XI BISHOP LOWTH Robert 171 of the two last mentioned. If his learning was not of so wide a range as Warburton's, he could make a more effective use of it; and his dignity was not so apt as Lowth. Hurd's to degenerate into primness and formality. As a bishop he was more "to the manner born," for both his father and great-grandfather, whom he could well remember, had been distinguished clergymen. He was more distinguished than either of them, though his father is said to have been the better scholar. He also received the best of education, first at Winchester and then at New College, Oxford. He paid a pious tribute to Winchester and New College by writing a Life of William of Wykeham (1758), which was the standard work on the subject until quite recently. In 1741 he was appointed Professor of Poetry at Oxford, and the lectures on Hebrew Poetry, Praelectiones de Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum, given in that capacity are equally conspicuous for the elegance of their Latinity and the value of their matter. In 1750 Bishop Hoadly appointed him Archdeacon of Winchester, upon which he vacated his fellowship at New College; in 1753 he was collated to the rectory of Woodbury; and in 1766 was raised to the Bench as Bishop of St. David's, and translated the same year to Oxford. In 1777 he became Bishop of London, Dean of the Chapels Royal, and a Privy Councillor; and in 1783 was offered the archbishopric of Canterbury, on the recommendation of Bishop Hurd, who had, as we have seen, declined it, as also did Bishop Lowth, on the ground of failing health. Lowth remained Bishop of London until his death in 1787. Among his writings perhaps the most valuable is his New Translation of Isaiah, with Notes (1778), which passed into an eleventh edition in 1835. His strong poetic feeling eminently qualified him for such a task: he was not without the divine gift himself, though he produced no great poem. As a controversialist he was a very formidable opponent, as we have already indicated in the account of his dispute with Warburton, His polished sarcasm is all the more telling because of the severe self-restraint which he strove to exercise. Perhaps, on the whole, he was the most highly cultured prelate of his day, and his culture helped to give him a wider sympathy than many of his Lowth and brethren possessed. The old story of his interview with John Wesley will bear repeating once more. In 1777, just after Lowth had been made Bishop of London, Wesley met him at dinner. The bishop refused to sit above him at table, saying, "Mr. Wesley, may I be found sitting at your feet in another world"; and when Wesley refused to take the precedence, Lowth insisted upon it, saying "that he was deaf and desired not to lose a sentence of Mr. Wesley's conversation." Wesley highly appreciated the courtesy, and wrote in his Journal: "Dined with Lowth, Bishop of London. His whole behaviour worthy of a Christian bishop-easy, affable, and courteous—and yet all his conversation spoke the dignity which was suitable to his character." It has been objected that the bishop's conduct on this occasion was affected and constrained, but those who think thus hardly understand what Wesley was. He identified himself so much with the poor and illiterate, that people are apt to forget that he was a man of a very high class in every way, not inferior-in point of education, breeding, and culture, in anything, in short, except that he was not a bishop-to Lowth; while he was seven years his senior, and in point of self-denial and Christian activity much his superior, as Lowth himself would be the first to own. This is not a history of bishops, and therefore it is not necessary to notice any more except in so far as their names will occur incidentally in connexion with other subjects, especially as more will have to be noticed when we come to our last period, some of whom were bishops now, but did not come into prominence until then. AUTHORITIES.-It is only needful to add to those already cited The Correspondence of Warburton with Hurd, 1809; Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Bishop Hurd, by Francis Kilvert; Lowth's Letter to Warburton, and the Life of Warburton by John Selby Watson, 1863. CHAPTER XII THE EVANGELICAL CLERGY It By the beginning of the reign of George III. the Evangelical movement was gradually making its way within the Church of England, following the lines of George Whitefield and Lady Huntingdon rather than those of the Wesleys. may seem strange that it should have done so; for both John and Charles Wesley were assuredly more attached churchmen than either George Whitefield or Lady Huntingdon. But a variety of circumstances brought about the result. In the first place, Lady Huntingdon, from her high position, was able to throw the aegis of her protection over the clergy who worked with her. She availed herself of her right as a peeress to appoint as many chaplains as she pleased; and several of the early leaders of the Evangelicals held that post. Then, in the two points which had