Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

"the compiling of any ordinary and falable piece "of English divinity that the fhops value. But he "who from fuch a kind of pfalmiftry, or any other "verbal devotion, without the pledg and earnest "of futable deeds, can be perfuaded of a zeal and true righteousness in the perfon, has much yet to "learn; and knows not that the deepest policy of a tyrant has bin ever to counterfeit religion: "and ARISTOTLE in his Politics has mention'd "that fpecial craft among twelve other tyrannical

66

66

¢

.46

¢་

[ocr errors]

fophifms. Neither want we examples. AN"DRONICUS COMNENUS the Byzantin emperor, "tho a moft cruel tyrant, is reported by NICETAS "to have bin a conftant reader of St. PAUL'S Epiftles; and by continual ftudy had fo incorporated the phrase and stile of that apostle into "all his familiar letters, that the imitation feem'd to vy with the original." Then having instanced Our RICHARD the third, to whom he might have added TARQUIN who built the ftately temple of JUPITER CAPITOLINUS, and the Ruffian BASILOWITZ that pray'd seven times a day, he discovers a piece of royal plagiarism, or (to be more charitable) of his chaplains prieftcraft; for one of king CHARLES's prayers, ftil'd a prayer in the time of captivity, deliver'd by himself to Dr. Juxon, and twice printed among his works in folio, is plainly ftolen and taken without any confiderable variation from the mouth of PAMELA, an imaginary lady, to a heathen deity in Sir PHILIP SIDNEY'S Arcadia. This has bin mention'd by others after MILTON, and those prayers laid parallel together on divers occafions. One of MILTON's fagacity could not but perceive

perceive by the compofition, ftile, and timing of this book, that it was rather the production of fom idle clergyman, than the work of a diftreft prince, either in perpetual hurry at the head of a flying army, or remov'd from one prifon to another during his unfortunat captivity till his death. Befides the theological phrafes frequently interfpers'd, there are fuch fanciful allufions and bold comments in it upon the fecret judgments of God, as smell rankly of a fyftem or the pulpit. When he mentions the fate of the HOTHAMS, by whom he was repuls'd at Hull, he fays of the father, That his head was divided from his body, because his heart was divided from the king and that two beads were cut off in one family for affronting the head of the commonwealth; the eldest fon being infected with the fin of the father, against the father of his country. These and fuch arguments drawn only from the book it self, without any further light, induc'd a great many at that time to fufpect the impofture; and that because CROMWEL got fuch a reputation among the people for his fuppos'd piety, the royalists would represent the king to be a wifer man and better Chriftian. But in the year 1686 Mr. MILLINGTON happening to fell the late lord ANGLESEY's library by auction, put up an Eikon Bafilike; and a few bidding very low for it, he had leifure to turn over the leaves, when to his great furprize he perceiv'd written with the fame noble lords own hand, the following memorandum.

[blocks in formation]

KING CHARLES the fecond, and the duke of York, did both (in the last feffions of parlament, 1675. when I fhew'd them in the lords houfe the written copy of this book, wherin are fom corrections and alterations written with the late king CHARLES the firft's own hand) affure me, that this was none of the faid king's compiling, but made by Dr. GAUDEN bishop of Exeter : which I here infert for the undeceiving of others in this point, by attefling fo much. under my own hand.

ANGLESEY.

This occafion'd the world to talk; and feveral knowing the relation which the late Dr. ANTHONY WALKER an Effex divine had to bishop GAUDEN, they inquir'd of him what he knew concerning this fubject, which he then verbally communicated to them but being afterwards highly provok'd by Dr. HOLLINGWORTH's harsh and injurious reflections, he was oblig'd in his own defence to print an account of that book, wherin are fufficient anfwers to all the fcruples or objections that can be made, and wherof I here infert an exact epitome, He tells us in the first place that Dr. GAUDEN was pleas'd to acquaint him with the whole defign, and fhew'd him the heads of divers chapters, with

fom

fom others that were quite finifh'd: and that Dr. GAUDEN asking his opinion of the thing, and he declaring his diffatisfaction that the world fhould be fo impos'd upon, GAUDEN bid him look on the title, which was the king's portraiture; for that no man is fuppos'd to draw his own picture. A very nice evafion! He further acquaints us, that fom time after this being both in London, and having din'd together, Dr. GAUDEN took him along with him to Dr. DUPPA the bishop of Salisbury (whom he made alfo privy to his defign) to fetch what papers he had left before for his perufal, or to fhew him what he had fince written: and that upon their return from that place, after GAUDEN and DUPPA were a while in privat together, the former told him the bishop of Salisbury wish'd he had thought upon two other heads, the ordinance against the Common Prayer Book, and the denying his majesty the attendence of his chaplains; but that DUPPA defir'd him to finish the reft, and he would take upon him to write two chapters on those subjects, which accordingly he did. The reafon, it seems, why Dr. GAUDEN himfelf would not perform this, was, first, that during the troubles he had forborn the use of the liturgy, which be did not extraordinarily admire; and fecondly, that he had never bin the king's chaplain, wheras Dr. DUPPA was both his chaplain, his tutor, and a bishop, which made him more concern'd about thefe particulars. Thirdly, Dr. WALKER informs us that Dr. GAUDEN told him he had fent a copy of Eikon Bafilike by the marquifs of Hartford to the king in the Ile of Wight; where it was, we may

be fure, that he made thofe corrections and alterations with his own pen, mention'd in my lord ANGLESEY'S memorandum: and which gave occafion to fom then about him that had accidentally feen, or to whom he had fhown the book, to beJieve the whole was his own. Fourthly, Dr. GAUDEN, after the restoration, told Dr. WALKER, that the duke of York knew of his being the real author, and had own'd it to be a great fervice; in confideration of which, it may be, the bishoprick of Winchester, tho he was afterwards put off with that of Worcester, was promis'd him. And, notwithstanding it was then a fecret, we now know that in expectation of this tranflation, the great houfe on Clapham common was built indeed in the name of his brother Sir DENIS, but really to be a manfionhouse for the bishops of Winchester. Fifthly, Dr. WALKER fays, that Mr. GAUDEN, the doctor's fon, his wife, himself, and Mr. GIFFORD who tranfcrib'd it, did believe it as firmly as any fact don in the place where they were; and that in that family they always fpoke of it among themselves (whether in Dr. GAUDEN's prefence or abfence) as undoubtedly written by him, which he never contradicted. We learn, fixthly, that Dr. GAUDEN, after part of it was printed, gave to Dr. WALKER with his own hand what was last fent to London; and after fhewing him what it was, feal'd it, giving him cautionary directions how to deliver it, which he did on Saturday the 23d of December, 1648. for Mr. ROYSTON the printer, to Mr. PEACOCK brother to Dr. GAUDEN's fteward, who, after the impreffion was finish'd, gave him, for his trouble, fix books,

« PredošláPokračovať »