occasioned comparison. They could hardly avoid comparing the simplicity, and poverty, and meanness, in respect of worldly circumstances, of our Lord, and his apostles, and most of the primitive saints and martyrs, with the pomp, and splendour, and opulence, of the rulers of the church in their own days. It is said, that a picture which Huss had procured, and exhibited to the people, wherein the entry of our Lord into Jerusalem, riding on an ass, attended by his disciples on foot, in a very homely garb, was contrasted by a procession of the pope and cardinals, in their pontifical habits, and magnificently mounted on the finest horses, richly caparisoned, and adorned with gold and silver and jewels, did not a little contribute to excite the indignation of spectators against their spiritual lords, as bearing no resemblance to those meek, humble, and unassuming men, from whom they pretended to derive all their high powers and prerogatives.

But the difference, in respect of wealth and worldly grandeur between the predecessors and their pretended successours, would not have had a great effect, had this been the only dif ference. It was but too evident, that the disparity was not less in disposition and character than in external circumstances. When once the clergy of any note had gotten considerably above the middling ranks of life, and lived not only in ease, but in opulence, and even in splendour, it was but too visible, that, in proportion as they became more rich and powerful, they grew less active and useful. They lived in luxury and idleness, often in the most gross and scandalous vices. As to what were properly the duties of their charge, the instruction of the people, and presiding in the publick worship, and sacred offices among them, these were but too commonly considered as a sort of drudgery, very unsuitable to men of their dignity and figure, and were therefore either totally neglected, or devolved on those whose poverty, however ill qualified they were, might induce them, for a living, to undertake the task. At the same time, whatever could be considered as a prerogative, or privilege of the office, whatever could contribute to the augmentation of their riches, or of their power, was contended for with such an earnestness and zeal, as the apostles and primitive martyrs never displayed, unless in support of the faith and religious institution once delivered by their master unto the saints.

Thus every thing had run into extremes among them. The dignified clergy, as they were both wealthy and powerful, were generally lazy, proud, ambitious, envious, vindictive, and sometimes profligate. Those again, on whom the burden of the service was devolved, as they were both needy and depend

Bb b

ent, and often ignorant, had a share of the vices, which commonly accompany those circumstances. They were false, mercenary, and servile. How much men were confirmed in the very worst opinions, which had been formed of the order, by the great schism in the papacy, which lasted about half a century, when the christian world was divided between two, at first, and afterwards three, rival popes, some nations adhering to one, and others to another, each claiming to be the only true head of the church, and calling every other an usurper, it would be superfluous to remark. It was this division in the popedom, both in the head, and in the members, which, as much as any thing, exposed, in the strongest light, the irreligion, the worldly ends, the vile intrigues, and even the infamy, of ecclesiastick leaders. I would not, however, be understood, in the character now given, as meaning to include all without exception. I know that, even in the worst times, there were both in the higher and in the lower ranks of clergymen, exceptions of persons, whose characters were irreproachable, and lives exemplary. But what I say regards the generality, or the much greater number, of the clerical body. And for the truth of it, I desire no other vouchers, than their own most celebrated historians and writers, men who not only lived and died in the communion of Rome, but also were zealous for preserving her unity, and advancing her honour. It will readily be admitted, as a circumstance of additional weight, that the different kingdoms and states of Europe had, at length, attained a better defined and more settled constitution than formerly; that statesmen had begun to entertain more extensive views of policy, and princes to understand better their own rights and interests. As men's eyes were opened, they saw more clearly the encroachments and usurpations of the priesthood. This discovery, co-operating with the abhorrence and contempt they entertained of many of the priests themselves on personal accounts, namely, the neglect or prostitution of the sacred functions, and the dissoluteness of their lives, led them to inquire a little into the foundations of the high powers and privileges which they claimed. This was a subject, that would not bear examination. As the great foundations of the hierarchy were in the people's ignorance, superstition, and credulity, when these are removed, the whole fabrick falls to pieces.