been bones of contention between John Wesley and Whitefield for twenty years, the rising Evangelicals took the side of Whitefield. This brings us to the famous Calvinistic dispute, which had been simmering ever since Whitefield was in America in 1739-40. There it simply took the form of a The correspondence between Wesley and Whitefield, Calvinistic Controversy. the gist of which has been wittily and not unfairly summed up thus: "DEAR GEORGE—I have read what you have written on the subject of predestination, and God has taught me to see that you are wrong and that I am right.Yours affectionately, J. WESLEY." And the reply: "DEAR JOHN-I have read what you have written on the subject of predestination, and God has taught me that I am right and you are wrong.-Yours affectionately, G. Whitefield." It did not, however, burst out in all its force till 1771, when Whitefield was no more; but meanwhile most of the Evangelical clergy and the laity who followed them were, more or less, on Whitefield's side. Not only two points, but all the five points of what is called the "Quinquarticular Controversy were indeed at issue. The following, however, were virtually the two questions on which the whole controversy hinged: Are a certain number predestined to eternal life? Is it possible to attain sinless perfection in this life? Of these questions Whitefield and the Calvinists answered the first in the affirmative, the latter in the negative. Wesley and the Arminians answered the first in the negative, the second in the affirmative. Both parties were very positive. Both discussed the questions as matters of life and death; but it may be added that both toned down their ideas, to say the very least. The moderate Calvinism of a rather later time had no tendency to Antinomianism, and John Wesley materially modified his views on perfection. His later theory might much more correctly be called "Christian perfection," which allows for the infirmities of human nature, than "sinless perfection"; indeed the former is his own designation of it, the latter that of his opponents. Guarded, as Wesley guarded it, it is perhaps a wholesome and inspiring doctrine, and one which leads not to self-righteousness, but to exactly the opposite result, as is finely expressed in the last stanzas of Charles Wesley's noble hymn attached to his brother's equally noble sermon Christian Perfection : Now let me gain perfection's height ! Now let me into nothing fall ! And feel that Christ is all in all. on Finally, the irregularities of Wesley and his followers, especially in the matter of intruding into parishes which were held by Evangelical clergy, not unnaturally inclined Evangelical churchmen to the other side. Among the Evangelical clergy at the beginning of the XII WILLIAM ROMAINE William 175 reign of George III. the first to be noticed must be William Romaine, whom we left at the end of a former chapter tossed about from lectureship to lecture- Romaine. ship in a most uncomfortable way, though finding some little comfort in being one of Lady Huntingdon's chaplains. At last, in 1766, when he had reached the mature age of fifty-two, he found himself in an assured position, but not without considerable difficulty and much opposition. The living of St. Anne's, Blackfriars, with St. Andrew-by-the-Wardrobe, which was in the gift of the parishioners, became vacant in 1764, and Romaine offered himself as a candidate for it. It raises our indignation that such a man at such an age should have to put himself in such a position. He was elected, but the poll was disputed, and it was not until 1766 that the Court of Chancery confirmed his right to the benefice. This was a highly important epoch in the history of the revival, which received from the appointment of Romaine to St. Anne's its first point d'appui in London. For twenty-nine years, that is, for the rest of his life, he ministered with eminent success at St. Anne's. He attracted the masses to the church, as he had done at St. George's, Hanover Square, and at St. Dunstan's-in-the-West. At St. Anne's happily there were no adverse churchwardens or incumbents to interfere with him. On his first Good Friday he had five hundred communicants, and on the following Easter Day three hundred. The church became so crowded that a gallery had to be built. The success of Romaine's ministry shows how ripe people must have been for a revival, for he does not appear to have had any popular gifts to recommend him. He was a grave, austere, reserved man, a strict disciplinarian, and one more calculated to inspire awe than love. His Life, Walk, and Triumph of Faith is undoubtedly a strong book, perhaps the strongest that the Evangelical revival produced, but we can hardly fancy it a popular work, nor the writer of it a popular preacher or speaker. His Calvinism was of a more pronounced type than that of any of the Evangelicals, and we can well believe the truth of John Newton's admission to Wilberforce that "Romaine had made many Antinomians." Probably, too, Thomas Scott had Romaine in his mind |