God. Grotius at last ordered him either to forbear railing or preaching. The meek preacher turned away in great wrath, and expressed his amazement that a Christian ambassador should shut the mouth of the Holy Ghost. This he thought very severe persecution; and he published his complaints everywhere, that Grotius had shut the mouth of the Holy Ghost; i. e., the mouth of his chaplain.

But to return to the consequences of the usurpation of power and the acquisition of wealth by the bishops and clergy. Opulence and dominion were so foreign from the first preaching of the gospel, so little known to its Author and his disciples, the estimation in which they were held was so trifling, and, indeed, so singularly changed in idea, that all was banished but the names. What can be seen of Christ and his humility, of the apostles and their poverty, in the pomp and pride of mitres, in courtly equipages, in splendid liveries, in a word, in all the fierceness and domination of prelacy? Is any thing of the plainness and simplicity of the gospel to be found in the intricacies of school divinity, or in the endless wranglings and strange distinctions of ecclesiastics? Do the bishops bear any likeness to Christ? Does the ambition of the clergy, their avidity for power and rich churches, for which they have contended with blows, bloodshed, and slaughter, come from Christ, or from the genius of his religion? Were the seditions, tumults, and wars, which followed such ambitious pursuits, the effects

of a Christian or of a clerical spirit? Were not such evils and calamities derived from an insatiable thirst after grandeur and authority? Yes! and the love of power, which under the most hypocritical disguises could insinuate itself into the breasts of men, has descended through all ages of the church, to the more enlightened period of the nineteenth century, as the heirloom to bishops.

41'

CHAP. IV.

THE PROGRESSIVE POWER AND USURPATION OF BISHOPS, CONCLUDED.

THE clergy of England, as well as of other nations, are always forward to complain of innovations, and of disturbing things that are settled. But pray who have made more innovations than churchmen? Who have more disturbed and changed religion and states by their ambition, their disputes, their turbulent behaviour, and their exorbitant claims ? And who are so much given to change? What changes, what violent and lawless changes, were there not wrought by Laud and his brethren in his time, and attempted by men of his spirit ever since? The laity have acted only on the defensive, warding off the attempts and monstrous demands made from time to time by the clergy. What is a great part of ecclesiastical history, but a continual detail and repetition of the efforts of the clergy to govern mankind and to master the world? Is not this an innovation with a witness, a propensity to change, an actual and alarming change? Have

they not been continually attempting to be what they were not, to possess what they did not, still to be richer, and still to be more powerful? Could there be a greater change, than from the almsmen of the people to become lords and princes; from poverty and humility to rise to mitres, and diadems, and dominion? Could such a change, a change so mighty and unnatural, be accomplished without turning the world upside down?

This is something more than quieta movere, something more than disturbing things that were settled. Did not Laud actually master and abolish the laws of his country, assert the independence of the clergy of the civil power, and terrify the judges from issuing prohibitions, as they were actually sworn to do? Did the spirit of Laud, for power, independence, and princely revenues, die with the archbishop? No! other bishops have improved upon his scheme, and added, if possible, to his wild and enslaving pretensions. A proof that they were the pretensions of the clergy, at least of the majority, we may remark, that the convocation could never be persuaded to censure them.

Whoever doubts whether the clergy have been the authors of changes in the world of a great and calamitous nature, whether they have themselves changed and degenerated from their patterns and original, need only read history, and compare them with Christ and his apostles. Compare their pretensions, pomp, luxury, and possessions, with the

simplicity, humility, labour, and disinterestedness of the primitive Christians.

The truth is, when the clergy make this complaint, which is very usually done, that it is not safe to disturb things which are established, they only mean to discourage men from disturbing them in their favourite pursuit after power and riches. Whatever is established on the authority of the New Testament, there are but few men to be found with the audacity to disturb. But if the elergy, with a progressively usurped power, make demands which are neither warranted by Christ nor the law of equity, it is right, and our bounden duty, to disturb and even to defeat them.

Such high pretenders to princely rule and opulence are the men who are given to change; and it is always right and just to oppose usurpation, to redress grievances, to remove nuisances, and to attack fraud, avarice, and nonsense.

It would be endless to adduce particulars. But suppose any assuming clergyman were so extravagant and daring, and had so little regard for conscience and public tranquillity, as to attempt to establish an ecclesiastical tribunal in our colonies abroad, to the terror and affliction of our brethren, many of whom were first driven there by the oppression and barbarity of such courts here, especially in the reign of such a man as Archbishop Laud; would not such an attempt tend to a bold innovation, and discover a busy, an arrogant, and