Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

A. Bannerman, sculp.

BISHOP ATTERBURY.

THE

BRITISH MAGAZINE,

For MAY,

1761.

**

The LIFE of Dr. FRANCIS ATTERBURY, Bishop of ROCHESTER.

F

RANCIS Atterbury, bishop of Rochester, was the fon of Dr. Lewis Atterbury, an eminent divine of the church of England; and was born at Middleton, or Milton Keymes, near Newport Pagnel, in Buckinghamshire, the 6th of March 1662, where his father was rector. He had his education in grammar learning at Westminster school; and from thence in 1680, was elected a student of Chrift's Church college in Oxford, where he foon distinguished himself for the politeness of his wit and learning, and gave early proofs of his poetical talents. In 1684, he took the degree of batchelor of arts, and that of master three years after; about which time he made his first essay in controverfial writing, in a piece intitled, An answer to Some confiderations on the fpirit of Martin Luaber, and the original of the reformation. It was a very learned performance, and written with great fpirit and vivacity, entirely refuting all the objections brought against - Luther's doctrines and manners. May, 1761.

This

vindication of that great reformer induced bishop Burnet to rank the author among thofe eminent divines who had diftinguished themselves by their admirable defences of the Proteftant religion.

During his stay in the univerfity, he is generally thought to have borne no inconfiderable part in the controversy between doctor Bentley and the honourable Charles Boyle, (afterwards earl of Orrery) concerning the genuineness of Phalaris's epiftles, which the former gentleman had denounced fpurious; though Mr. Atterbury's name was not made ufe of on that occafion. At what time he entered into holy orders is not certainly known; but in 1693, upon the death of his father, he made application to the earl of Nottingham, to fucceed in the rectory of Milton, which he then called the height of his ambition and wishes, as being the place of his birth; but in this expectation he was disappointed, that preferment being given to doctor Wooton.

He had been long tired of a college life, and paffionately defired to be in a more acFf tive

tive station. He fancied himself made for another fcene, and another conversation, and that he was lofing time every minute he flaid there. These were his own words in a letter he wrote to his father, three years before his death, dated the 24th of October 1690; wherein he told him, "That he was perfectly wearied with the naufeous circle of fmall affairs, that could now neither divert nor inftruct him. The only benefit he ever propofed to himself by the place was studying, and that he was not able to accomplish. His pupil, Mr. Boyle, took up half his time; college and univerfity bufinefs took up a great deal more; and befides, he was forced to be useful to the dean in a thousand particulars, fo that he had very little time." Having long revolved in his mind what courfe he should take, he made London his refidence; and foon diftinguifhed himself in fuch a manner, that he was appointed one of the chaplains in ordinary to king William and queen Mary, and was elected preacher at Bridewell, and lecturer of St. Bride's. In 1694 he preached a remarkable fermon at Bridewell chapel, before the governors of that and Bethlem hofpital, on the power of charity to cover fin; to which Mr. Benjamin Hoadley (late bishop of Winchefter) fome years after published fome exceptions. Mr. Atterbury's text was from the 4th chapter of St. Peter's firft epiftle, and 8th verfe: Charity fhall cover the multitude of fins; which words he explained in this fenfe: "That the virtue of charity is of fo great price in the fight of God, that thofe perfons who poffefs and exercise it in any eminent manner, are peculiarly entitled to the divine favour and pardon, with regard to numberlefs flips and failings in their duty, which they may be otherwife guilty of: this great Chriftian perfection of which they are mafters, fhall make many little imperfections to be overlooked and unobferved; it fhall cover the multitude of fins." Mr. Hoadley, in the poftfcript to his fecond letter to Dr. Atterbury, published in 1758, excepted against this doctrine, as farther enlarged and explained by Dr. Atterbury. Among other things, he fays; "If God will accept of ene duty in lieu of many others; and if our performance of that fhall be our jf tification, notwithstanding our omiffion of many others; this is a fort of falvation, in my judgment, unworthy of the nature of man to receive, and unworthy of the nature of God to offer.---Let me therefore (adds he

in the conclusion) intreat you to review the groundless and pernicious doctrine you have unwarily taught on this fubject: confider if charity ought to be founded upon a temper inconfiftent with innocence, and an unspotted confcience; as productive of vice, felly, and madrefs; as leading to the neglect of the principal branches of itself, and the like; and whether it becomes a Chriflian divine to fet the feveral parts of God's law at variance, and to make the performance of one of them an atenement for the

neglect of others as indispenfibly required.” We fhall not enter into any part of the controverfy, nor of Mr. Hoadley's reafons to fhew that Mr. Atterbury had mistaken the meaning of the text; but only observe, that the author of the fermon did not think fit to make any reply to the exceptions.

