« AnteriorContinuar »
and kindness to the deserving, especially to poor scholars and divines, and munificent in his donations to learned and charitable foundations. But he had still rarer and perhaps higher merits. He was disinterested, inflexible in principle, and courageously independent. The extensive patronage which he possessed appears to have been in his hand an instrument devoutly consecrated to the advancement of religion, learning and good morals. To all promptings of self-interest, to all solicitations of men in power, he resolutely turned a deaf ear when they interfered with higher motives. It is said by his biographer, of the sins which he abhorred most were simony and sacrilege. The first of these “ was so detestable to him as that for refusing to admit divers men to livings whom he suspected to be simonically preferred, he sùffered much by suits of law : choosing rather to be compelled against his will to admit them by law, than voluntarily to do that which his conscience made scruple of a.” We are further told that his dread of committing sacrilege, caused him in the time of Elizabeth to refuse successively the bishoprics of Salisbury and Ely when offered to him under the usual conditions of that time,--the alienation of church-lands in favor of laymen and courtiers. He is also said, when bishop of Winchester, to have refused several large sums of money for renewals of leases which he conceived injurious to his successors.
a Fuller, ut supra.
It should appear however, that in these sacrifices of worldly interest, Andrews was rather influenced by a nice sense of professional integrity and worldly honor than by any superstitious opinions respecting the sacredness of church property; for Selden has mentioned him as the only bishop who thought proper to express an approbation of his “ History of tythes," so much the object of alarm or horror to the clerical body at large.
The accession of James facilitated the advancement of Andrews by putting an end to that system of spoliation to which he was resolved not to become instrumental. Struck with his style of preaching, and filled with admiration at the extent and solidity of his erudition, the king spontaneously nominated him to the see of Chichester, adding a good living in commendam, and ordered him to write in favor of the oath of allegiance. In process of time his majesty appointed him lord almoner, translated him first to Ely, and finally to Winchester, and made him dean of the chapel royal and a privy-councillor. But even this extraordinary accumulation of benefits, acting on a mind peculiarly susceptible of the sentiments of gratitude, was unable to abase the spirit of Andrews to that servile adulation which the monarch loved, and which other dignitaries of the church paid him without scruple, though at the expense of truth, of patriotism, and sometimes even of piety
To this effect a striking anecdote has been preserved by Waller the poet. On the day when James
had dissolved in anger the parliament which assembled in January 1621, on account of its refusal of further supplies, Waller went to court and saw the king dine in public. Bishop Andrews, and Neil then bishop of Ely, stood behind his chair: the monarch turned to them, and, with his usual indiscretion, asked them aloud, if he might not levy money upon his subjects when he wanted it, without applying to parliament. Neil, one of the most shameless of his flatterers, replied without hesitation, “God forbid you might not! for you are the breath of our nostrils."
Well, my lord,” said the king to Andrews, “and what say you?” “Sir,” replied the bishop, “I am not skilled in parliamentary cases." “No put-offs, my lord,” insisted the king,"answer me presently.” “I think, then,” replied the bishop, “that it is lawful for you to take my brother Neil's money, for he offers it.” Nothing but the wit of the answer could have atoned for its courage. .
Bishop Andrews was one of the few clerical members of the society of antiquaries: Bacon appears to have held him in high esteem, and addressed to him his “ Dialogue on a holy war,” with an interesting epistle dedicatory, in which he enters at large into his own manner of life, and details the philosophical reflections and pursuits which consoled him under adversity and disgrace. The bishop ended his honorable and exemplary career in September 1626, in his 71st year. His death was bewailed, amongst the national calamities of the time, in an animated Latin elegy from the pen of a youth whose noble
mind, penetrated with that affectionate veneration for the wise and good which affords the best presage of future excellence, delighted thus to pay its pure unbidden homage to the reverend sanctity of the aged prelate. This youth was Milton, then in his eighteenth year. The concluding lines, in which he represents himself as transported in a vision to the gardens of the blessed, have been thus beautifully rendered into English by the poet of the “ Task:"
" While I that splendor, and the mingled shade
Ascend, my son ! thy father's kingdom share !
1621, 1622. Parliament assembled.-Speech of the lord-keeper.-Lord
Digby's account of his negotiations.-Petition and remon. strance of the commons.—The king's letter to the speaker. -Reply of the commons.-The king's rejoinder.-His rečeption of a committee of the house.--Conciliatory advice of the lord-keeper neglected by the king.--Notice of ad. journment delivered by the prince of Wales.- Protestation entered by the house on its journals.- Imprisonment of Philips, Selden, Pym and Mallory.-Other members sent to Ireland.
Attempts to ruin sir Edward Coke.-Sir John Savile bought over by the court.—Liberation of Selden.Committal of the earls of Southampton and Oxford.-Lord Spencer and others reprimanded.-Remonstrance against the creation of Scotch and Irish peers.-Menacing words of the king to the earl of Essex.—A benevolence extorted.Freedom of speech restrained.—Caricatures of king James.
-General liberation of prisoners for recusancy.-Re. i straints laid on preachers.—Anecdote of the lord-keeper. KING James's reluctance to call the parliament again into activity had appeared by his directing it to be further adjourned from November 1621 to the February following; but the return of lord Digby at this juncture from an unsuccessful embassy undertaken in behalf of the palatine, seemed to render an immediate declaration of war against the house of Austria inevitable, and parliament was therefore VOL. II.