Now it is remarkable, that in all the heresies which sprang up in the different parts of Europe, since the revival of letters, church power seems to have been the principal object struck Whereas, in ancient times, it was only incidentally affected. This will appear manifest to one who considers the ac

ousations brought against Waldo, of Lyons, or at least his followers, Wickliff of England, Huss of Bohemia, Luther of Germany, and Zuinglius of Switzerland; and compares them with those brought against the heresiarchs of the primitive ages, such as Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius, Eutychius, in none of whom was there any direct or pointed aim against ecclesiasticks. In those early times, indeed, church power, far from being grown up to such an enormous pitch as it arrived at afterwards, was but in its nonage; nor were churchmen themselves become obnoxious to universal odium, by their laziness and arrogance, as well as by the immorality of their lives. This difference of circumstances gave a taint to the modern sects, which plainly distinguished them from the ancient, and contributed not a little to the virulence, which their disputes excited in their adversaries. The wounds given to these were the deeper, and the more apt to fester, inasmuch as they awaked in their breasts a consciousness, that they were not unmerited. Those antagonists saw but too clearly, that the majority, even of their friends, who would not admit the conclusions drawn by the reformers, (as they called themselves, or hereticks, as their enemies called them) agreed but too much with them in their premises: a reflection which could not fail to gall them exceedingly.

The usurpation and tyranny of ecclesiastical superiours, the ignorance in which they kept the people, were at first almost the only topicks. From this they proceeded to censure practical abuses in ceremonies and discipline. The third and last step of their progress was to expose errours in doctrine. In these, indeed, when once they were propounded for discussion to the publick, they laid the principal stress of their cause. These they considered as the source of every thing else that was amiss. But it was not with them that they began. The shameful incontinence and debauchery of the clergy were the occasion, that very early and very generally the canons, which enjoin celibacy, became the subject of offence and clamour.. The absurdity of reading the scriptures to the people, and performing the publick offices of religion in a language which they do not understand, it required but a small share of knowledge, or rather of reflection and common sense, to enable them to discover. The manifest inconsistency of the practice, which had been introduced, had gradually spread, and was at last become universal, of administrating the eucharist to the people in one kind only, the bread, (the inconsistency of this I say) with the express words of the

institution, recorded in no fewer than four books of scripture; the exorbitant power and immunities, which, through the cri minal, as well as weak, indulgence of the secular powers, clergymen had obtained, and of which they made so bad a use, afforded matter of loud and universal outcry.

For some centuries before Luther's days, these, and the like corruptions, had been the subject of complaint and murmur in various places. But from the time of Wickliff's preaching in England, and sending abroad his sentiments to the world in Latin tracts, which was near a century and a half before the reformation, men's attention was roused to such topicks, and people grew bolder every day in speaking out their opinions. What they had ventured only to mutter, as it were, in a whisper before, they did not hesitate to proclaim in the most publick manner. You know the influence which Wickliff's doctrine had, even in the remote kingdom of Bohe mia, and the unhappy fate (I mean to outward appearance) of his two famous disciples, John Huss and Jerom of Prague. I do not say that in all things they adhered to the opinions of the celebrated English doctor. But as in what relates to the corruptions of the church, and of the clergy, the exorbitance and abuse of ecclesiastick power, they were evidently his followers; so by his writings and example they were embol dened to give an open testimony to the truth in their native country, and to seal it with their blood in Constance. This, though it be not considered as the era of the reformation, for it happened about a century before the publick remonstrances of Luther, is justly regarded as having paved the way for it. Wickliff had left a seed of reformation in England, which it was not in the power of the combined rulers, both spiritual and temporal, to destroy. The martyrdom of Huss and Jerom by the Romish sanhedrim, at Constance, confederated with the imperial authority basely prostituted in violation of plighted faith, through the accursed casuistry of those bloody and deceitful men, proved, as in primitive times, the means of promoting, and not of obstructing, the cause. In short, men were now arrived at such a measure of knowledge, as rendered the methods employed to keep their minds in subjection, formerly so successful, perfectly ridiculous. The clergy: had lost that veneration and respect from the people, which mere external trappings, and arrogant pretensions, had once been found sufficient to secure to them. Nay, so much were the sentiments of many of the laity changed in regard to those articles, that the spiritual denunciations and curses, (when unaided by the secular arm) which would have made their forefathers tremble, served only to make them smile.

Thus stood matters, in regard to religion, throughout Europe, about the end of the fifteenth, and beginning of the sixteenth century. Nothing could be more evident to men of discernment, than that christendom was ripe for a revolution in its ecclesiastical polity, and seemed only to wait for a favourable occasion. Such an occasion, the avarice of pope Leo the tenth, and the impiety, as well as indiscretion, of his ministers and agents, soon furnished. The use that was made of that occasion, and the effects produced by it, I shall briefly consider in my next lecture.

4