X

LECTURESHIPS

157

Some of

Bennet, Moss, and Marshall on that of the Tories. them, such as the Golden Lecture, were of considerable value. At St. Margaret's, Lothbury, this was worth until the recent scheme of the City Parochial Charities Act Commissioners at least £400 a year. Others, such as that of St. Lawrence Jewry, were of more honour than profit. In some cases, such as for example that of St. Antholin, provision was made for a daily lecture, and the position was limited to the holders of poor livings in Islington. For the greater part of the period covered by this volume these lectures were well attended and influential, but towards the close of the century, although the lecturers still held their places, yet the number of hearers fell off, partly through the increase in the numbers of the parochial clergy, and partly through the transference of population, which was even then beginning, from the City to the suburbs, and the consequent building of new churches in the new districts thus created. They lingered on indeed until almost the close of the nineteenth century, when most of them were swept away, or their tenure considerably modified and their emoluments reduced, under the City Parochial Charities Act.

AUTHORITIES.-William Law's mystical writings have not yet received the attention they deserve both historically and theologically. But see the Introduction to Dr. Alexander Whyte's Law's Characters and Characteristics, W. R. Inge's Bampton Lectures on Christian Mysticism, and Eleanor C. Gregory's admirable Introduction to her Little Book of Heavenly Wisdom. James Hervey's Meditations, etc., 1803 ed., contains a Life of the Author. Overton's The Evangelical Revival, Bishop J. C. Ryle's Christian Leaders of the Last Century, and M. Seeley's The Later Evangelical Fathers may all be s'udied with advantage. The Life of William Grimshaw, by R. Spence Hardy, 1861, and the authorities there cited, should be noted, as also the complete edition of Thomas Berridge's Works, with Memoir, and the Rev. W. B. Cadogan's Life of Romaine. The Dict. Nat. Biog. deals with most of those named in this chapter.

General

THIRD PERIOD, 1760-1789

CHAPTER XI

WARBURTON, HURD, AND LOWTH

It must be confessed that it is only when seen through a very strong microscope, so to speak, that the state of the Church in the early days of George III. shows any signs of Church improvement. Indeed, even then they are only tone. discernible when read in the light of after events. In themselves the times seemed to be, and perhaps were, as bad as ever. Bishops were still appointed for social or political, or at best intellectual, reasons, and not because they were most fitted for the post of presiding over the practical and spiritual work of the Church. Preferment-hunting was

still a favourite pursuit of the clergy from the highest to the lowest. Immediately upon a vacancy occurring, and sometimes before it occurred, men wrote to those in power advancing their own claims to the preferment. The Duke

hunting.

of Newcastle was the recipient of many requests Preferment- of this kind. Thus, the Archbishop of Tuam, Josiah Hort, writes to him upon the death of the Archbishop of Armagh, John Hoadly: "The death of our late primate happening while I was at Tuam, which is near 100 miles from Dublin, I am later than others in my application upon that event; but as the race is not to the swift, especially in cases of this nature, I hope it will not be too late for me to lay my small pretensions (if I may be permitted to use that expression) before your Grace.

CHAP. XI

PREFERMENT-HUNTING

159

I need not observe to your Grace what my principles and complexion were in the worst of times, and that I have not warped from them in one instance to this day." For the same primacy the Archbishop of Dublin also made suit to the minister. He had heard it rumoured that the Bishop of Derry was likely to be appointed, as he actually was, although junior to himself; and adds that while he "will give place to an experienced English prelate," he thinks it a shame that a junior should be put over him, as that would make him appear insignificant in the world and render him useless hereafter. So again, upon the death of the Bishop of Ely, Zachary Pearce, good man though he was, writes to Newcastle that the filling of that see will, he thinks, make a vacancy in one of the English bishoprics now held by a bishop educated at Cambridge. In that case Pearce, who had just been appointed to Bangor, begs that he may be recommended to the King for such vacant bishopric, instead of having his election to Bangor confirmed. When the living of St. James's, Westminster, was vacant, Newcastle writes to the Bishop of London on behalf of the King: "It is not his Majesty's intention to recommend any particular person to your lordship for it, but his Majesty would be extremely sorry to see a vacancy made by himself supplied by any person on whom his Majesty could not depend"; which Newcastle further explains in a postscript to mean, that the living must be given to a good Whig, a zealous and practicable man, and concludes with the words, "Don't be angry."

