in Parliament, and not a few of the religious had a share in the Convocation. It is not denied but that they were some of the best landlords. Their reserv'd rents were low, and their fines easy; and sometimes the product of the farms, without paying money, discharged the tenants in a great measure. They were particularly remarkable for their hospitality. The Monasteries were, as it were, houses of publick entertainment for the gentry that travelled. And as for their distributions of charity, it may be guess'd from one instance. While the Religious Houses were standing, there were no provisions of Parliament to relieve the poor: no assessment upon the parish for that purpose. But now this charge upon the kingdom amounts, at a moderate computation, to eight hundred thousand pounds per annum.

"Besides this rent-charge, as it were, drawn upon the whole nation by the dissolution, the ancient nobility suffer'd considerably. For the seisure and surrender of the Abbies being confirm'd to the Crown by Act of Parliament, the services reserved by the founders were extinguished of course. To mention some of them: the Abbots that held by knight's service, were bound to provide such a number of soldiers as their estates required, and to furnish them for the field at their own charges. Thus the men were to appear at the musters, and attend the heirs of their founders, or such benefactors who had settled a knight's fee upon them.

"Secondly, where they held by knight-service, they were bound to contribute towards a fortune for marrying their Lord's eldest daughter. And thirdly, to pay a sum of money to defray the expences of knighthood, when that distinction was confer'd upon the founder's eldest son.

"Lastly, the founders had the benefit of corrodies: that is, they had the privilege of quartering a certain number of poor servants upon the Abbies. Thus people that were worn up with age and labour, and in no condition to support themselves, were not thrown up to starving or parish collections, but had a comfortable retreat to the Abbies, where they were maintain'd, without hardship or marks of indigence, during life.”

III. "+ When the Monks were settled here in the reign of King Edgar, they promoted a general improvement. They were very industrious in restoring learning, and retrieving the country from the remarkable ignorance of those

+ Collier's Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. B. i. p. 19.

times. Their labours were answered with success: insomuch, that whereas before scarce any Secular Priest could write or read a Latin epistle, [Elfric Præf. ad Gram. Sax.] the face of things was so changed by the endeavours of Dunstan and his master Ethelwald, that in a short time learning was generally restored, and began to flourish. From this period the Monasteries were the schools and seminaries of almost the whole Clergy, both secular and regular. For the Universities (if we had more than one) were then very slender societies, and the Muses were confined, as 'twere, to the cloisters. The Monks thus rising in their figure, made a considerable progress in the restoration of learning. They bred their novices to letters and to this purpose, every Monastery had a peculiar College in each of the Universities. And even to the time of their dissolution, they maintain'd a great number of children at school for the service of the Church. And a little before the Reformation, many of the great Monasteries were nurseries of learning. Their superiors were men of distinction this way, and great promoters of their own sufficiency in others.-From hence it appears, that the Monks deserved a fairer character than is sometimes given them: and that in the darkest and most exceptionable ages they were far from being enemies to learning."

$ 9.-The Motives that induced K. Henry VIII. to dissolve the Religious Houses, &c. are recited and answered.

Motive I. THE King's Necessities. Answer. It is pretty plain in history, that this King's necessities were the necessary and unavoidable consequence of his own squandering prodigality and boundless profusion, both at home and abroad. At home, if we view him, "Nothing was to be seen but tilts, tournaments, balls, and such diversions.But tho' these entertainments might seem worthy a great young Prince, who had a mind to show the world the magnificence of his court, yet they were very fatal in their consequences, by giving him a constant habit of expence, till the treasures of the Crown were so exhausted, as to put him upon impious measures to support his necessities.". Then, as to his personal expeditions abroad, they do not

+ Short Vien, p. 180.

seem to have been always necessary, or even expedient. For it seems "This high-spirited and valiant Prince," as my Lord Herbert characters him, "would needs engage himself beyond what was requisite, and would be an actor, for the most part, when he needed only to have been a spectator."

Now, (to say nothing of the prodigious luxury of this King's Court) I only ask, whether it were requisite that his Majesty should interfere personally in romantic expeditions on the continent, and exhaust the treasures of the crown in foreign fruitless campaigns, when he might have contented himself with being a spectator only? And what necessity there could be for him to cross the seas in a superb vessel, rigged out (as Lord Herbert assures us) with sails of cloth of gold?

Granting, therefore, that magnificence (within the bounds of moderation) may be no discommendable qualification in a great Prince; yet, on the other hand, is not prodiyality a vice? And if so, we do not see how it can be exculpated by the feeble plea of necessity. One may indeed sometimes make a virtue of necessity; but does it not forfeit that title, when it becomes the patroness of vice? And does not prodigality fall under that denomination ? In short, let the King's necessities be what they would, or by what ways or means soever contracted, it must, we presume, be allowed, they were impiously supported by sacrilegious plundering, and unjust confiscations. Nay, supposing the Church Treasure had been put to better uses, this surely is no excuse. for the sacrilegious seizure of it.

