingsalariestoteachersinordertomakethemnegligentandidle,butbyinstitutingsomesortofprobation,eveninthehigherandmoredifficultsciences,tobeundergonebyeverypersonbeforehewaspermittedtoexerciseanyliberalprofession,orbeforehecouldbereceivedasacandidateforanyhonourableofficeoftrustorprofit。Ifthestateimposeduponthisorderofmenthenecessityoflearning,itwouldhavenooccasiontogiveitselfanytroubleaboutprovidingthemwithproperteachers。Theywouldsoonfindbetterteachersforthemselvesthananywhomthestatecouldprovideforthem。
Scienceisthegreatantidotetothepoisonofenthusiasmandsuperstition;andwhereallthesuperiorranksofpeopleweresecuredfromit,theinferiorrankscouldnotbemuchexposedtoit。
Thesecondofthoseremediesisthefrequencyandgaietyofpublicdiversions。Thestate,byencouraging,thatisbygivingentirelibertytoallthosewhofortheirowninterestwouldattemptwithoutscandalorindecency,toamuseanddivertthepeoplebypainting,poetry,music,dancing;byallsortsofdramaticrepresentationsandexhibitions,wouldeasilydissipate,inthegreaterpartofthem,thatmelancholyandgloomyhumourwhichisalmostalwaysthenurseofpopularsuperstitionandenthusiasm。Publicdiversionshavealwaysbeentheobjectsofdreadandhatredtoallthefanaticalpromotersofthosepopularfrenzies。Thegaietyandgoodhumourwhichthosediversionsinspirewerealtogetherinconsistentwiththattemperofmindwhichwasfittestfortheirpurpose,orwhichtheycouldbestworkupon。Dramaticrepresentations,besides,frequentlyexposingtheirartificestopublicridicule,andsometimeseventopublicexecration,wereuponthataccount,morethanallotherdiversions,theobjectsoftheirpeculiarabhorrence。
Inacountrywherethelawfavouredtheteachersofnoonereligionmorethanthoseofanother,itwouldnotbenecessarythatanyofthemshouldhaveanyparticularorimmediatedependencyuponthesovereignorexecutivepower;orthatheshouldhaveanythingtodoeitherinappointingorindismissingthemfromtheiroffices。Insuchasituationhewouldhavenooccasiontogivehimselfanyconcernaboutthem,furtherthantokeepthepeaceamongtheminthesamemannerasamongtherestofhissubjects;thatis,tohinderthemfrompersecuting,abusing,oroppressingoneanother。Butitisquiteotherwiseincountrieswherethereisanestablishedorgoverningreligion。Thesovereigncaninthiscaseneverbesecureunlesshehasthemeansofinfluencinginaconsiderabledegreethegreaterpartoftheteachersofthatreligion。
Theclergyofeveryestablishedchurchconstituteagreatincorporation。Theycanactinconcert,andpursuetheirinterestupononeplanandwithonespirit,asmuchasiftheywereunderthedirectionofoneman;andtheyarefrequently,too,undersuchdirection。Theirinterestasanincorporatedbodyisneverthesamewiththatofthesovereign,andissometimesdirectlyoppositetoit。Theirgreatinterestistomaintaintheirauthoritywiththepeople;andthisauthoritydependsuponthesupposedcertaintyandimportanceofthewholedoctrinewhichtheyinculcate,anduponthesupposednecessityofadoptingeverypartofitwiththemostimplicitfaith,inordertoavoideternalmisery。Shouldthesovereignhavetheimprudencetoappeareithertoderideordoubthimselfofthemosttriflingpartoftheirdoctrine,orfromhumanityattempttoprotectthosewhodideithertheoneortheother,thepunctilioushonourofaclergywhohavenosortofdependencyuponhimisimmediatelyprovokedtoproscribehimasaprofaneperson,andtoemployalltheterrorsofreligioninordertoobligethepeopletotransfertheirallegiancetosomemoreorthodoxandobedientprince。
