George Morley

son of Francis Morley Esq, by Sarah Denham his wife, sister to Sir Joh. Denham one of the Barons of his Majesties Exchecquer, was born in Cheapside within the City of London, on the 27. of Febr. 1597. He lost his father when he was six years of age, his mother when 12, and that little Patrimony that he was born to, by his father’s being engaged in other mens debts. At 14 years of age, or thereabouts, he was elected one of Kings Scholars of the Coll. at Westminster, and in the beginning of the year 1615 he became Student of Ch. Ch, where with very great industry running thro all the Classes of Logick and Philosophy, he took the degrees in Arts. After he had continued in that royal foundation seven years in the degree of Master, he was invited by Robert Earl of Caernarvon and his Lady to be Chaplain in their house, where he lived till he was 43 years of age, without having, or seeking, any preferment in the Church. After this, he was prefer’d to the Rectory of Hartfield in Sussex, which, being a Sinecure, he exchanged with Dr. Rich. Steuart, then Clerk of the Closet to his Majesty, for the Parsonage of Mildenhall near Marlborough in Wiltshire. But before he had that charge, he had a Prebendship of Ch. Ch. bestowed on him by the K. (to whom he was Chaplain in Ord.) an. 1641, which was the only preferment he ever desired, and of which he gave the first years profit to the King, towards the charge of his wars, which were then commenc’d against him by a prevalent party of Presbyterians in the Long Parliament: At the beginning of which, he preached one of the first solemn Sermons before the Commons, but so little to their gust and liking, that they commanded all the rest of the Sermons, but not his, to be printed. Yet after this, he being then Doctor of Divinity, he was nominated one of the Assembly of Divines by both Houses, as Dr. Prideaux B. of Worcester, Dr. H. Hammond, &c. were, but neither he, or either of them, appeared among them. As for his part, he always remained with his Majesty, did him what service he could, as long as the war continued. After which he was employed by his Majesty, then a prisoner at Hampton Court, to engage the University of Oxon not to submit to the illegal Visitation, that had been began, but for the present intermitted, because of the violent proceedings of the Army. Which affair he managed with such success, that the Convocation did presently pass an Act for that purpose, but with one dissenting voice only, tho they were then under the power of the enemy, that is the Parliament forces. After this, he was chosen by the Members of the University, with some other Assistants named by himself, to negotiate the making good of their Articles which were framed at the surrender of the Garrison of Oxon, to the said forces: which he did to that degree, as to gain time for the getting in of their rents, and to dispose of themselves, I mean as many of them, as were resolved not to submit to their new Masters. Soon after, he was one of the first that was deprived of all that he had in Oxon, or elsewhere, for not submitting to them, tho he was offer’d by one of the Grandees of the H. of Commons, to keep all that he had, without being put to say or do, or subscribe any thing against his Conscience, if he would but then give his word only, that he would not actually appear against them or their proceedings. See in Hist. & Antiq. Univ. Oxon. lib. 1. 391. a. b. 393. a. 394. a. 395. a. 396. a. &c. After this he was one of the Divines that was sent for by the King to assist at the Treaty in the Isle of Wight; which proving ineffectual, he resolved (having first assisted the gallant Arthur Lord Capell, as his confessor, before his execution, in the beginning of Mar. 1648) to quit his Country and find out the young King, and never to return till he and the Crown and the Church were restored. With this resolution he left England in the 51. year of his age, and found him at the Hague, where he was graciously received by him. From thence he went first with him into France, and from thence with him to the Scotch Treaty at Breda, and there preach’d the last Sermon that the K. heard before he went into Scotland: whither being not suffer’d to carry any of his own Divines with him, he the said Dr. Morley went thereupon to the Hague, and after some short stay there, he went with his dearest friend Dr. Jo. Earle to live at