'His Zeal for the Welfare of the Church of England': Nelson's 'Life of Dr. George Bull', patronage, and Tories

As we have seen in a variety of ways in our readings from Nelson's 1713 Life of Dr. George Bull, the work gives important insights into the life of the post-1662 Church of England. Today's extract introduces some significant themes: patronage, relationship with the State, and the Church and Toryism. 

Nelson introduces us to Heneage Finch, 1st Earl of Nottingham, who, after prosecuting the regicides at the Restoration and becoming Attorney General, was appointed Lord Chancellor - the first minister of the Crown - in 1675. He was what we might call a proto-Tory, embodying the Cavalier loyalty to Church and Crown which would, in the Exclusion Crisis of 1678-81, become Toryism. This, indeed, is seen in his eldest son, the 2nd Earl, and second son being leading Tory figures during and after the Revolution of 1688. His commitment to the Church of England, the distinguishing feature of early Toryism, is emphasised by Nelson:

Among the many very commendable Qualities of this Great Man, his Zeal for the Welfare of the Church of England, was not the least conspicuous; which particularly shewed itself, in the care he took in disposing of those Ecclesiastical Preferments, which were in the Gift of the Seal. He judged rightly, in looking upon that Privilege as a Trust for the good of the Church of God, of which he was to give a strict Account; and therefore being sensible that the several Duties of his great Post, as first Minister of State, as Lord Chancellor, and as Speaker of the House of Lords, would not allow his Lordship Time and Leisure to make that Enquiry which was necessary to know the Characters of such as were Candidates for Preferment, he devolved this particular Province upon his Chaplain, whose Conscience he charged with an impartial Scrutiny in this Matter; adding withal, that he would prefer none but those who came recommended from him; and that if he led him wrong, the blame should fall upon his own Soul.

When, in 1755, Samuel Johnson would publish his Dictionary of the English Language, he defined 'Tory' as "One who adheres to the antient constitution of the state, and the apostolical hierarchy of the church of England, opposed to a whig". Finch exemplified this. He had advised his eldest son when studying at Oxford, "to frequent the publique prayers, and study to reverence and defend, as well as to obey, the Church of England". If we want to know what led to Trollope, a century and half later, declaring "No man was so surely a Tory as a country rector", it was this commitment to the Church of England which post-1688 Toryism inherited from Cavalier allegiances of those such as Finch.

At Finch's side was his chaplain. This introduces us to another leading figure, a Tory clerk in holy orders who would, in 1691, become Archbishop of York, John Sharp:

It is true that this was a great Testimony of my Lord's intire Confidence, in the Uprightness as well as the Capacity of his Chaplain; but the World will quickly be satisfied with what Caution and Judgment his Lordship took his Measures, when they shall know, that his then Chaplain was Dr. Sharp, the present Lord Archbishop of York, who  fills one of the Archiepiscopal Thrones of the Church of England, with that universal Applause, which is due to His Grace's distinguishing Merit; whose Elevation hath not deprived him of his Humility, but he exerciseth the same Affability and Courtesy towards all Men, which he practised in a lower Sphere. And that Learning and Piety, that Integrity and Zeal for the Glory of God, which influence His Grace in the Government of his Diocess and of his Province, were peculiarly servicable to the Earl of Nottingham, in the Charge his Lordship laid upon him with so much Solemnity. 

Sharp would be Queen Anne's leading adviser on ecclesiastical affairs, entirely sidelining the Low Church Whig Tenison, Archbishop of Canterbury 1695–1715. Amongst those episcopal appointments, of course, was George Bull to the See of St. Davids in 1705.

That appointment, however, would be in the future. In the 1670s, following the publication of Harmonia Apostolica and the controversy surrounding it, Bull came to the attention of Finch and Sharp. The preferment which followed in 1678 is evidence of how Bull's work, rather than being regarded as heterodox, was understood by Finch and Sharp - both robust advocates of the Church of England - as representing the orthodox teaching and allegiance which they were determined to promote:

From a Lord Chancellor so well disposed to secure the Welfare of the Church, by preferring Men of unblemish'd Characters, and who was blest with a Chaplain, faithful and discerning to distinguish them, Mr. Bull received, a Prebend in the Church of Glocester, in which he was installed the 9th of Octob. 1678. And as a Testimony of his Gratitude, he designed a publick Acknowledgment of his Lordship's Favour, in dedicating to him, his Fidei Nicena Defensio, which was the next Book he published; but before it appeared, this Great Man died, in whom the Church lost a faithful and zealous Friend, and Learning and Piety a generous and constant Patron.

This seemingly insignificant event in 1678, the appointment of a Prebend to Gloucester Cathedral, opens to us enduring and defining aspects of the Church of England during the 'long 18th century': the functioning of patronage and the Tory culture of many clergy. Many contemporary Anglicans, of course, immediately dismiss these characteristics of 18th century Anglicanism, on tediously predictable grounds. What the operation of patronage and the Tory culture of country rectors represented, however, was a national Church deeply embedded in society and culture, thereby ensuring that a Christian moral vision was inherent to national and communal life. When compared to the frankly pathetic significance and influence of Anglican churches in 21st century North Atlantic societies, one might think that approaching the experience of Anglicans in the past with some humility, and not immediately dismissing that experience, would be self-evidently necessary and perhaps even useful.

A final note on today's post. As I sit writing this, George Owers' The Rage of Party is perched on my desk, waiting to be read. It has received tremendous reviews and I am eager to begin my reading. The subject matter of this post could be considered as something of a short prequel to the book. The 2nd Earl of Nottingham and Archbishop Sharp both appear in the story told by Owers. Church Tories and Church Whigs clash in the post-1688 culture war, with the conflict of the 1640s casting its long shadow. Whig bishops are confronted by Tory country rectors. And, on reading the book, you can decide whether you are a country parson who sides with Bull, Nottingham, and Sharp or - shudders - a Whig.

For those tempted by the latter allegiance, I should warn - and I believe the author of The Rage of Party would heartily agree - that Dr. Johnson reminds us that the father of Whiggery is held in very high esteem by the affectionate uncle of Wormwood.