Shouldheopposeanyoftheirpretensionsorusurpations,thedangerisequallygreat。Theprinceswhohavedaredinthismannertorebelagainstthechurch,overandabovethiscrimeofrebellionhavegenerallybeencharged,too,withtheadditionalcrimeofheresy,notwithstandingtheirsolemnprotestationsoftheirfaithandhumblesubmissiontoeverytenetwhichshethoughtpropertoprescribetothem。Buttheauthorityofreligionissuperiortoeveryotherauthority。Thefearswhichitsuggestsconquerallotherfears。Whentheauthorizedteachersofreligionpropagatethroughthegreatbodyofthepeopledoctrinessubversiveoftheauthorityofthesovereign,itisbyviolenceonly,orbytheforceofastandingarmy,thathecanmaintainhisauthority。Evenastandingarmycannotinthiscasegivehimanylastingsecurity;becauseifthesoldiersarenotforeigners,whichcanseldombethecase,butdrawnfromthegreatbodyofthepeople,whichmustalmostalwaysbethecase,theyarelikelytobesooncorruptedbythoseverydoctrines。TherevolutionswhichtheturbulenceoftheGreekclergywascontinuallyoccasioningatConstantinople,aslongastheeasternempiresubsisted;theconvulsionswhich,duringthecourseofseveralcenturies,theturbulenceoftheRomanclergywascontinuallyoccasioningineverypartofEurope,sufficientlydemonstratehowprecariousandinsecuremustalwaysbethesituationofthesovereignwhohasnopropermeansofinfluencingtheclergyoftheestablishedandgoverningreligionofhiscountry。
Articlesoffaith,aswellasallotherspiritualmatters,itisevidentenough,arenotwithintheproperdepartmentofatemporalsovereign,who,thoughhemaybeverywellqualifiedforprotecting,isseldomsupposedtobesoforinstructingthepeople。Withregardtosuchmatters,therefore,hisauthoritycanseldombesufficienttocounterbalancetheunitedauthorityoftheclergyoftheestablishedchurch。Thepublictranquillity,however,andhisownsecurity,mayfrequentlydependuponthedoctrineswhichtheymaythinkpropertopropagateconcerningsuchmatters。Ashecanseldomdirectlyopposetheirdecision,therefore,withproperweightandauthority,itisnecessarythatheshouldbeabletoinfluenceit;andbecaninfluenceitonlybythefearsandexpectationswhichhemayexciteinthegreaterpartoftheindividualsoftheorder。Thosefearsandexpectationsmayconsistinthefearofdeprivationorotherpunishment,andintheexpectationoffurtherpreferment。
InallChristianchurchesthebeneficesoftheclergyareasortoffreeholdswhichtheyenjoy,notduringpleasure,butduringlifeorgoodbehaviour。Iftheyheldthembyamoreprecarioustenure,andwereliabletobeturnedoutuponeveryslightdisobligationeitherofthesovereignorofhisministers,itwouldperhapsbeimpossibleforthemtomaintaintheirauthoritywiththepeople,whowouldthenconsiderthemasmercenarydependentsuponthecourt,inthesecurityofwhoseinstructionstheycouldnolongerhaveanyconfidence。Butshouldthesovereignattemptirregularly,andbyviolence,todepriveanynumberofclergymenoftheirfreeholds,onaccount,perhaps,oftheirhavingpropagated,withmorethanordinaryzeal,somefactiousorseditiousdoctrine,hewouldonlyrender,bysuchpersecution,boththemandtheirdoctrinetentimesmorepopular,andthereforetentimesmoretroublesomeanddangerous,thantheyhadbeenbefore。Fearisinalmostallcasesawretchedinstrumentofgovernment,andoughtinparticularnevertobeemployedagainstanyorderofmenwhohavethesmallestpretensionstoindependency。Toattempttoterrifythemservesonlytoirritatetheirbadhumour,andtoconfirmtheminanoppositionwhichmoregentleusageperhapsmighteasilyinducethemeithertosoftenortolayasidealtogether。TheviolencewhichtheFrenchgovernmentusuallyemployedinordertoobligealltheirparliaments,orsovereigncourtsofjustice,toenregisteranyunpopularedict,veryseldomsucceeded。