Dr. Gilbert Sheldon, Archbishop of Canterbury, died on the 9th of November, 1677. Illustrations have been afforded of his influence and activity at the time of the Restoration, of his conduct during the plague year, of the course which he adopted in relation to the great ecclesiastical questions of his day, and of the general spirit of his clerical policy;—but some further notice is requisite of the character of a man, who took so conspicuous a part in the re-establishment of the Episcopal Church of England.
Sheldon, according to Burnet, was esteemed a learned man before the Wars, but he was now engaged so deep in politics, that scarce any prints of what he had been remained. He was a very dexterous man in business, had a great quickness of apprehension, and a very true judgment. He was a generous and charitable man. He had a great pleasantness of conversation, perhaps too great. He had an art, which was peculiar to him, of treating all who came to him in a most obliging manner, but few depended much on his professions of friendship. He seemed not to have a deep sense of religion, if any at all; and spoke of it most commonly, as of an engine of Government and a matter of policy. By this means, the King came to look on him as a wise and honest clergyman.[671] An admission to the same effect is made unconsciously by Samuel Parker, the Archbishop's chaplain and friend. For, after affirming that Sheldon was a man of undoubted piety, he observes, "that though he was very assiduous at prayers, yet he did not set so high a value upon them as others did, nor regarded so much worship, as the use of worship, placing the chief point of religion in the practice of a good life." The ideas of a man's character conveyed by language of this sort must be interpreted by our knowledge of the writer; and, knowing what we do of Parker, we are justified in regarding what he says as a confirmation of Burnet's opinion. To use an expression which occurs in a letter from Henry VII. on the transition of Wareham from London to Canterbury—Sheldon showed himself to be largely endued with "cunning and worldly wisdom."[672] Genial and social in his habits he maintained a splendid hospitality,[673] and in all his intercourse it was apparent that he had seen much of mankind, thoroughly understood human nature, and knew exactly how to make himself agreeable to those whom he wished to please. Addicted to a free-and-easy manner of living, inconsistent with the character of a clergyman, he is reported as having on particular occasions sanctioned some very vulgar buffoonery at the expense of the Puritans.[674] Keen, clever, polite, and politic, knowing well how to compass his ends, he manifested at the same time his utter destitution of those moral impulses, noble motives, and spiritual aims, which, above all, ought to guide men who profess to be the ministers of Jesus Christ. Sheldon seems to have been fitted to grace a drawing-room, to sustain the position of a country gentleman, and to take a part in State affairs, but he was plainly unfit to preside over the Church of England. His half-recumbent figure, as represented on his monument in the parish church of Croydon—before the fire—his round face resting on his left hand, his countenance not of severe expression, but rather genial, easy, and good-humoured, and his gracefully-flowing robes, are all in harmony with the idea of a man of luxurious habits, and of pleasant manners: but the mitre on his head is out of place, and he has no business with the crozier at his side.[675] His course of life as a steady, persistent, heartless persecutor of Nonconformists eclipses his courtesies and charities. He was not a persecutor of the same school with Laud of Canterbury, or Cyril of Alexandria. No strong convictions of doctrine, no zeal for discipline, influenced him in his proceedings against Dissenters, and he must be reckoned as having belonged to that most odious class of persecutors "who persecute without the excuse of religious bigotry."[676] He hated Nonconformists mainly on three grounds. As a man of the world, he was averse to their profession of spiritual religion, being totally unable to understand it, looking at it, as he did, through the medium of prejudices which caricatured its noblest qualities; and he was also exasperated at what he deemed a pharisaical assumption on the part of Christians who advocate what are called "evangelical" views, and who insist upon what they style purity of communion. As a Royalist, Sheldon identified his opponents with the cause of Republicanism, and believed, or professed to believe, that they were all bent upon doing to Charles II. what some of them, or their predecessors, had done to Charles I. And, lastly, as an Episcopalian, who had himself suffered from Presbyterians and Independents, he determined to pay back in full what he owed—both capital and interest.
