Things
which they admitted to be indifferent, and which,
without violation of conscience, they might have
forborne to enforce, they remorselessly urged on
those who solemnly declared that without such a
violation they could not comply.
which they admitted to be indifferent, and which,
without violation of conscience, they might have
forborne to enforce, they remorselessly urged on
those who solemnly declared that without such a
violation they could not comply.
Marvell - Poems
On his lordship's saying,
" that his Majesty only desired to know whether
there was any place at court he would accept ; **
the patriot replied, ^ that he could accept nothing
with honour, for either he must treat the king
with ingratitude by refusing compliance with
court measures, or be a traitor to his country by
yielding to them. " The only favour, therefore,
he begged of his Majesty, was to esteem him as
a loyal subject, and truer to his interests in refuB-
ing his offers than he could be by accepting them.
His lordship having exhausted this species of
logic, tried the argumentum ad crumenam, and
told him that his Majesty requested his accept-
ance of £1,000. But this, too, was rejected with
fircdness ; " though,** says his biographer, ** soon
after the departure of his lordship, Marvell was
compelled to borrow a guinea from a friend. "
In 1672 commenced Marvell's memorable con-
troversy with Samuel Parker, afterwards Bishop
of Oxford, of which we shall give a somewhat
copious account. To this it is entitled from the
important influence which it had on Marveirs
reputation and fortunes; and as having led to the
composition of that work, on which his literary
to say, that the version it contains of the above interview,
and which has been extensively circulated, is not borna
out by the early biographies ; for example,, that of Cooke,.
1726.
Digitized by VjOOQIC
XXIV NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR.
fame, so far as he has any, principally depends —
we mean the Rehearsal Transprosed,
Parker was one of the worst specimens of the
highest of the high churchmen of the reign of
Charles II. It is difiicult in such times as these
to conceive of such a character as, by universal
testimony, Parker is proved to have been. Such
men could not well flourish in any other age than
that of Charles II. Only in such a period of un-
blushing profligacy-^K)f public corruption, happily
unexampled in the history of England — could we
expect to find a Bishop Parker, and his patron
and parallel. Archbishop Sheldon. The high
churchmen of that day managed to combine the
most hideous bigotry, with an utter absence of
seriousness — a zeal worthy of a " Pharisee " with
a character which would have disgraced a "publi-
can. " Scarcely Christians in creed, and any thing
rather than Christians in practice, they yet in-
sisted on the most scrupulous compliance with the
most trivial points of ceremonial ; and persisted
in persecuting thousands of devout and honest
men, because they hesitated to obey.
Things
which they admitted to be indifferent, and which,
without violation of conscience, they might have
forborne to enforce, they remorselessly urged on
those who solemnly declared that without such a
violation they could not comply. More tolerant
of acknowledged vice than of supposed error,
drunkenness and debauchery were venial, com-
Digitized by VjOOQIC
NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR. XXV
pared with doubts about the propriety of making
the sign of the cross in baptism, or using the ring
in marriage ; and it would have been better for
a man to break half the commands in the deca-
logue, than admit a doubt of the most frivolous
of the church's rites. Equally truculent^ and ser-
vile, they displayed to all above them a meanness
proportioned to the insolence they evinced to all
below them. They formally invested the mo-
narch with absolute power over the consciences
of his subjects ; and, with a practice in harmony
with their principles, were ready at any moment
(if they had had any) to surrender their own.
As far as appears, they would have been willing
to embrace the faith of Mahometans or Hindoos
at the bidding of his Majesty ; and to believe and
disbelieve as he commanded them. Extravagant
as all this may appear, we shall shortly see it
gravely propounded by Parker himself. It was
fit that those who were willing to offer such vile
adulation, should be suffered to present it to such
an object as Charles II. — that so grotesque an
idolatry should have as grotesque an idol. As it
was, the God was every way worthy of the
worshippers. In a word, these men seemed to
reconcile the most opposite vices and the widest
contrarieties ; bigotry and laxity — pride and
meanness — religious scrupulosity and mocking
scepticism — a persecuting zeal against conscience,
and an indulgent latitudinarianism towards vice —
Digitized by VjOOQIC
XXVI NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR.
the truculence of tyrants and the sycophancy of
parasites.
