Imágenes de páginas

terly vnto him, (for one quarter of a yeere to be ended the fifth daie of Januarie next ensueing), for his present supporte and subsistance, and incourragement in his Studdies, for the space of one whole yeere: Except He shall be provided with a Compatent good Livinge in the meane tyme; that then, from such tyme as He shall be provided for, this Allowance to Cease. And for soe doing this together with his Acquittance for the Receipte therof, shall be your Warrant, & Discharge; And allso to the Auditor generall to Allowe the same upon your Accompte. Dated at the Committee of Lords & Commons for his Maties Revenue sitting at Westminster the fiue & twentieth day of November. 1647. "PEMBROKE & MONT.






"To our verie Loving freind Thomas Fauconbridg Esq, Receivor generall of the Revenue.

5) Doctor Usher.

xmo Die Decembr 1647.

"Received by me James Usher Deor in Divinity] of Thomas Fauconberge Esq' Receiuo' Generall of the Revenew the some of fifty pounde in pt of one hundred pounde according to this warrant



"JA. USSHER Armachan.

"Vicesimo quarto die Februar 1647. "Receiued by me James Usher Dco' in Divinity of Thomas Fauconberge Esq' Receiuo' Genall of the Reuenewe the Sume of Fiftie pounds in full of 1. one hundred pounds According to the Warr' wthin

menconed. I say rec



"JA. USSHER Armachan.

"(Indorsed) DOCTOR VSHER. 239."

In the beginning of the year 1648 the Primate published another work, exhibiting his chronological and astronomical knowledge. The title of the book was, "Jacobi Usserii Armachani de Macedonum et Asianorum anno solari Dissertatio cum Græcorum astronomorum parapegmate ad Macedonum et Juliani anni rationes accomodata." One of his correspondents remarks, upon his dropping the title of Archbishop and Primate: "Equidem libri tui frontem subtristis et pæne flens aspexi. Jacobi Usserii Armachani vidi, et quid, inquam ego apud me, de Archiepiscopo et totius Hiberniæ Primate fit? Hui: Tantane tam patienter nullo certamine tolli dona sines ? tantaque doctrinæ virtutis et honoris insignia humeris illis pendentia detrahi vel diripi potius patieris? sed video quid sit; libris enim tuis tot tantisque plurimis et optimis Anglice Latineque olim conscriptis effectum esse putas, ut nulla regio tam remota sit, quæ non intelligat, nulla ætas tam fera quæ non recognoscat Armachani titulum huic operi præfixum non inquilinatus, sed honoris et dignitatis tuæ esse, et recte quidem putas itaque

[blocks in formation]

This was not however the first tract, in the title of which he had dropped any mention of his rank; the title-page of the tract on the Creed is exactly similar.

In this learned treatise the Primate establishes the fact, that the Macedonian months were changed from lunar to solar in the interval between the appointment of Philip to the command against the Phocians and the battle of Granicus; and then explains the subsequent introduction of solar months into Greece, by which means he solves many difficulties in chronology and ecclesiastical history: he endeavours particularly to determine the date of the martyrdom of Polycarp by many ingenious arguments, and fixes on the 26th of March, in the year 169. He also compared the Gre

P Letter 256, Works, vol. xvi. pag. 125.

◄ Another giant in learning, Bishop Pearson, has brought all his information to bear upon this point, and in seven dissertations refuted the po

cian and Macedonian months with the Julian, and with those of other nations, and, having given the entire arrangement of the Macedonian and Asiatic year, he added the rules for the cycles of the sun and moon, and for finding Easter for ever. There are also added several curious accounts of the celestial motions, according to Meton, Calippus, Eudoxus, and others; and finally an Ephemeris, being a complete Greek and Roman calendar for the whole year, with the rising and setting of the stars, as laid down by the ancient Grecian


When the news of the King being kept prisoner at Carisbrook Castle in the Isle of Wight came to London, the Primate preached at Lincoln's Inn on the text, "Say ye not, A confederacy to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy: neither fear ye their fear nor be afraid. Sanctify the Lord of Hosts himself: and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread." In this sermon he expressed strongly his disapprobation of the proceedings taken by the two Houses of Parliament against their lawful Prince; he condemned covenants and confederacies entered into contrary to the former oath of allegiance, and clearly pointed out the obligation of all to fear God rather than man, in discharging their duty to their King and their country. Not long after, the Presbyterian party having recovered their former preponderance by the absence of the army, and fearing the return of the Independents to power, annulled their former vote for non-addresses, and determined to open a personal treaty with the King. As one of the principal subjects of debate was to be church government, the King required the assistance of some of the episcopal clergy, and

sition of Archbishop Ussher by a variety of arguments, and proved almost to demonstration that Polycarp suffered martyrdom on the 26th of March, A. D. 147.