Themeanscommonlyemployed,however,theimprisonmentofalltherefractorymembers,onewouldthinkwereforcibleenough。TheprincesofthehouseofStewartsometimesemployedthelikemeansinordertoinfluencesomeofthemembersoftheParliamentofEngland;andtheygenerallyfoundthemequallyintractable。TheParliamentofEnglandisnowmanagedinanothermanner;andaverysmallexperimentwhichtheDukeofChoiseulmadeabouttwelveyearsagoupontheParliamentofParis,demonstratedsufficientlythatalltheparliamentsofFrancemighthavebeenmanagedstillmoreeasilyinthesamemanner。Thatexperimentwasnotpursued。Forthoughmanagementandpersuasionarealwaystheeasiestandthesafestinstrumentsofgovernments,asforceandviolencearetheworstandthemostdangerous,yetsuch,itseems,isthenaturalinsolenceofmanthathealmostalwaysdisdainstousethegoodinstrument,exceptwhenhecannotordarenotusethebadone。TheFrenchgovernmentcouldanddurstuseforce,andthereforedisdainedtousemanagementandpersuasion。Butthereisnoorderofmen,itappears,Ibelieve,fromtheexperienceofallages,uponwhomitissodangerous,orrathersoperfectlyruinous,toemployforceandviolence,asupontherespectedclergyofanyestablishedchurch。Therights,theprivileges,thepersonallibertyofeveryindividualecclesiasticwhoisupongoodtermswithhisownorderare,eveninthemostdespoticgovernments,morerespectedthanthoseofanyotherpersonofnearlyequalrankandfortune。Itissoineverygradationofdespotism,fromthatofthegentleandmildgovernmentofParistothatoftheviolentandfuriousgovernmentofConstantinople。Butthoughthisorderofmencanscarceeverbeforced,theymaybemanagedaseasilyasanyother;andthesecurityofthesovereign,aswellasthepublictranquillity,seemstodependverymuchuponthemeanswhichhehasofmanagingthem;andthosemeansseemtoconsistaltogetherintheprefermentwhichhehastobestowuponthem。
IntheancientconstitutionoftheChristianchurch,thebishopofeachdiocesewaselectedbythejointvotesoftheclergyandofthepeopleoftheepiscopalcity。Thepeopledidnotlongretaintheirrightofelection;andwhiletheydidretainit,theyalmostalwaysactedundertheinfluenceoftheclergy,whoinsuchspiritualmattersappearedtobetheirnaturalguides。Theclergy,however,soongrewwearyofthetroubleofmanagingthem,andfounditeasiertoelecttheirownbishopsthemselves。Theabbot,inthesamemanner,waselectedbythemonksofthemonastery,atleastinthegreaterpartoftheabbacies。Alltheinferiorecclesiasticalbeneficescomprehendedwithinthediocesewerecollatedbythebishop,whobestowedthemuponsuchecclesiasticsashethoughtproper。Allchurchprefermentswereinthismannerinthedisposalofthechurch。
Thesovereign,thoughhemighthavesomeindirectinfluenceinthoseelections,andthoughitwassometimesusualtoaskbothhisconsenttoelectandhisapprobationoftheelection,yethadnodirectorsufficientmeansofmanagingtheclergy。Theambitionofeveryclergymannaturallyledhimtopaycourtnotsomuchtohissovereignastohisownorder,fromwhichonlyhecouldexpectpreferment。
ThroughthegreaterpartofEuropethePopegraduallydrewtohimselffirstthecollationofalmostallbishopricsandabbacies,orofwhatwerecalledConsistorialbenefices,andafterwards,byvariousmachinationsandpretences,ofthegreaterpartofinferiorbeneficescomprehendedwithineachdiocese;