It is essential to our forming a correct estimate of the state of the Church after the Restoration, that we should examine what we can find respecting the character of others who occupied the Episcopal Bench, inasmuch as they must have been largely responsible for the administration of ecclesiastical affairs, and it is convenient for us here to pause for that purpose. To whatever party an author may belong, he finds it easy to idealize these dignitaries, and to give general impressions of them, favourable or unfavourable, according as his prejudices, working upon slight materials, may influence his imagination. But I decidedly prefer in what I shall say of the Caroline prelates, to confine myself to such reliable information as I can discover, rather than to indulge in generalities; and I lament, that after the best endeavours to acquaint myself with the subject, the knowledge I possess with regard to some of these persons is so scanty, that my accounts of them will afford the historical student but little satisfaction.
The selection of a principle of arrangement in this portion of our history is not without difficulties. Perhaps, on the whole, instead of adopting an alphabetical list of names, or a chronological series of characters, or a geographical distribution of sees, it will be better to take the occupants of the Bench according to their importance, and to select first the most prominent.[677]
Dr. Seth Ward had been President of Trinity College, Oxford, and at the Restoration had succeeded Reynolds at St. Laurence Jewry, upon the promotion of the latter Divine to a Bishopric. He was nominated to the see of Exeter in 1662, as, Pope, his biographer says, upon the recommendation of his friend Monk, Duke of Albemarle; but a different story is told by Aubrey. After Gauden, the Bishop of Exeter, had been translated to Worcester in 1661, Ward, who was then Dean, "was very well known to the gentry, and his learning, prudence, and comity, had won them all to be his friends. The news of the death of the Bishop being brought to them, who were all very merry and rejoicing with good entertainment, with great alacrity, the gentlemen cried all, 'We will have Mr. Dean to be our Bishop.' This was at that critical time when the House of Commons were the King's darlings. The Dean told them that, for his part, he had no interest or acquaintance at Court, but intimated to them how much the King esteemed the members of Parliament (and a great many Parliament men were then there), and that His Majesty would deny them nothing. 'If 'tis so, gentlemen,' said the Dean, 'that you will needs have me to be your Bishop, if some of you make your address to His Majesty, 'twill be done.' With that they drank the other glass, a health to the King, and another to their wished-for Bishop; had their horses presently made ready, put foot in stirrup, and away they rode merrily to London; went to the King, and he immediately granted them their request. This," adds Aubrey, "is the first time that ever a Bishop was made by the House of Commons."[678]
Ward speedily became renowned for his diligent discharge of Episcopal duties. "He kept his constant triennial visitations," says Pope, "in the first whereof he confirmed many thousands of all ages and different sexes; he also settled the Ecclesiastical Courts, and, without any noise or clamour, reduced that active, subtle, and then factious people, to great conformity, not without the approbation even of the adversaries themselves." During his residence at Exeter, he gained the love of all the gentry, and had particularly the help and countenance of the Duke of Albemarle, who, in all things, showed himself most ready to assist him in the exercise of his jurisdiction.[679] He zealously advocated the Conventicle Act, and was very severe in his treatment of Nonconformists, not, it is curiously pleaded, out of enmity to the Dissenters' persons, as they unjustly suggested, but of love to the repose and welfare of the Government. We are further informed by this admiring friend, "that Ward was very much in favour with the King, and the Duke of York, before the latter declared himself of the Romish persuasion, whom he treated magnificently at Salisbury; and also with the Archbishop of Canterbury, who used to entertain him with the greatest kindness and familiarity imaginable; in his common discourse to him, he used to call him Old Sarum: and I have heard the Archbishop speak of him more than once as the person whom he wished might succeed him." The temper of the prelate in relation to the Church of England, and the kind of policy which he adopted for the promotion of its interests, may be inferred from the good opinion of him entertained by Sheldon, just quoted by Pope, with much satisfaction.[680]
There is a want of material out of which to draw flesh and blood portraits of some of the Bishops: many are names and nothing more—others are but stiff and formal images without life—we can judge neither of their appearance, nor of their character, but the gossiping memoir of Ward by Pope affords us a pictorial idea of his mode of living, of his physical activity, of his fondness for horse exercise, and of his self-exposure to weather,—going out in wind, rain, and snow, until forced to seek shelter on the lee side of the nearest hayrick. He was something of a "muscular Christian,"—a bachelor also, but genial in his ways, exceedingly hospitable, and scrupulously punctilious in the discharge of his devotional duties.