The fame year (1694) he was warmly attacked for his fermon, preached before the queen at Whitehall, intitled, The fcorner incapable of true wisdom. But the largeft field of controverfy in which he ever engaged was that which opened itself in the year 1700, and continued four years, between him, Dr. Wake, (afterwards archbishop of Canterbury) and others, concerning the rights, powers, and privileges of convocations; in which he afferted, with a very high hand, the prerogatives and immunities of the church. However the truth of the queftion may be, he displayed fo much learning and ingenuity, as well as zeal for the interefts of his order, that the lower house of convocation returned him their thanks; and the university of Oxford complimented him with the degree of doctor in divinity. January the 29th, 1700, he was inftalled archdeacon of Totness, by Sir Jonathan Trelawny, then bishop of Exeter. The fame year he was engaged with fome other learned divines, in revifing an intended edition of the Greek Teftament, with Greek fokolia, collected chiefly from the fathers, by Mr. arch-deacon Gregory.

Upon the acceffion of queen Anne, in 1702, Dr. Atterbury was appointed one of her majesty's chaplains in ordinary ; and in October 1704, he was advanced to the deanery of Carlisle.

About two years

after this, he was engaged in a difpute with Mr. Hoadley, concerning the advantages of virtue, with regard to the present life, occafioned by his fermon preached at the funeral of Mr. Thomas Bennett, a book

feller.

feller. In 1707 Sir Jonathan Trelawny, bishop of Exeter, appointed him one of the canons-refidentiaries of that church; and in 1709 Sir John Trevor, a great difcerner of men, and their abilities, was fo ftruck with his fame, and charmed with his eloquence, that he made him preacher of the Rolls chapel. This year he was engaged in a fresh dispute with Mr. Hoadley, concerning obedience, occafioned by his Latin fermon, intitled, Concio ad clerum Londinenfem babita in ecclefia S. Elphegi.

In 1710 came on the famous trial of Dr. Sacheverel, whofe remarkable fpeech on that occafion was generally fuppofed to have been drawn up by our author, in conjunction with Dr. Smalridge and Dr. Friend. The fame year Dr. Atterbury was chofen prolocutor of the lower houfe of convocation, and had the chief management of affairs in that houfe. His favourite notion was, that the proceedings in convocation were to be just the fame as thofe in parliament; and he endeavoured to maintain, “That as in a feffion of parliament, a prorogation puts an end to all matters not finished, so that they were to begin all anew, the fame rule was to be applied to convocations." This being contrary to precedents, and the exprefs words of the royal writ, the bishops did not agree to it, but refolved to adhere to the method of former convocations. And this occafioned a difpute between the two houses, which put a stop to all business; fo that they could not determine thofe points which had been recommended to them by the queen. The eleventh of May, 1711, he was appointed by the convocation, one of the committee for comparing Mr. Whiston's doctrines with thofe of the church of England; and in June following, he had the chief hand in drawing up A reprefentation of the prefent ftate of religion, which was to be laid before her majefty. This piece was, by the moderate members of the convocation, regarded as a very partial and exaggerated account of the wickednefs of the times: however, it was agreed to by the lower houfe; but the bishops laid it afide, and ordered another reprefentation to be drawn, in more general and more modeft terms. This occafioned great difputes; but, in the end, Dr. Atterbury's draught was not prefented, though it was printed and difperfed about.

In 1712 he was made dean of Chrift church, where by his imperious conduct,

many things ran into great diforder; for it is an unhappy truth, that there was a kind of haughtinefs, and paffion for fingularity, in Dr. Atterbury, that where-ever he came, there feldom failed of being fome contention. Under the notion of afferting his rights and privileges, he fomented so many difcords, that it was not eafy to allay them. This made Dr. Smalridge," his fucceffor in two of his preferments, complain of his hard fate, in being forced to carry water after him, to extinguish the flames which the turbulence of Dr. Atterbury's temper had unfortunately raised. Some fay, that the ftrifes and disturbances were fo violent between him and the canons, who had long been used to the mild and gentle government of dean Aldrich, that it was thought adviseable to remove him fooner than was at firft intended, by preferring him to the first vacant bishopric. However that be, the next year faw him at the top of his preferment and reputation: for in the beginning of June, 1713, the queen, at the recommendation of the earl of Oxford, advanced him to the bishopric of Rochester, and deanery of Westminster; and he was confecrated at Lambeth the 4th of July following. It has been faid, (though we know not with what truth) that he had in view the primacy of all England, and that his credit with the queen and miniftry was fo confiderable, and his fchemes fo well laid, as probably to have carried it upon a vacancy, had not her majefty's death, upon the 1st of Auguft, 1714, prevented him. At the beginning of the fucceeding reign his tide of profperity began to turn; and he received a fenfible mortification presently after the coronation of king George I. when, upon his offering to prefent his majesty (with a view no doubt of ftanding better in his favour) with the chair of state and royal canopy, his own perquifites as dean of Weftminster, the offer was rejected, not without fome evident marks of diflike to his perfon.