Antwerp, where they continued together in the house of Sir Charles Cottrel Master of the Ceremonies, for the space of one year or thereabouts. At which time Sir Charles being called thence to be Steward to the Queen of Bohemia, and Dr. Earle to attend on his Higness James Duke of York then in France, Dr. Morley continued still in Antwerp with the Lady Frances Hyde (her Husband Sir Edw. Hyde being then Embassador for the King in Spain) and all the time he was there, which was about 3. or 4 years, he read the Service of the Church of England twice every day, catechiz’d once a week, and administred the Communion once a month to all the English in the Town, who would come to it, as he did afterwards at Breda for 4 years together in the same Family. But betwixt his going from Antwerp and his comming to Breda, he was invited by the Queen of Bohemia to the Hague to be her Chaplain: And he thereupon knowing her condition to be necessitous, thought himself so much the rather oblig’d both in Conscience towards God, and in duty to the Royal Family (for she was Sister to K. Charles 1.) to wait on her, and accordingly he did, and readily officiated both in her family, and in the English Church there, about two years and an half, without expecting or receiving any Salary or gratuity at all for so doing. There, as in all other places, where he lived, especially at Breda, he was blest with a retirement full of satisfaction to himself and with many opportunities of doing much good to others also. For besides the constant reading of the Prayers of the Church, his Catechizing of young persons, his administring the holy Sacraments, and his devoutest supplications for the K. and the Church in private, he visited the sick and buried the dead, and relieved many, whom their Loyalty had impoverished. His learned acquaintance abroad were Andr. Rivet, Dan. Heinsius and Claud. Salmasius, whom he often visited; to the last of which, then abiding at Leyden, the King sent our author Morley to give him thanks in his name for the Apology he had published for his martyr’d Father, but not with a purse of Gold as Joh. Milton the impudent lyer reported. But his acquaintance was more intimate with the famous Sam. Bochart, to whom he wrote a Latine Letter from Paris, declaring his reasons of not coming to the French Congregation: To which Mr. Bochart printed an answer in Latine the year following. And as he was zealous for the Church, so he was also for his Royal Master, w [•] tness the large Epistle he wrote in Latine to Triglandius to vindicate his Master from the false aspersion of Popery. For his friends at home (of whom he never lost any but by death only) were eminent both for parts and quality: the chiefest of which were Lucius L. Falkland, and Sir Francis Wenman of Oxfordshire, both long since dead, and Edward Earl of Clarendon, who died long after them. Among the Clergy were Dr. Rob. Payne, Dr. H. Hammond and Dr. Rob. Sanderson (late B. of Linc.) who were all Canons of Ch. Ch. at the same time with him. To these may be added many more as Mr. W. Chillingworth, Dr. Gilb. Sheldon Archb. of Cant, Dr. Earl of Salisbury, &c. with the two last of which, he kept a constant friendship for above 40 years, and enjoyed the company of Dr. Earl very often abroad, which made his banishment less tedious to him. After his Majesties return, this most worthy person Dr. Morley was first made Dean of Ch. Ch, (being then Chapl. to the Duchess of York) whence, after he had restored those that had been illegaly ejected in 1648, &c. and had filled up the vacant places, he was called to be Bishop of Worcester, to which See he was Consecrated in the Abbey Church at Westm, on the 28. of Octob. 1660, and in the beginning of the next year had the honour to preach the Kings Coronation-Sermon, and soon after made Dean of the Chappel Royal in the place of Dr. Sheldon. In 1662 he was upon the death of Dr. Duppa translated to the See of Winchester, (confirmed therein 14. May the same year) where he hath truly verified the saying that the King gave when he bestowed the said Bishoprick on him that he would never be the richer for it, For besides his expences in building and repairing his Palace at Winchester, he hath laid out much more than the supplies the Parliament gave him in the Act, which impowred him to lease out Waltham Park, and his Tenements which were built out of Winchester House in Southwark. He