This remarkable man distinguished himself as an astronomer, and was reputed to be the ablest orator of his time; after these proofs of his intellectual power, in addition to the evidences of his administrative ability, how affecting it is to turn to the record of his imbecility in his last days. "He did not," we are told, "know his house, or his servants; in a word, he knew nothing."[681]
Dr. George Morley may be noticed next. Burnet says that he "was, in many respects, a very eminent man, very zealous against Popery," and also very zealous against Dissent; considerably learned, with great vivacity of thought; soon provoked, and with little mastery over his own temper.[682] His zeal against the doctrines of Popery is apparent in his writings, and not less so, his zeal against Dissent; in connection with his opposition to both, he avows the doctrine of passive obedience, declaring in terms the most unequivocal, "the best and safest way for Prince, State, and people, is to profess, protect, cherish, and allow of that religion, and that only, which allows of no rising up against, or resisting sovereign power—no, not in its own defence, nor upon any other account whatsoever."[683] Indeed, he maintains, again and again, the principle of intolerance in the government of the Church, and the principle of despotism in the government of the State; holding the King to be sole sovereign, whilst the Parliament is only a concurring power in making laws, and the Bishops the only legitimate ecclesiastical rulers. The maintenance of these doctrines by a man of "hot spirit" and "ready tongue"—infirmities which Baxter charges upon him, not without sufficient reason, and not without Burnet's corroboration—augured little for the comfort or the peace of the Nonconformists in the diocese of Winchester, over which he presided from 1662 to 1684. He had, it is true, provoked Baxter,[684] and signs of the provocation occasionally appear in the pages of the Reliquiæ; in fact, the Bishop's treatment of the Presbyter was most violent; but the latter,—after quoting the report that Morley, Ward, and Dolben, through fear of Popery, had expressed a desire to abate the severity of the laws against Dissenters, and after stating, that though there was long talk there was nothing done,—expresses a hope that they were not so bad as their censurers supposed. Yet, he adds, it was a strange thing, that persons who had power to make such breaches had no power to heal them.[685] It is a pleasure to be able to state that Morley, in his old age, gave signs of better feeling; for it is related that he stopped proceedings against Mr. Sprint, an ejected minister, and invited him to dinner, endeavouring to soften down the terms of Conformity; but, better still, it is said, that in Morley's last days, he drank to an intermeddling Country Mayor, in a cup of Canary, advising him to let Dissenters live in quiet, "in many of whom, he was satisfied, there was the fear of God,"—and he thought they were "not likely to be gained by rigour or severity."
Dr. John Cosin had in his younger days been fond of Ritualism, and had suffered for it under the Long Parliament. Though there existed ground enough for charging him with the adoption of childish ceremonies, it is plain, from a complete and fair examination of his case, and of all which he urged in his own defence, that the charges against him were considerably exaggerated.[686] As I shall show hereafter, a considerable change took place in his sentiments during the latter part of his life. He became more opposed to Romanism than he had been before. He said once, in the hearing of Dr. Thomas Fuller, when some one was praising the Pope for certain concessions—"We thank him not at all for that which God hath always allowed us in His Word." The Pope "would allow it us, so long as it stood with his policy, and take it away, so soon as it stood with his power."[687]
Cosin, like Ward and other prelates, acquired renown for hospitality. Whether at home or not, he took care that the gates of his Castle should be always open for the entertainment of the Royal Commissioners, and other Officers of State, as they travelled to and fro between London and Edinburgh; nor did he forget to give shelter and cheer to guests of humbler rank. He is described, also, as zealous in restoring to its former state Divine worship at Durham Cathedral, in reforming irregularities which had prevailed under the Usurpation, in filling up the number of the Minor Canons, and of the members of the Choir, and in restoring discipline throughout his diocese. Further, it is recorded of him, that he was a man of great reading, and a lover of books for their own sakes, expending large sums upon his library with the enthusiasm of a true Bibliophilest. After the ejection of 1662, he was willing to concede something to scrupulous consciences—and offered to confer Episcopal orders in his chapel at Auckland upon Presbyterian ministers disposed to conform, according to a formulary much recommended at the time—"If thou hast not been ordained, I ordain thee." Yet, in some cases, he could be very intolerant; for he wrote, in the year 1663, to the Mayor of Newcastle, telling him to look sharply after certain Nonconforming ministers of high character, whom he stigmatized as Caterpillars.