littlemorebeinglefttothebishopthanwhatwasbarelynecessarytogivehimadecentauthoritywithhisownclergy。Bythisarrangementtheconditionofthesovereignwasstillworsethanithadbeenbefore。TheclergyofallthedifferentcountriesofEuropewerethusformedintoasortofspiritualarmy,dispersedindifferentquarters,indeed,butofwhichallthemovementsandoperationscouldnowbedirectedbyonehead,andconductedupononeuniformplan。Theclergyofeachparticularcountrymightbeconsideredasaparticulardetachmentofthatarmy,orwhichtheoperationscouldeasilybesupportedandsecondedbyalltheotherdetachmentsquarteredinthedifferentcountriesroundabout。Eachdetachmentwasnotonlyindependentofthesovereignofthecountryinwhichitwasquartered,andbywhichitwasmaintained,butdependentuponaforeignsovereign,whocouldatanytimeturnitsarmsagainstthesovereignofthatparticularcountry,andsupportthembythearmsofalltheotherdetachments。
Thosearmswerethemostformidablethatcanwellbeimagined。IntheancientstateofEurope,beforetheestablishmentofartsandmanufactures,thewealthoftheclergygavethemthesamesortofinfluenceoverthecommonpeoplewhichthatofthegreatbaronsgavethemovertheirrespectivevassals,tenants,andretainers。Inthegreatlandedestateswhichthemistakenpietybothofprincesandprivatepersonshadbestoweduponthechurch,jurisdictionswereestablishedofthesamekindwiththoseofthegreatbarons,andforthesamereason。Inthosegreatlandedestates,theclergy,ortheirbailiffs,couldeasilykeepthepeacewithoutthesupportorassistanceeitherofthekingorofanyotherperson;andneitherthekingnoranyotherpersoncouldkeepthepeacetherewithoutthesupportandassistanceoftheclergy。Thejurisdictionsoftheclergy,therefore,intheirparticularbaroniesormanors,wereequallyindependent,andequallyexclusiveoftheauthorityoftheking’scourts,asthoseofthegreattemporallords。Thetenantsoftheclergywere,likethoseofthegreatbarons,almostalltenantsatwill,entirelydependentupontheirimmediatelords,andthereforeliabletobecalledoutatpleasureinordertofightinanyquarrelinwhichtheclergymightthinkpropertoengagethem。Overandabovetherentsofthoseestates,theclergypossessedinthetithes,averylargeportionoftherentsofalltheotherestatesineverykingdomofEurope。Therevenuesarisingfromboththosespeciesofrentswere,thegreaterpartofthem,paidinkind,incorn,wine,cattlepoultry,etc。Thequantityexceededgreatlywhattheclergycouldthemselvesconsume;andtherewereneitherartsnormanufacturesfortheproduceofwhichtheycouldexchangethesurplus。Theclergycouldderiveadvantagefromthisimmensesurplusinnootherwaythanbyemployingit,asthegreatbaronsemployedthelikesurplusoftheirrevenues,inthemostprofusehospitality,andinthemostextensivecharity。Boththehospitalityandthecharityoftheancientclergy,accordingly,aresaidtohavebeenverygreat。Theynotonlymaintainedalmostthewholepoorofeverykingdom,butmanyknightsandgentlemenhadfrequentlynoothermeansofsubsistencethanbytravellingaboutfrommonasterytomonastery,underpretenceofdevotion,butinrealitytoenjoythehospitalityoftheclergy。Theretainersofsomeparticularprelateswereoftenasnumerousasthoseofthegreatestlay—lords;andtheretainersofalltheclergytakentogetherwere,perhaps,morenumerousthanthoseofallthelay—lords。Therewasalwaysmuchmoreunionamongtheclergythanamongthelay—lords。Theformerwereunderaregulardisciplineandsubordinationtothepapalauthority。Thelatterwereundernoregulardisciplineorsubordination,butalmostalwaysequallyjealousofoneanother,andoftheking。Thoughthetenantsandretainersoftheclergy,therefore,hadbothtogetherbeenlessnumerousthanthoseofthegreatlay—lords,andtheirtenantswereprobablymuchlessnumerous,yettheirunionwouldhaverenderedthemmoreformidable。Thehospitalityandcharityoftheclergy,too,notonlygavethemthecommandofagreattemporalforce,butincreasedverymuchtheweightoftheirspiritualweapons。Thosevirtuesprocuredthemthehighestrespectandvenerationamongalltheinferiorranksofpeople,ofwhommanywereconstantly,andalmostalloccasionally,fedbythem。
