solution of morality, and consequently of civil society, from
the practices of the Romish church. They do not consider, that after all
these indulgences were promulgated, there still remained (besides hell
fire) the punishment by the civil magistrate, the infamy of the world,
and secret remorses of conscience, which are the great motives that
operate on mankind. The philosophy of Cicero, who allowed of an Elysium,
but rejected all Tartarus, was a much more universal indulgence than
that preached by Arcemboldi or Tetzel; yet nobody will suspect Cicero
of any design to promote immorality. The sale of indulgences seems,
therefore, no more criminal than any other cheat of the church of Rome,
or of any other church. The reformers, by entirely abolishing purgatory,
did really, instead of partial indulgences sold by the pope, give,
gratis, a general indulgence of a similar nature, for all crimes and
offences, without exception or distinction. The souls once consigned
to hell were never supposed to be redeemable by any price. There is on
record only one instance of a damned soul that was saved, and that by
the special intercession of the Virgin. See Pascal's Provincial Letters.
An indulgence saved the person who purchased it from purgatory only.]

[Footnote 5: NOTE E, p. 142. It is said, that when Henry heard that the
commons made a great difficulty of granting the required supply, he was
so provoked that he sent for Edward Montague, one of the members, who
had a considerable influence on the house; and he being introduced to
his majesty, had the mortification to hear him speak in these words:
"Ho! man: will they not suffer my bill to pass?" And laying his hand
on Montague's head, who was then on his knees before him, "Get my bill
passed by to-morrow, or else to-morrow this head of yours shall be off."
This cavalier manner of Henry succeeded; for next day the bill passed.
Collins's British Peerage. Grove's Life of Wolsey. We are told by Hall,
(fol. 38,) that Cardinal Wolsey endeavored to terrify the citizens of
London into the general loan exacted in 1525, and told them plainly,
that "it were better that some should suffer indigence than that the
king at this time should lack and therefore beware and resist not, nor
ruffle not in this case, for it may fortune to cost some people their
heads." Such was the style employed by this king and his ministers.]

[Footnote 6: NOTE F, p. 177. The first article of the charge against the