Isaiah, chap. viii. ver. 12. 13.

• There is great diversity in the lists given of the clergy who attended. Fuller says, Archbishop Ussher, Duppa Bishop of Salisbury, Doctors Sheldon, Sanderson, Ferne, were in attendance; and that Prideaux Bishop of Worcester, and Brownrigg Bishop of Exeter, were summoned, but did not attend, the first from poverty, not having money to travel so far, the other having been imprisoned by the Parliament. Whitelock names Archbishop Ussher, Doctors Bainbridge, Prideaux, Warner, Ferne, and Mor

permission was granted. Archbishop Ussher was not sent for, or certainly did not reach Newport, till the conference had been going on for a considerable time. He arrived in the month of November, and immediately preached before the King, on his birth-day. The text was, "Remember thou art my first-born, my might and the beginning of my strength." The sermon was published" immediately after, not by the Archbishop, but by some persons who took notes, and, as Dr. Parr, who was present, states, very imperfectly. The sermon conveys the same ideas of prerogative and divine right, that are contained in the treatise of the Power of the Prince, which had been written some years before. Dr. Parr observes: "This sermon together with the Archbishops steady carriage in the point of Episcopacy did so much enrage both the Presbyterian and Independent factions, that in their news-books and pamphlets at London they reproached the Lord Primate for flattering the King, as also for his persuading him not to abolish Bishops; and that he had very much prejudiced the treaty; and that none among the Kings chaplains had been so mischievous (meaning to them) as he." The presence of the Primate was of little avail to settling the differences. He proposed again the plan he had drawn up in 1641, and obtained the consent of the Presbyterian clergy, who approved of it as being, though not all they wished for, yet as much as they could expect to obtain. The King not only consented to the Primate's plan, but offered, in addition, to suspend the exercise of episcopal government for three years; that after that time.

ley. Neal gives a much longer list: at the beginning of the conference, Juxon Bishop of London, Duppa Bishop of Salisbury, Dr. Sheldon, Dr. Hammond, Dr. Oldsworth, Dr. Sanderson, Dr. Turner, Dr. Haywood, and, towards the end, Ussher Archbishop of Armagh, Dr. Bramhall, Dr. Prideaux, Dr. Warner, Dr. Ferne, and Dr. Morley. This account is undoubtedly wrong: Drs. Sheldon and Hammond were sent for, but were kept in confinement at Oxford; Bishops Bramhall and Prideaux were also absent. It is strange that so simple a fact cannot be ascertained; there is however no doubt that the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishop of Salisbury, Drs. Sanderson, Ferne, and Morley, were in attendance.

'Genesis, chap. xlix. ver. 3.

"The sermon is printed in the Archbishop's works, vol. xiii. pag. 353. ▾ See Baxter's Life, pag. 62.

the power of ordination should not be exercised by Bishops, except with the consent of Presbyters, and that no other episcopal jurisdiction should be exercised, except such as should be agreed upon by His Majesty and the two Houses of Parliament. The Parliamentary Commissioners were however determined to abolish episcopacy, and would not consent to any compromise. I have already offered some remarks upon the planx proposed by the Primate, which was entirely founded upon his principle, that a Bishop differed from a Presbyter in degree, not in order, a principle utterly, as it would seem, irreconcileable with the preface to the forms of ordination, which declares, that the Church receives the orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. However, the Primate, in maintaining that the Bishop only differed from the Presbyter in degree, did not mean to assert what has been pleaded on his authority. His opinion was, as stated by Dr. Bernard, "that" the degree which the Bishop hath above a Presbyter is not to be understood as an arbitrary matter at the pleasure of men but that he held it to be of Apostolical institution—and that this gradus is both derived

w Charles gave a happy illustration of the nature of this treaty, in which not one of his propositions was conceded: "Consider Mr. Buckley, if you call this a treaty, whether it be not like the fray in the comedy, where the man comes out and says, there has been a fray and no fray, and being asked how that could be? Why, says he, there hath been three blows given and I had them all."

Similar was the description of the satyrist:

"Si rixa est ubi tu pulsas, ego vapulo tantum."

The extraordinary license which the dissenting ministers assumed is sufficiently proved by two of them daring to tell His Majesty, "that if he would not consent to the utter abolition of Episcopacy, he would be damned."

* Dr. Aikin's view of this subject is strange; he says: "The good pastor is to be applauded for an attempt to unite in the bonds of Christian communion two hostile parties by an expedient which he thought need not shock the prejudices of either." This is, at least, an assumption that prejudices alone interfered in the question, whether the expedient was consistent with the true doctrines of Christianity. Dr. Aikin has, indeed, been correct in using the word expedient, and like other schemes of expediency, it weakened the cause it was intended to uphold, without effecting the imagined good.

y Bernard on Ordination by Presbyters, pag. 128.

« AnteriorContinuar »