Everythingbelongingorrelatedtosopopularanorder,itspossessions,itsprivileges,itsdoctrines,necessarilyappearedsacredintheeyesofthecommonpeople,andeveryviolationofthem,whetherrealorpretended,thehighestactofsacrilegiouswickednessandprofaneness。Inthisstateofthings,ifthesovereignfrequentlyfounditdifficulttoresisttheconfederacyofafewofthegreatnobility,wecannotwonderthatheshouldfinditstillmoresotoresisttheunitedforceoftheclergyofhisowndominions,supportedbythatoftheclergyofalltheneighbouringdominions。Insuchcircumstancesthewonderis,notthathewassometimesobligedtoyield,butthatheeverwasabletoresist。
Theprivilegeoftheclergyinthoseancienttimes(whichtouswholiveinthepresenttimesappearthemostabsurd),theirtotalexemptionfromthesecularjurisdiction,forexample,orwhatinEnglandwascalledthebenefitoftheclergy,werethenaturalorratherthenecessaryconsequencesofthisstateofthings。Howdangerousmustithavebeenforthesovereigntoattempttopunishaclergymanforanycrimewhatever,ifhisownorderweredisposedtoprotecthim,andtorepresenteithertheproofasinsufficientforconvictingsoholyaman,orthepunishmentastooseveretobeinflictedupononewhosepersonhadbeenrenderedsacredbyreligion?Thesovereigncould,insuchcircumstances,donobetterthanleavehimtobetriedbytheecclesiasticalcourts,who,forthehonouroftheirownorder,wereinterestedtorestrain,asmuchaspossible,everymemberofitfromcommittingenormouscrimes,orevenfromgivingoccasiontosuchgrossscandalasmightdisgustthemindsofthepeople。
InthestateinwhichthingswerethroughthegreaterpartofEuropeduringthetenth,eleventh,twelfth,andthirteenthcenturies,andforsometimebothbeforeandafterthatperiod,theconstitutionoftheChurchofRomemaybeconsideredasthemostformidablecombinationthateverwasformedagainsttheauthorityandsecurityofcivilgovernment,aswellasagainsttheliberty,reason,andhappinessofmankind,whichcanflourishonlywherecivilgovernmentisabletoprotectthem。Inthatconstitutionthegrossestdelusionsofsuperstitionweresupportedinsuchamannerbytheprivateinterestsofsogreatanumberofpeopleasputthemoutofalldangerfromanyassaultofhumanreason:becausethoughhumanreasonmightperhapshavebeenabletounveil,eventotheeyesofthecommonpeople,someofthedelusionsofsuperstition,itcouldneverhavedissolvedthetiesofprivateinterest。Hadthisconstitutionbeenattackedbynootherenemiesbutthefeebleeffortsofhumanreason,itmusthaveenduredforever。Butthatimmenseandwell—builtfabric,whichallthewisdomandvirtueofmancouldneverhaveshaken,muchlesshaveoverturned,wasbythenaturalcourseofthings,firstweakened,andafterwardsinpartdestroyed,andisnowlikely,inthecourseofafewcenturiesmore,perhaps,tocrumbleintoruinsaltogether。
Thegradualimprovementsofarts,manufactures,andcommerce,thesamecauseswhichdestroyedthepowerofthegreatbarons,destroyedinthesamemanner,throughthegreaterpartofEurope,thewholetemporalpoweroftheclergy。Intheproduceofarts,manufactures,andcommerce,theclergy,likethegreatbarons,foundsomethingforwhichtheycouldexchangetheirrudeproduce,andtherebydiscoveredthemeansofspendingtheirwholerevenuesupontheirownpersons,withoutgivinganyconsiderableshareofthemtootherpeople。Theircharitybecamegraduallylessextensive,theirhospitalitylessliberalorlessprofuse。
