beacon lights of history-iii-2-第42章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



investigation。　　The　monks　were　accused　of　dilapidating　public

property；　of　frequenting　infamous　places；　of　stealing　jewels　from

consecrated　shrines。　　In　1511；　Archbishop　Warham　instituted　another

visitation。　　In　1523　Cardinal　Wolsey　himself　undertook　the　task　of

reform。　　At　last　the　Parliament；　in　1535；　appointed　Cromwell　vicar

or　visitor…general；　issued　a　commission；　and　intrusted　it　to

lawyers；　not　priests；　who　found　that　the　worst　had　not　been　told；

and　reported　that　two　thirds　of　the　monks　of　England　were　living　in

concubinage；　that　their　lands　were　wasted　and　mortgaged；　and　their

houses　falling　into　ruins。　　They　found　the　Abbot　of　Fountains

surrounded　with　more　women　than　Mohammed　allowed　his　followers；　and

the　nuns　of　Litchfield　scandalously　immoral。



On　this　report；　the　Lords　and　Commonsdeliberately；　not　rashly

decreed　the　suppression　of　all　monasteries　the　income　of　which　was

less　than　two　hundred　pounds　a　year；　and　the　sequestration　of　their

lands　to　the　King。　　About　two　hundred　of　the　lesser　convents　were

thus　suppressed；　and　the　monks　turned　adrift；　yet　not　entirely

without　support。　　This　spoliation　may　have　been　a　violation　of　the

rights　of　property；　but　the　monks　had　betrayed　their　trusts。　　The

next　Parliament　completed　the　work。　　In　1539　all　the　religious

houses　were　suppressed；　both　great　and　small。　　Such　venerable　and

princely　retreats　as　St。　Albans；　Glastonbury；　Reading；　Bury　St。

Edmunds；　and　Westminster；　which　had　flourished　one　thousand　years；

founded　long　before　the　Conquest；shared　the　common　ruin。　　These

probably　would　have　been　spared；　had　not　the　first　suppression

filled　the　country　with　rebels。　　The　great　insurrection　in

Lincolnshire　which　shook　the　foundation　of　the　throne；　the

intrigues　of　Cardinal　Pole；　the　Cornish　conspiracy　in　which　the

great　house　of　Neville　was　implicated；　and　various　other

agitations；　were　all　fomented　by　the　angry　monks。



Rapacity　was　not　the　leading　motive　of　Henry　or　his　minister；　but

the　public　welfare。　　The　measure　of　suppression　and　sequestration

was　violent；　but　called　for。　　Cromwell　put　forth　no　such

sophistical　pleas　as　those　revolutionists　who　robbed　the　French

clergy；that　their　property　belonged　to　the　nation。　　In　France　the

clergy　were　despoiled；　not　because　they　were　infamous；　but　because

they　were　rich。　　In　England　the　monks　probably　suffered　injustice

from　the　severity　of　their　punishment；　but　no　one　now　doubts　that

punishment　was　deserved。　　Nor　did　Henry　retain　all　the　spoils

himself：　he　gave　away　the　abbey　lands　with　a　prodigality　equal　to

his　rapacity。　　He　gave　them　to　those　who　upheld　his　throne；　as　a

reward　for　service　or　loyalty。　　They　were　given　to　a　new　class　of

statesmen；　who　led　the　popular　party；like　the　Fitzwilliams；　the

Russells；　the　Dudleys；　and　the　Seymours；and　thus　became　the

foundation　of　their　great　estates。　　They　were　also　distributed　to

many　merchants　and　manufacturers　who　had　been　loyal　to　the

government。　　From　one…third　to　two…thirds　of　the　landed　property　of

the　kingdom；as　variously　estimated；thus　changed　hands。　　It　was

an　enormous　confiscation；nearly　as　great　as　that　made　by　William

the　Conqueror　in　favor　of　his　army　of　invaders。　　It　must　have

produced　an　immense　impression　on　the　mind　of　Europe。　　It　was

almost　as　great　a　calamity　to　the　Catholic　Church　of　England　as　the

emancipation　of　slaves　was　to　their　Southern　masters　in　our　late

war。　　Such　a　spoliation　of　the　Church　had　not　before　taken　place　in

any　country　of　Europe。　　How　great　an　evil　the　monastic　system　must

have　been　regarded　by　Parliament　to　warrant　such　an　act！　　Had　it

not　been　popular；　there　would　have　been　discontents　amounting　to　a

general　hostility　to　the　throne。



It　must　also　be　borne　in　mind　that　this　dissolution　of　the

monasteries；　this　attack　on　the　monastic　system；　was　not　a

religious　movement　fanned　by　reformers；　but　an　act　of　Parliament；

at　the　instance　of　a　royal　minister。　　It　was　not　done　under　the