spent 8000 l. in repairing the Castle at Farnham, before the year, 1672, and afterwards spent more, and above 4000 l. in purchasing Winchester House at Chelsey to annex it to the See, which when he came to, he found not an house to dwell in, yet afterwards, left two fair ones to his successors. At that time also he had not purchased one foot of Land or Lease, as if he had taken more care to enrich the poor than his Relations, and what his benefaction was to the Coll. that gave him education, you may see in Hist. & Antiq. Univ. Oxon. lib. 2. p. 285. a. In the first year of his Translation he visited his Diocese in person, and went into the Isle of Wight, where had not been a Bishop before, in the memory of man. In July 1664 he came to Oxon and visited in person those Colleges which of right belonged to him as B. of Winchester, was received, and entertained with great solemnity in all, only in Co. Ch. Coll. finding stubborness he bound some to their good behaviour. Daniel Agas one of the Fellows, who had been educated there under the Presbyterians, accused the Bishop of injustice before his face, for granting and sending Letters to the Coll. in behalf of Tho. Turner (son of Dr. Th. Turner) to come in Scholar, for which his impudence he was put out of Commons for 3 weeks. This worthy Doctor who was most famous for his great charity and benefaction while he sate at Winchester, was a person of approved and throly tried Loyalty, not of the number of those lukewarm irreligious Temporizers, who had learn’d politickly to shift and quit their Principles to make them suit to the times, and so pliably to tack about, as still to be ready to receive what ever revolution and turn of affairs should happen, and by an easie submission to that government which was uppermost, alway to stand fair for promotion under a succession of continued usurpations, tho of a quite different nature and complexion. He was so firmly setled in, and fixed to, the Ch. of England that he constantly bore up against, and became impregnable either by the attempting allurements of a splendid papacy, or the reproachful and ignominious treatment of the ruder disciplinarian party. He had courage enough to own a persecuted Church, and an exil’d Prince, and as he vindicated on all occasions the honour and dignity of the former, both against the open assaults and batteries of her professed Adversaries, and the mo [•] e sly and undermining insinuations of her pretended friends; so did he act with no less vigour, by leaving no projects unattempted, which carried in them any reasonable probability of success, whereby he might affect his Majesties restauration to his Crown and just rights: which altho managed with his utmost skill, industry and best interest, yet fell short of his design. And as he was a constant Adherer to his Master in his sufferings, who reposed so great confidence in his experienc’d fidelity, as to admit him to the honorable privacy of his most important and weighty concerns, so he was upon, and since the restauration, rewarded by him, as I have before told you, for his many eminent and good services done by himself, and, upon his engagement, by others, for the Royal Cause and Family. He was a great Calvinist, and esteemed one of the main Patrons of those of that persuasion. He was a good and pious Prelate, who by temperance and a regular exercise did arrive to a good old age, having enjoyed ease and quiet for many years, since that time he was forced to eat his bread in forreign Countries. In the 74 year of his age, and after, he was without any remarkable decay, either in his limbs or senses. His usual course then was, to rise about 5 of the clock in the morning, Winter and Summer, and to go to bed about eleven at night, and in the coldest mornings never to have a fire, or warm his bed at night. He eat but once in 24 hours, and had never either Gout, Stone, Stranguery, or Headach, but enjoyed almost a constant health from his infancy, having never kept his bed for any sickness, but twice only. Afterwards his grinders began to cease, and those that looked out of the windows began to be darkned, and other infirmities followed to conduct him to his long home, where, that he might safely arrive, and that it might be to him a place of everlasting rest and happiness, he did humbly in his last dayes beg all good mens prayers. As for his works of learning, they are these.

