There are, indeed, some ideas in reference to worship, and the sacraments, and the government of the Church, and aids to a religious life, defended by the Scholastic doctors, which Protestants do not accept, and for which there is not much authority in the writings of the Fathers.  But the main difference between Protestants and Catholics is in reference to the institutions of the Church,—­institutions which gradually arose with the triumph of Christianity in its contest with Paganism, and which received their full development in the Middle Ages.  It was the enormous and scandalous corruptions which crept into these institutions which led to the cry for reform.  It was the voice of Wyclif, denouncing these abuses, which made him famous and placed him in the van of reformers.  These abuses were generally admitted and occasionally attacked by churchmen and laymen alike,—­even by the poets.  They were too flagrant to be denied.

Now what were the prominent evils in the institutions of the Church which called for reform, and in reference to which Wyclif raised up his voice?—­for in his day there was only one Church.  An enumeration of these is necessary before we can appreciate the labors and teachings of the Reformer.  I can only state them; I cannot enlarge upon them.  I state only what is indisputable, not in reference to theological dogmas so much as to morals and ecclesiastical abuses.

The centre and life and support of all was the Papacy,—­an institution, a great government, not a religion.

I have spoken of this great power as built up by Leo I., Gregory VII., and Innocent III., and by others whom I have not mentioned.  So much may be said of the necessity of a central spiritual power in the dark ages of European society that I shall not combat this power, or stigmatize it with offensive epithets.  The necessities of the times probably called it into existence, like other governments, although I cannot see any argument drawn from the Scriptures, or from the history of the early Apostolic Church, to warrant its existence.  Nor would I defend the long series of papal usurpations by which the Roman pontiffs got possession of the government of both Church and State.  I speak not of their quarrels with princes about investitures, in which their genius and their heroism were displayed rather than by efforts in behalf of civilization.

But the popes exercised certain powers and prerogatives in England, about the time of Wyclif, which were exceedingly offensive to the secular rulers of the land.  They claimed the island as a sort of property which reason and the laws did not justify,—­a claim which led to heavy exactions and forced contributions on the English people that crippled the government and impoverished the nation.  Boys and favorites were appointed by the popes to important posts and livings.  Church preferments were almost exclusively in the hands of the Pope; and these were often bought.