THE WEALTH OF NATIONS.

753

selves consume; and there were neither arts nor manufacturesfor the produce of which they could exchange the surplus.The clergy could derive advantage from this immense sur-plus in no other way than by employing it, as the greatbarons employed the like surplus of their revenues, in themost profuse hospitality, and in the most extensive charity.Both the hospitality and the charity of the ancient clergy,accordingly, are said to have been very great. They not onlymaintained almost the whole poor of every kingdom, but manyknights and gentlemen had frequently no other means ofsubsistence than by travelling about from monastery to mo-nastery, under pretence of devotion, but in reality to enjoy thehospitality of the clergy. The retainers of some particularprelates were often as numerous as those of the greatest lay-lords ; and the retainers of all the clergy taken together were,perhaps, more numerous than those of all the lay-lords.There was always much more union among the clergy thanamong the lay-lords. The former were under a regular dis-cipline and subordination to the papal authority. The latterwere under no regular discipline or subordination, but almostalways equally jealous of one another, and of the king.Though the tenants and retainers of the clergy, therefore, hadboth together been less numerous than those of the great lay-lords, and their tenants were probably much less numerous,yet their union would have rendered them more formidable.The hospitality and charity of the clergy too, not only gavethem the command of a great temporal force, but increasedvery much the weight of their spiritual weapons. Those vir-tues procured them the highest respect and veneration amongall the inferior ranks of people, of whom many were con-stantly, and almost all occasionally, fed by them. Everything belonging or related to so popular an order, its posses-sions, its privileges, its doctrines, necessarily appeared sacredin the eyes of the common people, and every violation ofthem, whether real or pretended, the highest act of sacrilegi-ous wickedness and profaneness. In this state of things, ifthe sovereign frequently found it difficult to resist the confe-deracy ot a few of the great nobility, we cannot wonder thatlie should find it still more so to resist the united force of thtclergy of his own dominions, supported by that of the clergyof all the neighbouring dominions. In such circumstancesthe wonder is, not that he was sometimes obliged to yieldbut that lie ever was able to resist.