[688] But, with a fluctuation of feeling common in impulsive natures, he would sometimes administer rebuke to those who laughed at Puritans,—and he wrote in his will, "I take it to be my duty, and that of all the Bishops, and ministers of the Church, to do our utmost endeavour, that at last an end may be put to the differences of religion, or, at least, that they may be lessened."[689] He suffered much from the disease of the stone, yet he persisted in performing his Episcopal visitations, even when obliged to be carried over paved roads in a sedan chair. His chaplain, Isaac Basire, records, that, being so near death, as to be unable to kneel, he often devoutly repeated the words of King Manasses, "Lord I bow the knee of my heart;" and having often prayed, "'Lord Jesus, come quickly,' his last act was the elevation of his hand, with this, his last ejaculation, 'Lord,'—wherewith he expired without pain, according to his frequent prayer, that he might not die of a sudden, or painful death."[690] He filled the see of Durham from 1660 to 1671.
Dr. John Hacket left behind him two well-known monuments of his Churchmanship. The one is his Scrinia Reserata, or memorial of Archbishop Williams: as strange a piece of biography as was ever written—full of allusions and disquisitions of all kinds, so that readers are puzzled to find out links of connection, and lose sight altogether of the hero amidst the mazes into which they are led by the biographer. "What it contains of Williams," as Lord Campbell has said, "is like two grains of wheat in two bushels (not of chaff, but) of various other grain;" yet the knowledge and the pedantry, the sagacity and the prejudice, the zeal for the Church and the animosity towards Dissenters, which mark the book throughout, accurately reflect the character of its author during his busy episcopate of nine years. The other monument of this famous Bishop of Lichfield is to be found in the cathedral of his diocese, to the restoration of which he zealously devoted himself. He reconsecrated it on Christmas Eve, in the year 1669, and ordered a peal of six bells to be hung in the tower, one of which was finished during his last illness. "Then he went out of his bed-chamber into the next room to hear it, seemed well pleased with the sound, and blessed God, who had favoured him with life to hear it, but at the same time observed that it would be his own passing bell; and, retiring into his chamber, he never left it until he was carried to his grave," an event which occurred in 1670.[691]
Of the two chief monuments of Hacket's fame, the cathedral is the more honourable,[692] showing as it does his commendable desire for the beauty of God's house, and the comeliness of its worship; and with it we may associate the remembrance of his Episcopal activity in reducing the clergy of his see to order, and what he esteemed efficiency. The Scrinia Reserata suggests the idea of what he must have been in his intercourse with the ministers and people who dwelt in his diocese: learned but verbose, clever but wearisome, equally fond of argument and gossip, one-sided in opinion, and abounding both in favouritism and in personal dislikes—not without genial temper and strong affections of friendship for some who were within the Church, but violent and bitter to all those who were without. His sermons suggest what he was as a preacher—fond of ingenious but trifling disquisitions; and, although a Calvinist, delighting in the Fathers and Schoolmen, and sometimes talking about the Holy Virgin, after the manner of a believer in the immaculate conception. From all this it may be inferred how he would treat Nonconformists, but his biographer leaves no doubt upon that point, for he distinctly states—"The Bishop was an enemy to all separation from the Church of England; but their hypocrisy he thought superlative, that allowed the doctrine and yet would separate for mislike of the discipline, and therefore he wished that, as of old, all kings and other Christians subscribed to the conciliary decrees, so now a law might pass that all Justices of Peace should do so in England, and then they would be more careful to punish the depravers of Church orders."[693]