direction　of　a　Protestant　king；for　Henry　was　never　a　Protestant；

but　as　a　public　measure　in　behalf　of　morality　and　for　reasons　of

State。　　It　is　true　that　Henry　had；　by　his　marriage　with　Anne　Boleyn

and　the　divorce　of　his　virtuous　queen；　defied　the　Pope　and

separated　England　from　Rome；　so　far　as　appointments　to

ecclesiastical　benefices　are　concerned。　　But　in　offending　the　Pope

he　also　equally　offended　Charles　V。　　The　results　of　his　separation

from　Rome；　during　his　life；　were　purely　political。　　The　King　did

not　give　up　the　Mass　or　the　Roman　communion　or　Roman　dogmas　of

faith；　he　only　prepared　the　way　for　reform　in　the　next　reign。　　He

only　intensified　the　hatred　between　the　old　conservative　party　and

the　party　of　reform　and　progress。



How　far　Cromwell　himself　was　a　Protestant　it　is　difficult　to　tell。

Doubtless　he　sympathized　with　the　new　religious　spirit　of　the　age；

but　he　did　not　openly　avow　the　faith　of　Luther。　　He　was　the　able

and　unscrupulous　minister　of　an　absolute　monarch；　bent　on　sweeping

away　abuses　of　all　kinds；　but　with　the　idea　of　enlarging　the　royal

authority　as　much；　perhaps；　as　promoting　the　prosperity　of　the

realm。



He　therefore　turned　his　attention　to　the　ecclesiastical　courts；

which　from　the　time　of　Becket　had　been　antagonistic　to　royal

encroachments。　　The　war　between　the　civil　power　and　these　courts

had　begun　before　the　fall　of　Wolsey；　and　had　resulted　in　the

curtailment　of　probate　duties；　legacies；　and　mortuaries；　by　which

the　clergy　had　been　enriched。　　A　limitation　of　pluralities　and

enforcement　of　residence　had　also　been　effected。　　But　a　still

greater　blow　to　the　privileges　of　the　clergy　was　struck　by　the

Parliament　under　the　influence　of　Cromwell；　who　had　elevated　it　in

order　to　give　legality　to　the　despotic　measures　of　the　Crown；　and

in　this　way　a　law　was　passed　that　no　one　under　the　rank　of　a

subdeacon；　if　convicted　of　felony；　should　be　allowed　to　plead　his

〃benefit　of　clergy；〃　but　should　be　punished　like　ordinary

criminals；thus　re…establishing　the　constitutions　of　Clarendon　in

the　time　of　Becket。　　Another　act　also　was　passed；　by　which　no　one

could　be　summoned；　as　aforetime；　to　the　archbishop's　court　out　of

his　own　diocese；a　very　beneficent　act；　since　the　people　had　been

needlessly　subject　to　great　expense　and　injustice　in　being　obliged

to　travel　considerable　distances。　　It　was　moreover　enacted　that　men

could　not　burden　their　estates　beyond　twenty　years　by　providing

priests　to　sing　masses　for　their　souls。　　The　Parliament　likewise

abolished　annats；a　custom　which　had　long　prevailed　in　Europe；

which　required　one　year's　income　to　be　sent　to　the　Pope　on　any　new

preferment；　a　great　burden　to　the　clergy；　a　sort　of　tribute　to　a

foreign　power。　　Within　fifty　years；　one　hundred　and　sixty　thousand

pounds　had　thus　been　sent　from　England　to　Rome；　from　this　one

source　of　papal　revenue　alone；equal　to　three　million　pounds　at

the　present　time；　or　fifteen　millions　of　dollars；　from　a　country　of

only　three　millions　of　people。　　It　was　the　passage　of　that　act

which　induced　Sir　Thomas　More　（a　devoted　Catholic；　but　a　just　and

able　and　incorruptible　judge）　to　resign　the　seals　which　he　had　so

long　and　so　honorably　held；the　most　prominent　man　in　England

after　Cromwell　and　Cranmer；　and　it　was　the　execution　of　this　lofty

character；　because　he　held　out　against　the　imperious　demands　of

Henry；　which　is　the　greatest　stain　upon　this　monarch's　reign。

Parliament　also　called　the　clergy　to　account　for　excessive　acts　of

despotism；　and　subjected　them　to　the　penalty　of　a　premunire　（the

offence　of　bringing　a　foreign　authority　into　England）；　from　which

they　were　freed　only　by　enormous　fines。



Thus　it　would　seem　that　many　abuses　were　removed　by　Cromwell　and

the　Parliament　during　the　reign　of　Henry　VIII。　which　may　almost　be

considered　as　reforms　of　the　Church　itself。　　The　authority　of　the

Church　was　not　attacked；　still　less　its　doctrines；　but　only　abuses

and　privileges　the　restraint　of　which　was　of　public　benefit；　and