Theirretainersbecameconsequentlylessnumerous,andbydegreesdwindledawayaltogether。Theclergytoo,likethegreatbarons,wishedtogetabetterrentfromtheirlandedestates,inordertospendit,inthesamemanner,uponthegratificationoftheirownprivatevanityandfolly。Butthisincreaseofrentcouldbegotonlybygrantingleasestotheirtenants,whotherebybecameinagreatmeasureindependentofthem。Thetiesofinterestwhichboundtheinferiorranksofpeopletotheclergywereinthismannergraduallybrokenanddissolved。Theywereevenbrokenanddissolvedsoonerthanthosewhichboundthesameranksofpeopletothegreatbarons:becausethebeneficesofthechurchbeing,thegreaterpartofthem,muchsmallerthantheestatesofthegreatbarons,thepossessorofeachbeneficewasmuchsoonerabletospendthewholeofitsrevenueuponhisownperson。
Duringthegreaterpartofthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturiesthepowerofthegreatbaronswas,throughthegreaterpartofEurope,infullvigour。Butthetemporalpoweroftheclergy,theabsolutecommandwhichtheyhadoncehadoverthegreatbodyofthepeople,wasverymuchdecayed。ThepowerofthechurchwasbythattimeverynearlyreducedthroughthegreaterpartofEuropetowhatarosefromherspiritualauthority;andeventhatspiritualauthoritywasmuchweakenedwhenitceasedtobesupportedbythecharityandhospitalityoftheclergy。Theinferiorranksofpeoplenolongerlookeduponthatorder,astheyhaddonebefore,asthecomfortersoftheirdistress,andtherelieversoftheirindigence。Onthecontrary,theywereprovokedanddisgustedbythevanity,luxury,andexpenseofthericherclergy,whoappearedtospendupontheirownpleasureswhathadalwaysbeforebeenregardedasthepatrimonyofthepoor。
Inthissituationofthings,thesovereignsinthedifferentstatesofEuropeendeavouredtorecovertheinfluencewhichtheyhadoncehadinthedisposalofthegreatbeneficesofthechurch,byprocuringtothedeansandchaptersofeachdiocesetherestorationoftheirancientrightofelectingthebishop,andtothemonksofeachabbacythatofelectingtheabbot。There—establishingofthisancientorderwastheobjectofseveralstatutesenactedinEnglandduringthecourseofthefourteenthcentury,particularlyofwhatiscalledtheStatuteofProvisors;
andofthePragmaticSanctionestablishedinFranceinthefifteenthcentury。Inordertorendertheelectionvalid,itwasnecessarythatthesovereignshouldbothconsenttoitbeforehand,andafterwardsapproveofthepersonelected;andthoughtheelectionwasstillsupposedtobefree,hehad,however,alltheindirectmeanswhichhissituationnecessarilyaffordedhimofinfluencingtheclergyinhisowndominions。
OtherregulationsofasimilartendencywereestablishedinotherpartsofEurope。Butthepowerofthepopeinthecollationofthegreatbeneficesofthechurchseems,beforetheReformation,tohavebeennowheresoeffectuallyandsouniversallyrestrainedasinFranceandEngland。TheConcordatafterwards,inthesixteenthcentury,gavetothekingsofFrancetheabsoluterightofpresentingtoallthegreat,orwhatarecalledtheconsistorial,beneficesoftheGallicanChurch。
SincetheestablishmentofthePragmaticSanctionandoftheConcordat,theclergyofFrancehaveingeneralshownlessrespecttothedecreesofthepapalcourtthantheclergyofanyotherCatholiccountry。Inallthedisputeswhichtheirsovereignhashadwiththepope,theyhavealmostconstantlytakenpartywiththeformer。ThisindependencyoftheclergyofFranceuponthecourtofRomeseemstobeprincipallyfoundeduponthePragmaticSanctionandtheConcordat。Intheearlierperiodsofthemonarchy,theclergyofFranceappeartohavebeenasmuchdevotedtothepopeasthoseofanyothercountry。WhenRobert,thesecondprinceoftheCapetianrace,wasmostunjustlyexcommunicatedbythecourtofRome,hisownservants,itissaid,threwthevictualswhichcamefromhistabletothedogs,andrefusedtotasteanythingthemselveswhichlittlebeenpollutedbythecontactofapersoninhissituation。Theyweretaughttodoso,itmayverysafelybepresumed,bytheclergyofhisowndominions。