Perhaps the most inveterate of all the clerical beggars was Sir William Ashburnham, Dean of Chichester. He writes to Newcastle that "the exceeding unpleasantness of his situation, occasioned merely by the streightness of his circumstances, compels him to write for anything the vacancy caused by filling up the bishopric of Hereford may afford," and candidly adds that the thing in the world which would make him most happy would be to get the deanery of St. Paul's. Later he says that the vacancy of two bishoprics must needs give the duke "an opportunity of doing whatever he really intends to do for him." He tries to secure the appointment of a residentiary of St. Paul's, and succeeds in 1754 in obtaining the bishopric of Chichester. Not content, he again applies

for promotion upon the deaths of the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of London, and having in the meanwhile failed to obtain the bishopric of Salisbury, he in 1762 hopes that if the Bishop of London's death creates a vacancy, then he may at last be appointed. Dr. Thomas Newton (not to be confounded with John Newton) writes to the Duke of Newcastle in August 1761: "I think it my duty to acquaint your Grace that the Archbishop of York lies a-dying, and, as all here think, cannot possibly live beyond to-morrow morning, if so long upon this occasion of two vacancies, I beg, I hope, I trust your Grace's kindness and goodness will be shown to one who has long solicited your favour." It is, however, only fair to add that the Church as thus depicted was neither better nor worse than the society of the time. Place-hunting was rife everywhere both in Church and State.

Pluralities, with their necessary concomitants of nonresidence and consequent neglect of duty-a few men gorged, the majority starved-were as common as ever. Morals seemed as corrupt, amusements as brutal, punishments as cruel, church services as sparse and unattractive, new organisations for doing good as rare, and the old ones, started in happier days, as badly supported, as they had been in the days of the two first Georges. The efforts of the new reformers of the Evangelical revival only brought out into stronger relief the general corruption, for instead of being welcomed, they were thwarted and snubbed at every turn.

Signs of improvement.

Nevertheless, there certainly were, to those who could look beneath the surface, symptoms of a turn of the tide. Warburton, writing to Hurd in 1771, animadverts on some remarks of Voltaire written five years earlier, and says: "The state of religion amongst us, though it be bad enough amongst us, is not so bad as this scoundrel represents it. Miserable as the condition of it is at present, I am confident it will revive again; but as I am no prophet, but only a sincere believer, I will not pretend to say how soon. The present generation seems not to be worthy of this blessing, which believers only are indulged with a Pisgah sight of just sufficient to support their faith, not sufficient to prevent their being laughed at by the prodigal, and even by the sceptical." And Bishop Newton, speaking of "the gross

XI

ARCHBISHOP SECKER

161

immorality and irreligion of our people," yet adds that there were "still some vital signs, some symptoms of recovery." It counted for something, if not for very much, that the highest personages in the nation were now on the side of virtue and religion. The purification of the Court had led, in a certain measure, to a gradual purification in less exalted quarters. The fashion was set of paying at least an outward respect for decency, and people are apt to follow the fashion of those above them.

The Evangelicals, in spite of opposition and discouragement, increased both in numbers and influence.

It

Compare their position in 1760 and 1790, and the difference will be very perceptible. Moreover, what was perhaps of still greater importance, they influenced indirectly men who were better theologians, and of a stronger intellectual calibre generally, than themselves. The year 1760, again, was " the turning-point in the history of Methodism in its relations to the Church. was at this time that the lay preachers employed under the Wesleys began to take out licenses as dissenting teachers for themselves and their chapels, and to administer the Sacraments." But these points will best be brought out by entering into details, and we will begin, as in duty bound, with the rulers of the Church, though we shall find that these do not form so interesting a study as those noticed in former chapters. We shall find no such men as Gibson, Sherlock, Butler, Benson, or Wilson.

At the accession of George III. Secker was Primate of All England. He had attained that eminence two years earlier, and held it for eight years of the new reign. No subject could have been brought more into contact with his sovereign than Secker seems to have been with George III. He had baptized him in 1738, crowned him in 1760, married him in the same year, and he subsequently baptized several of his children. But his ill-health in later years prevented him from having the influence which, as Archbishop of Canterbury, he deserved to have. For he was certainly the most distinguished of all the primates from the death of Archbishop Archbishop Wake to the close of the century. It is true that he was less consulted than any archbishop had been for a long time before; and in his later years

Secker.

M