Happily the state of things which generated
such men has long since passed away. But
examples of this sort of high churchmanship
were not infrequent in the age of Charles II. ;
and perhaps Bishop Parker may be considered
the most perfect specimen of them. His father
was one of Oliver Cromwell's roost obsequious
committee-men ; his son, who was born in 1 640,
was brought up in the principles of the Puritans,
and was sent to Oxford in 1659.
" that his Majesty only desired to know whether
there was any place at court he would accept ; **
the patriot replied, ^ that he could accept nothing
with honour, for either he must treat the king
with ingratitude by refusing compliance with
court measures, or be a traitor to his country by
yielding to them. " The only favour, therefore,
he begged of his Majesty, was to esteem him as
a loyal subject, and truer to his interests in refuB-
ing his offers than he could be by accepting them.
His lordship having exhausted this species of
logic, tried the argumentum ad crumenam, and
told him that his Majesty requested his accept-
ance of £1,000. But this, too, was rejected with
fircdness ; " though,** says his biographer, ** soon
after the departure of his lordship, Marvell was
compelled to borrow a guinea from a friend. "
In 1672 commenced Marvell's memorable con-
troversy with Samuel Parker, afterwards Bishop
of Oxford, of which we shall give a somewhat
copious account. To this it is entitled from the
important influence which it had on Marveirs
reputation and fortunes; and as having led to the
composition of that work, on which his literary
to say, that the version it contains of the above interview,
and which has been extensively circulated, is not borna
out by the early biographies ; for example,, that of Cooke,.
1726.
Digitized by VjOOQIC
XXIV NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR.
fame, so far as he has any, principally depends —
we mean the Rehearsal Transprosed,
Parker was one of the worst specimens of the
highest of the high churchmen of the reign of
Charles II. It is difiicult in such times as these
to conceive of such a character as, by universal
testimony, Parker is proved to have been. Such
men could not well flourish in any other age than
that of Charles II. Only in such a period of un-
blushing profligacy-^K)f public corruption, happily
unexampled in the history of England — could we
expect to find a Bishop Parker, and his patron
and parallel. Archbishop Sheldon. The high
churchmen of that day managed to combine the
most hideous bigotry, with an utter absence of
seriousness — a zeal worthy of a " Pharisee " with
a character which would have disgraced a "publi-
can. " Scarcely Christians in creed, and any thing
rather than Christians in practice, they yet in-
sisted on the most scrupulous compliance with the
most trivial points of ceremonial ; and persisted
in persecuting thousands of devout and honest
men, because they hesitated to obey.
Things
which they admitted to be indifferent, and which,
without violation of conscience, they might have
forborne to enforce, they remorselessly urged on
those who solemnly declared that without such a
violation they could not comply. More tolerant
of acknowledged vice than of supposed error,
drunkenness and debauchery were venial, com-
Digitized by VjOOQIC
NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR. XXV
pared with doubts about the propriety of making
the sign of the cross in baptism, or using the ring
in marriage ; and it would have been better for
a man to break half the commands in the deca-
logue, than admit a doubt of the most frivolous
of the church's rites. Equally truculent^ and ser-
vile, they displayed to all above them a meanness
proportioned to the insolence they evinced to all
below them. They formally invested the mo-
narch with absolute power over the consciences
of his subjects ; and, with a practice in harmony
with their principles, were ready at any moment
(if they had had any) to surrender their own.
As far as appears, they would have been willing
to embrace the faith of Mahometans or Hindoos
at the bidding of his Majesty ; and to believe and
disbelieve as he commanded them. Extravagant
as all this may appear, we shall shortly see it
gravely propounded by Parker himself. It was
fit that those who were willing to offer such vile
adulation, should be suffered to present it to such
an object as Charles II. — that so grotesque an
idolatry should have as grotesque an idol. As it
was, the God was every way worthy of the
worshippers. In a word, these men seemed to
reconcile the most opposite vices and the widest
contrarieties ; bigotry and laxity — pride and
meanness — religious scrupulosity and mocking
scepticism — a persecuting zeal against conscience,
and an indulgent latitudinarianism towards vice —
Digitized by VjOOQIC
XXVI NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR.
the truculence of tyrants and the sycophancy of
parasites.
Happily the state of things which generated
such men has long since passed away. But
examples of this sort of high churchmanship
were not infrequent in the age of Charles II. ;
and perhaps Bishop Parker may be considered
the most perfect specimen of them. His father
was one of Oliver Cromwell's roost obsequious
committee-men ; his son, who was born in 1 640,
was brought up in the principles of the Puritans,
and was sent to Oxford in 1659.
