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。