Dr. John Wilkins was a very different man from Hacket. His close alliance by marriage with the Cromwell family, and his connection with the Protector Richard, stood for a time in the way of his preferment after the Restoration, but at length he obtained, through the influence of his friend Seth Ward, the living of St. Lawrence Jewry. Not only was he disliked at Whitehall, but there was a strong prejudice against him at Lambeth, and, to add to his misfortunes, he lost his library, his furniture, and his parsonage-house, in the fire of London. But the Duke of Buckingham befriended the sufferer; and, in spite of Sheldon's opposition, secured for him the Bishopric of Chester. When this person of varied fortune had reached the Episcopal bench, the Archbishop became reconciled to his elevation, and formed a favourable estimate of his character—a circumstance which, like that of Wilkins' first preferment after the Restoration, was owing to the esteem in which he was held by Dr. Seth Ward, his old Oxford friend, whose regard for him, notwithstanding their different opinions upon ecclesiastical subjects, continued to the end of life.[694] Whilst Ward was a High Churchman, and harshly treated the Nonconformists, Wilkins was a very Low Churchman, and showed them great favour. For this the latter was eulogized by one party,[695] and abused by another. From the reproaches he incurred he was vindicated by Dr. William Lloyd, at the time Dean of Bangor, who, in his funeral sermon for the Bishop, ascribed his liberality to the goodness of his nature, and to the education which he had received under his grandfather, Mr. Dod, a truly learned and pious man, although a Dissenter in some things.[696] Influenced by kindness of heart and catholicity of principle, Wilkins pursued a course of moderation and charity; and it proved—as such a course ever must—politic in the end, for Calamy acknowledges that many ministers were brought within the pale of the Establishment by Wilkins' soft interpretation of the terms of conformity. The ability and the attainments of this prelate were only equalled by his moral excellence. Burnet praises his greatness of mind, and sagacity of judgment, and says he was the wisest clergyman he ever knew.[697] Sir Peter Pett celebrated him as an ornament both of the University and the nation; and the Royal Society eulogized his insight into all parts of learning, as well as his charity, ingeniousness, and moderation.[698] As these persons were his friends and associates, their opinion of him might be charged with partiality; but there is a general concurrence in praise of his virtues, on the part of persons who were decidedly opposed to him in their ecclesiastical opinions. He enjoyed his dignity only four years, and died in 1672.
He was succeeded by that illustrious theological scholar Dr. John Pearson—author of the Exposition of the Creed—who, from his studious habits, became easy and remiss in his Episcopal functions, for some years before the end of his episcopate, in 1686, when he died, having some time before sunk into a state of second childhood. His theological opinions will come under our review in the next volume.
The circumstances under which Dr. Edward Reynolds accepted a mitre have been described already. He did so professedly upon condition that the Worcester House Declaration should become law, which it never did; and that the Church of England should be modified, so as to meet Presbyterian scruples, which it never was. However, it does not appear that his Presbyterianism had at any time been so extreme as to prevent his adopting a modified form of Episcopacy; and Baxter does not charge him with inconsistency in going so far as he actually went. Indeed, Baxter persuaded him to accept a Bishopric, implying that he did not discover in his friend that repugnance to the position which he felt himself. Reynolds' inconsistency appears, not in his first qualified acceptance, but in his subsequent retention of the office, after the conditions on which avowedly he had entered upon it were completely disregarded. But the truth is, he was a man of little firmness, and the blame of his continued conformity has been ungallantly, but in accordance with a very ancient precedent, cast on his wife. "It was verily thought, by his contemporaries, that he would have never been given to change, had it not been to please a covetous and politic consort, who put him upon those things he did."[699] Throughout his episcopate in the diocese of Norwich, which lasted until 1676, he remained a Puritan, eschewing Court politics, leading a quiet life in the discharge of the duties of his calling, and in the retirement of his palace; to which, it may be observed, he added a new chapel on the ruins of the old one, which had been destroyed by the rabble after the fall of the Bishops in the year 1643. Affability and meekness are virtues generally ascribed to Reynolds; his abilities as a Divine, and his gifts as a preacher—with the drawback of a harsh and unpleasant voice—were acknowledged by his contemporaries to have been considerable.
