came to the relief in a funereal way. But they
were not cold and hard and cruel, like baronial lords.
Secular lords were rapacious, and ground down the
people, and mocked and trampled upon them; but the
clergy were hospitable, gentle, and affectionate.
They sympathized with the people, from whom they chiefly
sprang. They had their vices, but those vices
were not half so revolting as those of barons and
knights. Intellectually, the clergy were at
all times the superiors of these secular lords.
They loved the peaceful virtues which were generated
in the consecrated convent. The passions of nobles
urged them on to perpetual pillage, injustice, and
cruelty. The clergy quarrelled only among themselves.
They were human, and not wholly free from human frailties;
but they were not public robbers. They were the
best farmers of their times; they cultivated lands,
and made them attractive by fruits and flowers.
They were generally industrious; every convent was
a beehive, in which various kinds of manufactures
were produced. The monks aspired even to be artists.
They illuminated manuscripts, as well as copied them;
they made tapestries and beautiful vestments.
They were a peaceful and useful set of men, at this
period, outside their spiritual functions; they built
grand churches; they had fruitful gardens; they were
exceedingly hospitable. Every monastery was an
inn, as well as a beehive, to which all travellers
resorted, and where no pay was exacted. It was
a retreat for the unfortunate, which no one dared
assail. And it was vocal with songs and anthems.
The clergy were not only thus general benefactors
in an age of turbulence and crime, in spite of all
their narrowness and spiritual pride and their natural
ambition for power, but they lent a helping hand to
the peasantry. The Church was democratic, and
enabled the poor to rise according to their merits,
while nobles combined to crush them or keep them in
an ignoble sphere. In the Church, the son of
a murdered peasant could rise according to his deserts;
but if he followed a warrior to the battle-field, no
virtues, no talents, no bravery could elevate him,—he
was still a peasant, a low-born menial. If he
entered a monastery, he might pass from office to
office until as a mitred abbot he would become the
master of ten thousand acres, the counsellor of kings,
the equal of that proud baron in whose service his
father spent his abject life. The great Hildebrand
was the son of a carpenter. The Church ever
recognized, what feudality did not,—the
claims of man as man; and enabled peasants’
sons, if they had abilities and virtues, to rise to
proud positions,—to be the patrons of the
learned, the companions of princes, the ministers of
kings.