1661. ture of things than had been done formerly. They declared against superstition on the one hand, and enthusiasm on the other. They loved the constitution of the church, and the liturgy, and could well live under them: but they did not think it unlawful to live under another form. They wished that things might have been carried with more moderation. And they continued to keep a good correspondence with those who had differed from them in opinion, and allowed a great freedom both in philosophy and in divinity: from whence they were called men of latitude. And upon this men of narrower thoughts and fiercer tempers fastened upon them the name of Latitudinarians z. They read Episcopius much. And the making out the reasons of things being a main part of their studies, their enemies called them Socinians. They were all very zealous against popery. And so, they becoming soon very considerable, the papists set themselves against them to decry them as atheists, deists, or at best Socinians. And now that the main principle of religion was struck at by Hobbs and his followers, the papists acted upon this a very strange part. They went in so far even into the argument for atheism, as to publish many books, in which they affirmed, that there was no certain proof of the Christian religion, unless we took it from the authority of the church as infallible. This was such a delivering up of the cause to them, that it raised in all good men a very high indignation at popery; that party shewing, that they chose to make men who would not turn papists, become atheists, rather z See Sir Philip Warwick's Memoirs, page 89. O. than believe Christianity upon any other ground than 1661. infallibility. A character The most eminent of those, who were formed 189 under those great men I have mentioned, were Til- of some lotson, Stillingfleet, and Patrick. The first of these divines. was a man of a clear head and a sweet temper. He had the brightest thoughts and the most correct style of all our divines; and was esteemed the best preacher of the age. He was a very prudent man; and had such a management with it, that I never knew any clergyman so universally esteemed and beloved, as he was for above twenty years. He was eminent for his opposition to popery. He was no friend to persecution, and stood up much against atheism. Nor did any man contribute more to bring the city to love our worship than he did. But there was so little superstition, and so much reason and gentleness in his way of explaining things, that malice was long levelled at him, and in conclusion broke out fiercely on him. Stillingfleet was a man of much more learning, but of a more reserved and a haughtier temper. He, in his youth, writ an Irenicum for healing our divisions, with so much learning and moderation, that it was esteemed a masterpiece. His notion was, that the apostles had settled the church in a constitution of bishops, priests, and deacons, but had made no perpetual law about it, having only taken it in, as they did many other things, from the customs and practice of the synagogue; from which he inferred, that certainly the constitution was lawful, since authorized by them, but not necessary, since they had made no settled law about it. This took with many; but was cried out upon by others, as an attempt against 1661. the church. Yet the argument was managed with so much learning and skill, that none of either side ever undertook to answer itz. After that, he wrote against infidelity, beyond any that had gone before him. And then he engaged to write against popery, which he did with such an exactness and liveliness, that no books of controversy were so much read and valued as his were. He was a great man in many respects. He knew the world well, and was esteemed a very wise man. The writing of his Irenicum was a great snare to him: for, to avoid the imputations which that brought upon him, he not only retracted the book, but he went into the humours of that high sort of people beyond what became him, perhaps beyond his own sense of things. He applied himself much to the study of the law and records, and the original of our constitution, and was a very extraordinary man, [too much conceited of himself, and too much concerned for his family.] Patrick was a great preacher. He wrote much and well, and chiefly on the scriptures. He was a laborious man in his function, of great strictness of life, but a little too severe against those who differed from him. But that was, when he 190 thought their doctrines struck at the fundamentals of religion. He became afterwards more moderatea. To these I shall add another divine, who, though of Oxford, yet as he was formed by bishop Wilkins, so he went into most of their principles; but went far beyond them in learning. Lloyd was a great critic in the Greek and Latin authors, but chiefly in the z (The book itself was answered in the year 1680, by bishop Parker, as it was then said. See Wood's Athena Oxon. art. S. Parker.) a Yes, for he turned a rank whig. S. scriptures; of the words and phrases of which he 1661. carried the most perfect concordance in his memory, and had it the readiest about him, of all men that ever I knew. He was an exact historian, and the most punctual in chronology of all our divines. He had read the most books, and with the best judgment, and had made the most copious abstracts out of them, of any in this age: so that Wilkins used to say, he had the most learning in ready cash of any he ever knew. He was so exact in every thing he set about, that he never gave over any part of study, till he had quite mastered it. But when that was done, he went to another subject, and did not lay out his learning with the diligence with which he laid it in. He had many volumes of materials upon all subjects laid together in so distinct a method, that he could with very little labour write on any of them. He had more life in his imagination, and a truer judgment, than may seem consistent with such a laborious course of study b. Yet, as b Lloyd, after several translations, was bishop of Worcester. In the year 1712, he told queen Ann he thought it his duty to acquaint her, that the church of Rome would be utterly destroyed, and the city of Rome consumed by fire, in less than four years; which he could prove beyond contradiction, if her majesty would have the patience to hear him upon that subject. The queen appointed him next day in the forenoon; and a great Bible was brought, which was all he said would be wanting. The bishop of London came with him; and the duke of Shrews bury, lord Oxford, lord Dart- 1661. much as he was set on learning, he had never neglected his pastoral care. For several years he had the greatest cure in England, St. Martin's, which he took care of with an application and diligence beyond any about him; to whom he was an example, or rather a reproach, so few following his example. He was a holy, humble, and patient man, ever ready to do good when he saw a proper opportunity: even his love of study did not divert him from that. He did, upon his promotion, find a very worthy successor in his cure, Tenison, who carried on and advanced all those good methods that he had begun in the management of that great cure. He endowed schools, set up a public library, and kept many curates to assist him in his indefatigable labours among them. He was a very learned manc, and took much pains to state the notions and practices of heathenish idolatry, and so to fasten that charge on the church of Rome. And, Whitehall lying within that parish, he stood as in the front of the battle all king James's reign; and maintained, as well as managed, that dangerous post with great courage and much judgment, and was held in very high esteem for his whole deportment, which was ever grave and moderate. These have been the greatest divines we have had these forty years d: he said, that if what he had ad- low voice, that nobody else might hear; which she told me afterwards was, that after four years were expired, Christ would reign personally upon earth for a thousand years. D. The dullest, good for nothing man I ever knew. S. (Compare lord Dartmouth's note at vol. II. p. 136, folio edit.) d (No very accurate asser |