An unpublished letter sheds light on the state of the diocese of Norwich, and the character of the Bishop:—
"Having often complaints made unto me in general of the offensive lives of some of the clergy, I held it my duty to signify so much unto you, not thereby myself accusing any of my brethren, but conceiving it very needful, by occasion of such reports, earnestly to entreat them that they will be very tender of the credit of religion, of the dignity of their function, and of the success of their ministry; and endeavour, by their sober, pious, and prudent conversations, to stop the mouths of any that watch for their halting, to bear witness to the truth of that doctrine which they preach, to be guides and examples of holiness of life to the people over whom they are set, and to lay up for themselves a comfortable account against the time that we shall appear before the Great Shepherd and Bishop of Souls. So commending you to the guidance of God's Holy Spirit, and his gracious protection, &c."[700]
Dr. Herbert Croft—descended from an old English family, distinguished in the reigns of Edward IV. and Elizabeth—had in his youth been decoyed into the Church of Rome, whilst a student at St. Omer; but, on his return from the Continent, he had been reconciled to the Church of England by Morton, Bishop of Durham. He had held a Canonry in St. George's Chapel, Windsor, and had been made Dean of Hereford in the year 1644. His appointment to such a dignity at such a time suggests the fact that then he was a very Low Churchman, with Presbyterian tendencies; of course he was afterwards obliged to relinquish both the office and its revenues. When the King returned, to whose cause Croft had been attached, he recovered his Deanery, and on the death of Dr. Monk, in 1661, he succeeded to the Bishopric. His family had long been settled in Herefordshire, and he cherished a strong attachment to his native county; in consequence of which he preferred to remain in this inferior see, with its small revenues, rather than accept richer preferment at a distance. Weary of Court life he, in the year 1667, retired from the office of Dean to the Chapel Royal, to live entirely amongst his own clergy, like a primitive Bishop. Becoming a strict disciplinarian, he admitted none to stalls in his cathedral who did not dwell within the diocese, in the centre of which his own country residence was situated; and there he regularly relieved at his gates sixty poor people a week, besides assisting the indigent in other ways. The moderate ecclesiastical views which he expressed in his Naked Truth, he retained to the last, but he did himself no honour by submitting to the order of James II. in 1688.[701]
Respecting the character of Dr. Matthew Wren, there appears to have existed little difference of opinion amongst his contemporaries; for not only did Burton the Puritan say that in all Queen Mary's reign "there was not so great a havoc made in so short a time of the faithful ministers of God," as by him, but Archbishop Williams spoke of him as a "wren mounted on the wings of an eagle," and Lord Clarendon called him a "man of a severe, sour nature."[702] He filled the see of Ely a second time, from the fall of the Commonwealth until the year 1667, when he departed this life; and it is recorded of him, that as an act of thanksgiving for the King's return and his own restoration, he built at Pembroke Hall—the College in which he had been educated at Cambridge—a new chapel, where his remains were interred with unusual pomp.[703]
Wren was succeeded by Dr. Benjamin Laney, previously Bishop of Peterborough, who was translated from that place to Lincoln in 1663, and who died in 1675. Laney seems to have been kind-hearted as well as able, for in his primary visitation, before Bartholomew's day, he said very significantly to the assembled clergy, "Not I, but the law;" and although he had suffered considerably from the Presbyterians at Cambridge, in the year 1644, he could, to use his own phrase, when presiding over the see of Lincoln, "look through his fingers;" and he suffered a worthy Nonconformist to preach publicly very near him, for some years together.[704]
Laney was followed at Ely by Dr. Peter Gunning. The fondness of the latter for controversy is attested by the epitaph in his cathedral, where he was buried in 1684, and receives illustration from the accounts recorded of theological discussions in which he publicly engaged with Nonconformists. Blamelessness of private life, and the Episcopal virtues of generosity to friends,[705] of benefactions to charitable and religious objects, and of almsgiving to the poor, are ascribed to him by Wood; Dr. Gower, in his funeral sermon for him, extols his piety; but Burnet has painted his character in different colours. "He was a man of great reading, and noted for a special subtlety of arguing; all the arts of sophistry were made use of by him on all occasions, in as confident a manner as if they had been sound reasoning." "He was much set on the reconciling us with Popery in some points; and because the charge of idolatry seemed a bar to all thoughts of reconciliation with them, he set himself with very great zeal to clear the Church of Rome of idolatry. This made many suspect him as inclining to go over to them; but he was far from it, and was a very honest, sincere man, but of no sound judgment, and of no prudence in affairs. He was for our conforming in all things to the rules of the primitive Church, particularly in praying for the dead, in the use of oil, with many other rituals."[706]
Dr. William Paul, being possessed of large property, and being also a man of business, had, through the influence of Sheldon, been appointed to the see of Oxford, with the hope that he would rebuild the dilapidated episcopal palace at Cuddesden. He applied himself to that undertaking, and, that he might be assisted in it, received permission to hold the valuable Rectory of Chinnor in commendam; but, after he had purchased materials for his intended work, especially a large quantity of timber, he died in 1665, having held the see for only two years.