He was very intimate with the duke of Ormond, whom he advifed to fly out of the kingdom, which he accordingly did. About the fame time broke out the rebellion in Scotland, during which bishop Atterbury gave an instance, if not of growing difaffection, at least of the highest impru dence, as well as unpardonable coolness and luke-warmnefs; at a time, when every friend of their country, when every man,

Ffa

whe

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

who had not an abfolute averfion to the established government, should have overlooked all animofities and diftinctions, difregarded all flights and neglects, though unprovoked, and have given the fincereft proofs in their power of their good intentions; at a time, when every one should have eagerly fought, and gladly feized an opportunity of ferving that government, of giving all poffible affurance of their allegiance and fidelity to it, and have taken the utmost care that there might not be the fmaileft exception made to their conduct--Yet in fuch a time, bishop Atterbury, and, by his inftigation, bishop Smalridge, refufed to fign the paper intitled, The declaration of the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishops in and near London, teftifying their abborrence of the rebellion; and an exhortation to the clergy and people under their care, to be zealous in the difckarge of their duties to bis majefty king George. They grounded their refufal on pretence of a just offence, taken at fome unbecoming reflections caft on a party, not inferior to any (they faid) in point of loyalty. The reader will find the words objected to in the note; and then he must be left to judge whether there be any thing in them fo exceptionable, as to countenance fuch a behavicur in fo critical a juncture of affairs, when the pretender's declaration was pofted up in most market towns, and in fome places his title proclaimed; and whether this refufal was not one of the greateft affronts ever offered by a fubject to a sovereign ?

He diftinguished himself in feveral debates; particularly when the riot at Oxford, on the prince of Wales's birth day, and the neglect of the Univerfity to celebrate it with the usual rejoicings, came before the house of Lords: he spoke in favour

of the Univerfity, and endeavoured to juftify the proceedings of that learned body. When the South-Sea affair came to be examined, and the conduct of the directors inquired into, he spoke with great energy against them, and compared thatfatal scheme to a peftilence. When the bill for allowing the Quakers to leave out in their folemn affirmation the words, "In the prefence of Almighty God," was under confideration, he made a fpeech, wherein he said, he was not for allowing that people any. further indulgences than those they already poffeffed, which were very great, fince they could hardly come under the denomination of Chriftians. The earl of Ilay (late duke of Argyll) answered, "He wondered that reverend prelate should call in queftion, whether the Quakers were Chriftians, fince they were fo at leaft by act of parliament, being included in the toleration act, under the general denomination of Proteftant diffenters." The bishop replied, "It was against the standing orders of that auguft affembly to make any perfonal reflections; and he thought it a much greater indecency, to make a jeft of any thing that was facred; and that the calling the Quakers Chriftians by act of parliament, was a fort of fide-wind reflection upon Chriftianity itself: however, he would let that pafs, and reserve to another opportunity what he had to offer against the bill." Accordingly, he afterwards endeavoured to prove from fcripture and reafon, that the Quakers were no Chriftians, and was feconded and supported by the earl of Strafford, lord North and Grey, and the archbishop of York +. The bill paffed however, but not without being protefted against by several lords and bishops. Bishop Atterbury had a very

They were as follow: "We are the more concerned that both the clergy and people of our communion thould fhew themfelves hearty friends to the government upon this occafion, to vindicate the honour of the church of England, because the chief hopes of our enemies feem to arife from difcontents artificially raifed among us; and because fome who have valued themfelves, and have been too much valued by others, for a pretended zeal for the church, have joined with Papifts in these wicked attempts; which, as they must ruin the church, if they fucceed, fo they cannot well end without great reproach to it, if the rest of us do not clearly and heartily declare our deteftation of fuch practices." There was no occafion for bishop Atterbury, or bishop Smalridge, to take any notice of this paffage; for had they figned the declaration, the reflections here would have been their own on other perfons.

The Quakers of thefe days are perhaps much altered from the first founders of their fect; who, if they believed in fuch doctrines as authors relate, were certainly a Arange fort of Chriftians. Confult Refs's view of all religions, under the article Quaker.

great

« AnteriorContinuar »