Theclaimofcollatingtothegreatbeneficesofthechurch,aclaimindefenceofwhichthecourtofRomehadfrequentlyshaken,andsometimesoverturnedthethronesofsomeofthegreatestsovereignsinChristendom,wasinthismannereitherrestrainedormodified,orgivenupaltogether,inmanydifferentpartsofEurope,evenbeforethetimeoftheReformation。Astheclergyhadnowlessinfluenceoverthepeople,sothestatehadmoreinfluenceovertheclergy。Theclergy,therefore,hadbothlesspowerandlessinclinationtodisturbthestate。
TheauthorityoftheChurchofRomewasinthisstateofdeclensionwhenthedisputeswhichgavebirthtotheReformationbeganinGermany,andsoonspreadthemselvesthrougheverypartofEurope。Thenewdoctrineswereeverywherereceivedwithahighdegreeofpopularfavour。Theywerepropagatedwithallthatenthusiasticzealwhichcommonlyanimatesthespiritofpartywhenitattacksestablishedauthority。Theteachersofthosedoctrines,thoughperhapsinotherrespectsnotmorelearnedthanmanyofthedivineswhodefendedtheestablishedchurch,seemingeneraltohavebeenbetteracquaintedwithecclesiasticalhistory,andwiththeoriginandprogressofthatsystemofopinionsuponwhichtheauthorityofthechurchwasestablished,andtheyhadtherebysomeadvantageinalmosteverydispute。Theausterityoftheirmannersgavethemauthoritywiththecommonpeople,whocontrastedthestrictregularityoftheirconductwiththedisorderlylivesofthegreaterpartoftheirownclergy。Theypossessed,too,inamuchhigherdegreethantheiradversariesalltheartsofpopularityandofgainingproselytes,artswhichtheloftyanddignifiedsonsofthechurchhadlongneglectedasbeingtotheminagreatmeasureuseless。Thereasonofthenewdoctrinesrecommendedthemtosome,theirnoveltytomany;thehatredandcontemptoftheestablishedclergytoastillgreaternumber;butthezealous,passionate,andfanatical,thoughfrequentlycoarseandrustic,eloquencewithwhichtheywerealmosteverywhereinculcated,recommendedthemtobyfarthegreatestnumber。
ThesuccessofthenewdoctrineswasalmosteverywheresogreatthattheprinceswhoatthattimehappenedtobeonbadtermswiththecourtofRomewerebymeansofthemeasilyenabled,intheirowndominions,tooverturnthechurch,which,havinglosttherespectandvenerationoftheinferiorranksofpeople,couldmakescarceanyresistance。ThecourtofRomehaddisobligedsomeofthesmallerprincesinthenorthernpartsofGermany,whomithadprobablyconsideredastooinsignificanttobeworththemanaging。Theyuniversally,therefore,establishedtheReformationintheirowndominions。ThetyrannyofChristianIIandofTroll,ArchbishopofUpsala,enabledGustavusVasatoexpelthembothfromSweden。Thepopefavouredthetyrantandthearchbishop,andGustavusVasafoundnodifficultyinestablishingtheReformationinSweden。ChristianIIwasafterwardsdeposedfromthethroneofDenmark,wherehisconducthadrenderedhimasodiousasinSweden。Thepope,however,wasstilldisposedtofavourhim,andFrederickofHolstein,whohadmountedthethroneinhisstead,revengedhimselfbyfollowingtheexampleofGustavusVasa。ThemagistratesofBerneandZurich,whohadnoparticularquarrelwiththepope,establishedwithgreateasetheReformationintheirrespectivecantons,wherejustbeforesomeoftheclergyhad,byanimposturesomewhatgrosserthanordinary,renderedthewholeorderbothodiousandcontemptible。