Dr. John Warner is noted chiefly for being well read in scholastic divinity and patristic literature. It is recorded of him that, when Prebendary of Canterbury, he built a new font in the cathedral, which, "whether more curious or more costly," it was difficult to judge. Made Bishop of Rochester, he, in the earlier sittings of the Long Parliament, zealously asserted Episcopalian principles, "speaking for them as long as he had any voice left him," and valiantly defending the antiquity and justice of an order of spiritual peers.[707] He suffered, not only like the rest of his brethren, by losing the temporalities of his see, and by being driven away from the performance of its duties, but he had to compound for his own estates, which were of considerable value. During the Protectorate he resided at Bromley, in Kent, and on the return of Charles II. regained the see of Rochester, which he held to the time of his death, in 1666. Being a rich man, his benefactions were large, he contributed liberally to the cathedral of his diocese, and to the Colleges of Magdalen, and Baliol, at Oxford, the place of his education; and he also founded a College at Bromley for clergymen's widows.
Dr. John Earle, after being in exile with the King, first obtained at the Restoration the Deanery of Westminster, then succeeded Gauden in the Bishopric of Worcester, 1662, and finally rose to the see of Salisbury in 1663, upon Henchman becoming Bishop of London. Earle is described as having been "a very genteel man, a contemner of the world, religious, and most worthy of the office of a Bishop;" also, he is spoken of as having the sweetest and most obliging nature, and as being one than whom, since Hooker's death, God had not blessed any with more innocent wisdom, more sanctified learning, or a more pious, peaceable, primitive temper.[708] He was, says another authority, favourable to Nonconformists, a man that could do good against evil, forgive much, and of a charitable heart, and died, to the no great sorrow of them who reckoned his death was just, for labouring all his might against the Oxford Five Mile Act.[709] Within two years after his death, in 1665, his successor in the Bishopric, Dr. Alexander Hyde, followed him to the grave, the latter having owed his promotion to the influence of his kinsman, Lord Clarendon.
Dr. Robert Skinner, who had been Bishop of Bristol, and had been translated thence to Oxford before the Civil Wars, regained that diocese in 1660. Thence he proceeded to the far more desirable see of Worcester, in 1663. He is reported to have been the sole Bishop who conferred orders during the Commonwealth; and, after the Restoration, he ordained no less than 103 persons at one time in Westminster Abbey; so many others had been made by him deacons and priests, that at his death, in 1670, it was computed that he had sent more labourers into the vineyard of the Church than all his survivors had done, he being the last of the prelates who had received consecration before the time of the Commonwealth.
In pursuing the task of noticing the Bishops after the Restoration, we now reach several names of less interest, but the few scanty hints respecting them which I have been able to gather may suggest in some cases an idea of such Episcopal qualifications as they possessed.