Sermon at the coronation of K. Ch. 2. in the Collegiat Church of S. Peter in Westm. 23. Apr. 1661, on Prov. 28. 2. Lond. 1661. qu.

Letter to a friend in Vindication of himself from Mr. Baxters calumny. Lond. 1662. qu. in six sh. and an half. The writing of which was occasion’d by some passages in Mr. Baxters Address to the inhabitants of Kiderminster before his book entit. The mischief of self-ignorance in the benefits of self-acquaintance. These reflected on that account which our author Morley had before briefly, both in a Sermon at Kederminster (soon after he, as Bishop of Worcester, had prohibited Baxter to preach there) and in a conference held in his own house with him, in the presence of Dr. Warmstry Dean of Worcester concerning a very groundless and dangerous exception made by the Commissioners of the Presbyterian persuasion (appointed by his Majesty to meet others of the Episcopal Divines at the Savoy in the Strand, an. 1661. to review the book of Common Prayer in order to a design’d accommodation between both parties) against a solid, sound position at that time laid down in a due and regular form of reasoning by the Commissioners nominated to appear in the Churches behalf. But as to the letter before mention’d Baxter in his Second part of the Nonconformists plea for peace, &c. and in his Apologie for the Nonconformists Ministers, &c. endeavours to answer some parts of it, and the Bishop (Morley) is mention’d by name among many others in the title to this last piece. It may not be now amiss here by the by to take notice that as Mr. Baxter is extreamly guilty of still throwing upon the tired Reader the self same nauseated matter very often, so he seems to take no greater delight in the telling any other story than that concerning the Savoy Papers, viz. the proceedings of the Divines on both sides in persuance of his Majesties Commission, that their reply to the answer of the Episcopal Divines return’d to their general and particular exceptions against the Liturgy (all which are contained in a piece, printed at Lond. 1661. qu. without any Printer’s or Bookseller’s name to it entit. The grand debate, &c.) and also The petition of peace, with the reformation of the Liturgy, &c. (that is in their common and ordinary acceptation of that charming word Reformation, with an abolition and destruction of the Liturgy; for it was of this nature) printed also after the same sculking manner with the former,—Lond. 1661. qu, were never answered either by word or writing, altho great importunity had been used to procure replyes to these three several Papers. Mr. Baxter is generally said to have penned The Petition of Peace; with the reformation of the Liturgy, &c. before mention’d. He himself saith that these two were drawn up in eight dayes, but not by whom, and that a poor reading Curate, whom they were forced to use for copies, keeping some for himself, gave them to the Printer thro meer poverty to get a little money, and that by his means they came out very false and without their knowledge, as did also those other Papers called The grand debate, &c. Mr. Baxter thinks himself qualified with such a peculiar excellency and knack of talking about these Papers, that I find him not a little angry with Dr. Joh. Hinckley, barely for being so bold and daring as to pretend to write somthing relating to them; for he himself saying that he believed no man then (viz. 1671.) living could give an account of them besides himself, he judged questionless that the Doctor herein had too rudely invaded his sole Province. Yet notwithstanding this, (together with a great deal of talk about their Sentiments and reception of his Majesties Declaration about Ecclesiastical affairs, the reduction and model of Episcopacy made by the learned Usher Primate of Ireland, and that other of Dr. Hall Bishop of Norwych, subscribed to by Dr. Rich. Holdesworth, either of which, they would, as he saith, have willingly allowed of) he with a great deal of confidence repeated in the preliminary introductions to most of his very many late most bitter pieces against the Church, (as if he could not otherwise by any means begin a treatise, unless these hughly beloved relations did kindly usher the following very uneven, unconcocted, roving, often repeated and medley stuff) will hardly perswade us to believe, that he hath been so little conversant with books, especially such as have been wrot against his own party and himself, as not to have very well known that Roger L’estrange in a book of his entit. The relapsed Apostate, &c. published not long after those three Papers above mention’d, had fully, and at large answered his Petition for peace, animadverted on many parts of the reformed Liturgy, and that moreover he had in a Supplement to his Relapsed Apost. refuted the Two papers of proposals concerning the Discipline and Ceremonies of the Church, together with a single sheet in form of petition to his Majesty, and that the Papers compriz’d in The great debate, &c. were briefly also touched and reflected on in the same Supplement, &c. Mr. L’estrang taketh notice also of this unwarrantable boast and vaunt of Mr. Baxter concerning these Papers in a late preface to the third edit. of The relapsed Apostate, &c. Lond. 1681. qu, therein citing Baxters words to that purpose, out of the Preface to his answer to Dr. Stillingfleets Charge of Separation, &c. Mr. Baxter indeed (altho in some of his books he saith expresly that none of the above named Papers were ever answer’d by any) confesseth that two small treatises, one entit. Pulpit conceptions, popular deceptions: or the grand debate resum’d in the point of Prayer, viz, in defence of prescribed forms, &c. Lond. 1662. qu. and the other Concerning Lent-Fast, had been wrot against some single parts occurring in those three Papers above mention’d, as also that L’estrange had said somthing against their Liturgy, and that he had no more to say (this last in his answer to a Letter of Dr. Hinckley) yet mentions nothing even there of L’estranges answers to any of their other Papers. But all this being spoken by the way lets now return to our author Morley and his other writings.