"The Christian world," says our Noble Historian, was astonished at these doings: and tho' the excessive number of the Houses excused the King, in some part, for the first suppression of the lesser Houses under 200 pounds, yet the latter suppression of the great Houses had no such specious pretext, when their surrender, purchase, or the like, was urged; so that, notwithstanding the King's neces- : sities, no little occasion of scandal and obloquy was given. For, besides the houses and lauds taken away, there was much money made of the present stock of cattle and corn, of the timber, lead, bells, &c. and chiefly of the plate and church ornaments, which were not valued. All which being by some openly called rapine and sacrilege, I will no way excuse."

+ Lord Herbert's Life of King Henry VIII. p. 11. ‡ Ibid. p. 442.

Motive II. The excessive number of Religious Houses: --Answer. To this excuse it may be answered: That the redundancy of Religious Houses (if any such there was) might possibly induce the Government to lop off the supernumerary ones; but why was the undistinguishing axe unmercifully laid to the root of all the rest?" It is very ill surgery, to lop off a limb when there is any hopes of a cure: there is no human institution but will be liable to some errors and inconveniences; but if the good on the other hand outbalances the ill, we ought so to distinguish, as to preserve the one, and remove the other. These places were first founded by the piety of our ancestors, with a charitable design, to give a retreat to such persons as had a mind to detach themselves from the affairs of the world, and dedicate their lives to the service of God, in a state of quiet and devotion. By these people were the hungry fed, the naked cloathed, and the dead buried; with all other acts of charity, which seemed so essential to the spirit of Christianity. But to all this it may be objected, that, tho' these were the designs of the first founders, these houses, by the corruption of time, were degenerated into nurseries of sloth. However, tho' there might be some instances of this nature, it does not follow, that an institution should be abolished for the abuse of it; any more than that there should be no inns to receive honest travellers, because some publick houses harbour thieves and highwaymen. A severe visitation might have corrected these abuses, without turning so many religious into the world, which, by the most solemn vows, they had abandon'd before."

Motive III. The Monks, &c. led immoral lives. Answer. 1. "That the narratives of this kind were swell'd beyond truth and proportion may well be suspected, from the mercenary tempers of some of the Visitors.-Besides, that several of the Religious Houses had a fair reputation, appears from authentic records."-[Having said thus much in defence of the Religious in general, our Author produces not a few particular testimonies (and those mostly signed by the hands of the Visitors themselves) of the inoffensive and unexceptionable behaviour of the following Religious Houses, viz.] The Abby of S. Edmundsbury, Suffolk. The Priory of Catesby, Northamptonshire, The

Abby of Cliffe, in Cornwell. The Abby of Ramsey. The Priory of Boxgrave. The Nunnery of Polesworth, in Warwickshire. The Priory of Woolstrop, in Northamptonshire. The Nunnery of Godstow. The Abby of Rewly, in Oxfordshire. The Abby of Hewlin. The Nunnery of Leyburne. -There are, subjoins our Historian, several other fair testimonials of the Regularity of the Religious Houses to be seen upon record in the Augmentation Office, but what I have mention'd may be sufficient."-Sufficient they are, to prove demonstratively, that there were more righteous Monasteries in England, than righteous men in Sodom.

66

2. Mr. Fuller tells us, "+ It is confessed by impartial people, that some Monasteries of both sexes, being put to the test, appeared very commendable in their behaviour, se that the least aspersion could not be cast upon them. I read in one Author, (Ld. Herbert, p. 399,) That some societies behaved themselves so well, that their lives were not only exempt from notorious faults, but their spare time bestowed in writing books, painting, carving, engraving.-Amongst these, the nunnery of Godstow, near Oxford, must not be forgotten; which as it hath a good name (be ing God's house or habitation) it well answer'd thereunto, in the conditions of the people living therein."

3.

It is certain, that the pretended disorders and immoralities of the Monks, &c. (both with regard to their number and enormity) were most superlatively exaggerated and magnified beyond measure, by the Visitor-General and his most sagacious sin-questors. Every trifling mole-hill of a fault was by them very dexterously magic-lanterned into the size of a mountain; and every peccadillio with which the Religious could possibly be charged, was represented under the formidable appearance of a first-rate enormity. This is ingenuously confessed by D. Heylin, who fairly owns that the Visitors "Represented their offences in such multiplying glasses, as made them seem both greater in number, and more horrid in nature, than indeed they were." -All which things considered, we may reasonably conclude, that the reports made by Cromwel and his emissaries in disfavour of the Religious, deserve but little notice, and less credit.But,

4. "There is another heavier imputation laid upon the

+Fuller's Ch. Hist. Book VI. p. 316.

Heylin's Hist. Ref. p. 90.

Collier's Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. B. ii. p. 108.