Dr. William Nicholson, Bishop of Gloucester, defended and maintained the Church of England against its adversaries in the days of its adversity. His works, it is said, proved him to be a person of learning, piety, and prudence, particularly his Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church, his Exposition of the Apostles' Creed, and his Exposition of the Church Catechism, subjects which indicate his Anglican orthodoxy, and his Episcopalian zeal. He is spoken of as a great friend of Dr. George Bull, and as much admired by that distinguished theologian for his knowledge of the Fathers and the Schoolmen, and for his large stores of critical learning. He died in 1672.[710]
Dr. Humphrey Henchman, it may be remembered, had taken part in the Savoy Conference, and is described by Baxter as "of the most grave, comely, reverend aspect," and of "a good insight in the Fathers and Councils."[711] Consecrated Bishop of Salisbury in 1660, he was translated from Salisbury to London, upon the translation of Sheldon to Canterbury, and manifested great alarm when the excitement against Popery prevailed, earnestly enjoining upon his clergy the duty of combating its errors and superstitions, although he knew perfectly well that such a course would be offensive to the King. He edited a book once of some celebrity, entitled The Gentleman's Calling, supposed to be a production of the author who wrote The Whole Duty of Man. Henchman died October, 1675.
Dr. Edward Rainbow had been a minister in the Establishment throughout the Commonwealth. Although deprived of the Mastership of Magdalen College, Cambridge, for refusing to sign a protestation against King Charles I. he, in the year 1652, obtained the living of Chesterfield, in Essex, and, in 1659, the Rectory of Benefield, in Northamptonshire. Restored to his Mastership at Cambridge, and made Dean of Peterborough soon after the Restoration, he rose to the Bishopric of Carlisle, upon the translation of Dr. Sterne to the Archbishopric of York. Rainbow died in 1684; he appears to have possessed an extraordinary talent for extemporaneous speaking; of which he gave a singular example, when, in the absence of the appointed orator, he delivered an unpremeditated discourse before the University, to the great admiration of all who listened to him. His style is described as florid and pedantic, but he is represented as a man of learning, of politeness, of devotion, and of charity. We do not know much respecting Nicholson, Henchman, and Rainbow, but some things are said respecting them, pointing to intellectual and moral qualities suitable to their position. That which can be gathered respecting the following names, contains little or nothing which is satisfactory.
Dr. Joseph Henshaw, consecrated Bishop of Peterborough in 1663, had been chaplain to the first Duke of Buckingham, through whose influence he had obtained a Prebend in the Cathedral of Peterborough. After suffering for his loyalty during the Civil Wars, and the Commonwealth, he lived for some time at Chiswick, in the house of Lady Paulet, being described "as a brand snatched out of the fire."[712] He died in 1678.
Dr. Gilbert Ironside, who had been Rector of Winterbourn, in Dorsetshire, was promoted to the see of Bristol immediately after the Restoration. Wood's chief remark respecting him, and one by no means satisfactory, is, that although he had not before "enjoyed any dignity in the Church," or been chaplain to any one of distinction,[713] he received this promotion to a poor Bishopric because he happened to be a man of property. His death occurred in the year 1671. Dr. Walter Blandford, under the Commonwealth, escaped ejectment from Wadham College, Oxford, by submitting to the Government, and was admitted Warden before the Restoration. After that event he became Vice-Chancellor; in the year 1665 he became Bishop of Oxford, and, in 1671, Bishop of Worcester. The following notice of his death occurs in a letter written at the time:—"It may be you have heard before this, how upon Friday last, between 9 and 10 in the morning, it pleased God to put a period to the pains and patience of the good Bishop, who spent the day before in bemoaning himself unto his God, and sending up pious ejaculations unto Him; and then, without any reluctancy, quietly resigned up his soul and departed in peace; and, I doubt not, that it was welcomed with an Euge bone serve! The next day after I came hither, he called me to his bedside, and asked after the welfare of his friends at Court, and made frequent mention of his gracious master and King, prayed most heartily for him, and said nothing laid him so low as the consideration that he had not been more serviceable to him."[714] But it is only just,—when noticing the particular reference which is made to the loyalty of this prelate on his death-bed,—to remember that such reference occurs in a correspondence in which the writer was anxious to commend himself to his Royal master, with the hope of securing promotion.