Epistola apologetica & paraenetica ad Theologum quendam Belgam scripta. Lond. 1663. in two sh. and an half in qu, written at Breda 7. Jun. 1659. This came out again with several of our authors treatises (which I shall anon mention) under this title. Epistola ad virum clariss. D. Cornelium Triglandium, unum ex Pastoribus Hagiensibus & Principi Auriaco à studiis conscripta, in quâ agitur de sereniss. regis Car. 2. erga reformatam religionem affectu, &c. Lond. 1683. qu. The author of this (as writing to a Protestant, who was a favourer of his Masters interest, and with whom he had before held some correspondence by Letters) fully clears K. Ch. 2. from all the least ground of suspicion of his enclining to Popery throughout his whole time of exile, contrary to what some English men had reported either thro ignorance or hatred; and which was by an easie credulity too greedily entertain’d by some foreigners. After this he vehemently presseth the Dutch (as desiring that this his Epistle might be communicated to other Dutchmen of the like perswasion with the person to whom it was immediatly directed) with strong reasons drawn from the several perswasive heads vigorously to employ their speedy and utmost endeavours to restore his Majesty to his lawful throne and just rights.

The Summe of a short conference betwixt Fath. Darcey a Jesuit, and Dr. Morley at Bruxells, 23 June 1649. Stil. Nov. Lond. 1683. qu.

An argument drawne from the evidence and certainty of sense, against the doctrine of Transubstantiation.

Vindication of the argument drawne from sense, against Transubstantiation, from a pretended answer to it, by the author of a pamphlet called A treatise of the nature of Catholick faith and heresie.

Answer to Father Cressy’s Letter—This, which is about religion and the Clergy of England, was written in 1662.

Sermon before the King at Whitehall, 5. Nov. 1667, on 1. Cor. 14.33.

Answer to a Letter written by a Rom. Priest, 1676.

Letter to Anne Duchess of York, some few months before her death, written 24 Jan. 1670.—This Duchess, who was dau. of Sir Edw. Hyde Lord Chanc. of England (afterwards E. of Clarendon) was carefully principled in the doctrine of the Protestant faith by our author Morley while he continued at Antwerp in the family of her father, yet died in the faith of the Rom. Church.

Ad clarissimum virum Janum Ulitium Epistolae duae, de invocatione Sanctorum. Written on the first of July, 1659. The aforesaid Summe of a short conference, &c. with all the things that follow to these two Epistles, were with the Epistle to Corn. Trigland, &c. printed together in one vol. in qu. an. 1683. Soon after was published by L. W. a book entit. A revision of Dr. Morley’s Judgment in matters of religion: or, an answer to several treatises of his, written on several occasions, concerning the Church of Rome. Which book was answer’d by another called The revision revised: or a vindication of the right rev. father in God George L. Bish. of Winton, against, &c. Lond. 1685. qu.

Letter to the Earl of Anglesey, of the meanes to keep out Popery, and the only effectual expedient to hinder the growth thereof. Lond. 1683, At the end of A true account of the whole proceedings betwixt James Duke of Ormonde and Arthur Earl of Anglesey. Printed in fol.

Vindication of himself from divers false, scandalous and injurious reflections made upon him by Mr. Rich. Baxter in several of his writings. Lond. 1683. qu. What else he hath published, I know not, unless A character of K. Ch. 2. Lond. 1660. in one sheet in qu. then vulgarly reported to be by him written; much about which time other Characters were published, as that by Dr. Wall. Charlton, &c. He made also an Epitaph on K. Jam. 1. an. 1625, which was afterwards printed at the end of Dr. John Spotswood’s Church Hist. of Scotland. At length after this most worthy and pious Bishop had liv’d to a fair age, spent all in celebacy, and had done much good, he surrendred up his soul to God in Farnham Castle about three of the clock in the morn. of the 29. of Octob. in sixteen hundred eighty and four: whereupon his body was conveyed to Winchester, 1684. and buried in a little vault in the body of the Cathedral there, betwixt two pillars, (just opposite to those, between which Bishop Will. Edendon was buried) at the foot of the steps ascending to the Choire on the north side. Soon after was an altar-tombe erected over his body, and the inscription put thereon, which he the said Dr. Morley had made for himself in the eightieth year of his age: The contents of which being too large for this place, shall be now omitted, and especially for this reason, because there is nothing in it, but what is mention’d before in his life.