in the choice of such things as he was to live on in the time of fasting. Some shewed a trifling superstition in those matters, as well as vanity and affectation that was indeed scandalous. Plain and simple fasting was despised, as not singular nor pompous enough for their pride. For it seems by what follows, that the clergy was then corrupted with the same disorders, with which our saviour had reproached the pharisees, while they did not study inward purity, so much as outward appearances; nor the pleasing of God, so much as the praise of men. But here he stops short, for it seems he went too near the describing some eminent man in that age.. From that he turns to the government of a priest's tongue: He ought neither to detract from any one himself, nor to encourage such as did: The very hearkening to slander was very unbecoming. They ought to visit their people, but not to report in one place what they observed in another; in that they ought to be both discreet and secret. Hippocrates adjured those that came to study from him, to be secret, grave, and prudent in their whole behaviour; but how much more did this become those, to whom the care of souls was trusted? He advises him to visit his people rather in their afflictions than in their prosperity; not to go too often to their feasts, which must needs lessen him that does it too much. He, in the last place, speaks very severely of those who applied the wealth of the church to their own private uses. It was theft to defraud a friend, but it was sacrilege to rob the church. It was a crime that exceeded the cruelty of high-way men, to receive that which belonged indeed to the poor, and to withdraw any part of it to one's private occasions. He concludes

with this excuse, That he had named no person, he had not writ to reproach others; but to give them warning. And therefore since he had treated of the vices of the clergy in general terms, if any was offended with him for it, he thereby plainly confessed that he himself was guilty."

CHAP. V.

An account of some Canons in divers 'ages of the church, relating to the duties and labours of the clergy..

I

WILL go no farther in gathering quotations, to shew the sense that the fathers had in these matters; these are both so full and so express, that I can find none more plain and more forcible. I shall to these add some of the canons that have been made both in the best aud in the worst ages of the church, obliging bishops and other clerks to residence, and to be contented with one cure. In that at Sardica, that met in the year 347, consisting of above 350 bishops, two canons were made, (the 11th and 12th) against bishops who without any urgent necessity, or pressing business, should be absent from their church above three weeks, and thereby grieve the flock that was committed to their care: And even this provision was made, because bishop's had estates lying out of their diocesses; therefore they were allowed to go and look after them, for three weeks, in which time they were to perform the divine functions in the churches to which those estates belonged.

Many provisions were also made against such as went to court, unless they were called by the emperors, os

went by a deputation from the church upon a public aecount. There is not any one thing more frequently provided against, than that any of the clergy should leave their church, and go to any other church, or live any where else without the bishop's leave and consent: Nor is there any thing clearer from all the canons of the first ages, than that they considered the clergy of every church as a body of men dedicated to its service; that lived upon the oblations of the faithful, and that was to labour in the several parts of the ecclesiastical ministry, as they should be ordered by the bishop.

In the 4th general council at Calcedon, pluralities do first appear: For they are mentioned and conde nned in the 10th canon, which runs thus: No clerk shall at the same time belong to two churches; to wit, to that in which he was first ordained, and that to which as being the greater, he has gone, out of a desire of vain-glory; for such as do so, ought to be sent back to that church in which they were at first ordained, and to serve there only: But if any has been translated from one church to another, he shall receive nothing out of his former church nor out of any chapel or alms-house belonging to it: and such as shall transgress this definition of this general council, are condemned by it, to be degraded. I go next to a worse scene of the church, to see what provisions were made in this matter about the 8th century, both in the east and in the west: The worse that those ages and councils were, it makes the argument the stronger; since even bad men in bad times, could not justify or suffer such an abuse.

In the year 787, the second council of Nice was held that settled the worship of images. The 15th canon of

it runs thus. "No Clerk shall from henceforth be reckoned in two churches, (for every church had a catalogue of its clergy, by which the dividends were made) for this is the character of trafficking, and covetousness, and wholly estranged from the ecclesiastical custom. We have heard from our Saviour's own words, that no man can serve two masters; for he will either hate the one or love the other, or cleave to the one and despise the other: Let every one therefore, according to the apostle's words, continue in the vocation in which he is called, and serve in one church: For those things which filthy lucre has brought into church matters, are contrary to God. There is a variety of employments, for acquiring the necessary supplies of this life: Let every one that pleases, make use of these, for furnishing himself: For the apostle says, these hands ministered to my necessities, and to those that were with me. This shall be the rule in this town, which is guarded by God; but in remote villages an indulgence may be granted, by reason of the want of men." It is upon this that the canonists do found the first of the two reasons, for which only they allow that a dispensation for holding two benefices may be lawful: one is, the want of fit and sufficient men for the service of the church. The foundation of the other will be found in the canon, which I shall next set down.

It is the 49th canon of the sixth council at Paris, under Lewis the Good, in the year 829. This council came after a great many, that had been held by Charles the Great and his son, for purging out abuses, and for restoring the primitive discipline. These councils sat at Frankfort, Ments, Aken, Rheims, Chalons, Tours, Arles; and this of Paris was the last that was held upon

I

that design. In these, all the primitive canons relating to the lives and labours, and the government of the clergy, were renewed. Among others is that of Calcedon formerly mentioned; but it seems there was no occasion given to make a special one against pluralities, before this held at Paris, which consisted of four provinces of France, Rheims, Sens, Tours, and Rouen. The canon runs thus: As it becomes every city to have its proper bishop; so it is also becoming and necessary that every church dedicated to God, should have its proper priest. Yet covetousness which is idolatry (of which we are much ashamed) has so got hold of some priests and caught them captives in its fetters, that they blinded with it, know neither whether they go nor what they ought to be or do; so that they being kindled with the fire of covetousness, and forgetful of the priestly dignity, neglecting the care of those churches, to which they were promoted, do by some present given or promised, procure other churches not only from clerks, but from laymen, in which they do against law undertake to perform the ministry of Christ. It is not known whether their bishops are consulted in this matter, or not; if they are, without doubt their bishops become partakers of their sin: but if they presume to do it without consulting them, yet it is to be imputed to the bishop's negligence. There is scarce a priest to be found who warreth worthily, and diligently in that church in which he is dedicated, to the divine service: but how much less will he be able to do that worthily in two, three or more churches? This practice brings a reproach on the christian religion, and a confusion on the priestly order, the covetousness of the clergy is censured by their people;